Robin Thicke called the cops on Paula in the middle of their custody dispute


On Friday, we learned that Paula Patton and Robin Thicke have been embroiled in a very nasty custody fight for months now. It’s been undercover for a while, but everything seems to have exploded in the past week or so. Paula’s side says that Thicke is a drug user and that he’s been spanking and punching their son Julian. Thicke’s side says Paula is making it up, coaches Julian on what to say, and that she’s just mad that she wasn’t invited to Alan Thicke’s funeral. The lawyers are involved, school officials are witnesses, and therapists are trying to figure out what happened. So far, the judge hasn’t ended Thicke’s custodial rights, which meant that Robin was due to see his son last Thursday, only Paula didn’t let Julian go to his dad’s house. So the cops were called and everything has just gotten messier:

One day after an L.A. judge rejected Paula Patton‘s request to limit ex-husband Robin Thicke‘s joint custody of their 6-year-old son, Julian, the dispute between the former couple is becoming increasingly fraught. A representative for the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department’s Lost Hills station confirms to PEOPLE that law enforcement officials were dispatched to Patton’s Calabasas home Friday morning after Julian didn’t arrive at school. He had missed his visitation with Thicke the evening before. The representative referred to the incident as “a non-event” but said “it involved a child not wanting to go with someone.”

Court documents obtained by PEOPLE show that Patton texted Thicke to tell him she was picking up their son on Thursday, Jan. 5, despite it being Thicke’s custodial time. “Paula sent someone to school to intercept Julian, in violation of the custody orders,” Thicke’s lawyer, Angela Pierce di Donato, tells PEOPLE, adding that “she did not return him to school today.”

Thicke’s lawyer says the singer is concerned about Julian’s well-being. “Julian only shows any evidence of emotional harm when questioned by Paula or in her presence,” says Pierce di Donato. Counters a source familiar with the situation, “Julian has made it clear he does not feel safe in his father’s presence, a fact confirmed today by the Malibu Sheriff’s Department determination — with Mr. Thicke present — that the child needed to remain with his mother.”

The source close to the situation responds: “It is well-documented in court declarations, not only by the mother, but by two school officials as well as the child’s nanny, that there are allegations of abusive behavior by Mr. Thicke. To be clear, it was concern by school officials, not Ms. Patton, that led DCFS to initiate their ongoing investigation into allegations of abuse by the father. Despite Mr. Thicke’s intent to smear her as a mother, Ms. Patton must do everything in her power to protect her son.”

[From People]

That People article is really long and detailed and features extensive comments from Thicke’s lawyer, who basically says over and over that Paula is coaching Julian and that Paula is in violation of their custodial agreement and that Paula is the one at fault here. But I think the quote about how the school triggered the DCFS investigation is really telling, right? I dare say it’s a situation comparable to Angelina Jolie’s situation – when a third party initiated the DCFS investigation against the father, the mothers in both situations are doing what they can to protect their children and limit their kids’ exposure to the father under investigation. Then again, I think it’s really odd that the judge keeps denying Paula’s requests to limit Thicke’s access to Julian, given the ongoing investigations into Thicke’s alleged conduct.

A photo posted by Robin Thicke (@robinthicke) on

Photos courtesy of Instagram, WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

78 Responses to “Robin Thicke called the cops on Paula in the middle of their custody dispute”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Nicole says:

    I think this case is different than AJ only because there are multiple people unrelated to Paula that were concerned. And it wasn’t just one incident it was a culmination of many. Being drunk at a kid function? Your kid saying he’s scared of you and you punched him? This is no where near the AJ/Brad situation this is worse.

    • Magdalene says:

      Brad’s two older boys were still refusing to see Brad even under therapist supervision months after the plane inccident according to his lawyer, the kids were said to have been traumatized by his behavior, how is this worse? People stay making excuses for Brad.

      • YepIsaidit says:

        Exactly. It’s so bad that Maddox is ~allegedly~ no longer using Pitt as a last name.

        The Pitt pity party continues and it looks like Robin Thickes side learned a lot from how Brad Pitt has managed his situation- attack the mother and gaslight.

      • Nicole says:

        Ummm not a Pitt fan but thanks for that leap in logic. My point is for all we know (until evidence to the contrary) this stems from ONE incident. The Thicke case is months of bad behavior that has been documented by several figures in Julian’s life. Have we seen that in the AJ/Brad case? No we haven’t. Until then I’m not going to paint the cases as the same. They aren’t.

      • LadyT says:

        >”Brad’s two older boys were still refusing to see Brad even under therapist supervision months after the plane incident”
        Ok. Here goes. Just my opinion. This sounds like willful, self-righteous teen behavior allowed to drag on too long. ( I am not criticizing teens for being teens, rather those that are still allowing/encouraging it)
        Completely different than protecting a frightened 6 year from a punching parent with no safety net in place.

      • LadyT says:

        Let me clarify- Change “encouraging it” to “passively encouraging” it, as in “You don’t have to do anything you don’t want to.”

      • Merritt says:

        Or the teens understand the situation better than their younger siblings and are rightfully angry at PItt.

      • teacakes says:

        …..wait, so a 12-year-old and a 15-year-old are not to be given credit for knowing their own minds? And they’re ‘wilful’ and ‘self-righteous’ for allegedly refusing to see their father, and their mother/other adults are to blame for not forcing them to? Wow.

      • LadyT says:

        I agree completely with rightfully angry last Sept. It is now, four months later, with Dad going to weekly therapy/drug testing in an effort to right his wrong that I question the teens being allowed to not participate.

      • LadyT says:

        tea cakes-
        That’s a rather unfairly extreme version of what I tried to say. But yes, under these same circumstances, in my household, the teens would be required to at least show up.

      • crogirl says:

        You say under the same circumstances yet none of us knows what exactly happened

      • crogirl says:

        Yepisaidit said: “Exactly. It’s so bad that Maddox is ~allegedly~ no longer using Pitt as a last name.”

        Well according to your logic he’s dropping Jolie too because the text says Maddox Chivan. I think they just wrote his middle name instead of full and that’s it.

      • Boxy Lady says:

        @Lady T Has it not occurred to you that perhaps Brad did or said something that pertains specifically to Maddox and Pax? Like something anti-Asian or against adopted boys? Those are things that would apply only to Maddox and Pax but not to the other children directly. It could explain why those 2 are the main kids against Brad instead of their just being teenage brats.

      • Merritt says:


        I don’t see four months as a long time. Especially if what happened was emotionally painful and it seems it was.

      • LadyT says:

        Boxy Lady-
        You are more than welcome to disagree but please don’t put words in my mouth. I did not call anyone a teenage brat. If Brad as their father hurt those boys in the worst possible way as you hypothetically suggest that seems like all the more compelling reason to require them to attend therapy.

        This is not negating their feelings. The family, including them, needs to try to heal. It’s for their health and benefit, even if they don’t see it now.

        At this point I stand by my statements but I’m not spending the morning defending myself against the deliberately twisted, false versions of what I have said.

      • LoveIsBlynd says:

        Sadly I am accurately versed in custody issues. Starting with the Patton case, she needed to file an emergency injunction to take away Thick’s parenting rights; until then, she’s in contempt of court to withhold parenting time from Thicke. From experience, it’s painful beyond words to send a child with an “alleged” abuser, but she has to comply or she will get charged with parental alienation. With a child the age of 6, this is so slow and hard to prove. Patton needs to have her representation file that injunction NOW. That leads me to the teens in the AJ case. The boys would likely side with their father if Brad’s behavior was isolated or benign. These boys are old enough, unlike Patton/Thick’s child, to be taken seriously by the courts. Add the fact that male children side against their father makes it very concerning to the courts.

      • YepIsaidIt says:

        Crogirl, how bad would that make Angelina look of she allowed him to use Jolie only- his Pr team would say its proof that she is alienating 🙄. For now it’s best if he uses the middle name if he can’t stand the Pitt. It’s too early for him to legally change it – he might eventually get over the anger he has for his dad and regret it.

    • Ramona says:

      For me the biggest difference is that this has been going for months before it hit the press. Thats probably Paulas influence given how messy Robin has proven himself to be. The other inescapable difference is that Brad voluntarily accepted testing and counselling for all involved as well as supervised visits. Robin, whos addiction and anger issues are already in the public dormain, would never agree to such. And finally, Brad was requesting a tiny amount of increased time with the four children who have not refused to see him, Robin is demanding time with a child who is refusing to see him.

      The goal is always to get the parent to rectify their behavior and achieve full reconcilliation with the child. Brad is working towards that and Robin isn’t.

      • Magdalene says:

        See, Brad did not volunteer anything, that was their PR spin. Read through the court filings and you will see that child services closed the case after the safeguard were put in place, he accepted those conditions in order for them to close the case, but if it makes you feel better thinking he volunteered, have at it. I really do not want argue with Brad fans because its a no win situation.

      • Lindsey says:

        They didn’t close the case due to the safe guards it has been explained multiple times why that is counter intuitive and would not work to end a DCFS investigation.

      • Sticks says:

        Well said, Ramona.

      • YepIsaidIt says:

        Lindsay, I think I’ll trust team Angelina who have been consistently honest throughout the entire situation. Her statement said the dcfs felt good with the recommended safeguards in place and closed the case.

    • Luca76 says:

      I think the biggest difference is we know a lot more about what happened here. People think they know a lot of details about who reported Brad (most assume it was someone on Angies team) but we actually don’t know much. So I think comparing the situations is useless.

    • Paige says:

      It’s pointless to compare the situations because we still don’t know what happened in Brad and Angelina’s situation. We don’t have any hard facts.

  2. Sixer says:

    Here’s what I take from all of this (these two, the Jolie-Pitts, Kelly Rutherford and all the others). American celebrities spend a lot of time (rightly) complaining about pap photographers invading their children’s privacy and the lasting damage it can do, but the second they decide to get divorced have no compunction whatsoever about putting the most embarrassing, private and salacious details into the public domain if it means they’ll “win” the divorce.

    Also, I’m all for open justice. And I think the American legal system excels at this. However, it also seems to have no mechanisms whatsoever to prevent minor children being forced into the centre of damaging and traumatic media storms because of the actions of their parents.

    All divorcing celebrities should be sent to the Moon to do it.

    • Kitten says:

      Agreed. It’s bad enough for a kid to have to deal with his parents separating, but having the world know every detail of it must be mortifying.

      Sad that these people aren’t shielding their children.

      • Who ARE these people? says:

        It sounds as if she is trying to shield her son from actual abuse. That media get court records and police statements is separate. It’s a bad situation but if her lawyers respond to queries then at least the son will know she tried to protect him, and that is about all she can do given the high profile of the case and sensational nature of the allegations.

      • Sixer says:

        I would never comment on individual children but don’t get me wrong, WATP. I’m all for one parent shielding a child from abuse by the other and for the courts to centre child protection in any divorce or custody proceedings. I just don’t think the circumstances of minor children should find their way into the press – either through public court filings or media briefings from either parent.

      • Lahdidahbaby says:

        Yes, Kitten and Sixer, exactly. And even worse than “having the world know every detail of it” is having the world pull groundless, fictitious scenarios out of their collective arse (e.g. that Pitt made anti-Asian or cruel adoption comments to Maddox or Pax). Yecccch. Around here, it’s always the very same few offenders. To them I would say, just STOP. If you honestly care at ALL about the well-being of these kids whom you DO NOT KNOW, then please JUST STOP with the damaging fiction you are writing. Go write a novel or something instead!

    • Goldie says:

      According to the article, they finalized their divorce last year, so this isn’t about trying to win the divorce. It just seems like Robin’s destructive behavior has escalated to a point where his caretakers felt they had to intervene.

      I do agree about the privacy part though. I understand that some of the info is coming from the court hearing, but it also seems like their reps have provided some direct statements to People mag. They’ve got to focus on protecting the child rather than trying win the media war. That said, I do have a lot of sympathy for Paula.

      • Sixer says:

        Yes, I was kind of lumping together divorce AND subsequent custody issues.

        This doesn’t happen here in Britland and we have the most vicious tabloid press in creation. If the Daily Fail could run a story with the headline FAMOUS PERSON SPANKS HIS CHILD, it would. Plus, it would, somehow, probably manage to sexualise the whole thing in some way. I cringe to even imagine the reporting we would see. Plus, I imagine, we have as many acrimonious celebrity divorces.

        But here, family court proceedings are anonymised with leakage a serious contempt issue so the circumstances of the minors stay private, even when state protection agencies are involved. But it seems that stateside, the adult parties have to agree to proceedings being sealed or one party has to obtain a judgement to get them sealed. I think this is the difference.

      • SusanneToo says:

        @Sixer. Completely off topic, but sometimes the Brit papers get it exactly right.

      • Sixer says:

        Oh my goodness. That is the most deadpan thing I’ve ever read. But yes – brilliant!

        ETA: to wish you a happy Sunday and to think of past interracial and international solidarity that should inspire us today, I give you Paul Robeson at a Scottish mine in 1949.

        (Sorry to continue the OT, everyone, but it’s a lovely video).

      • SusanneToo says:

        Thanks for the video. It’s great! I lived his choice of song – it’s a message that too many have forgotten and would be wise to relearn.

      • Lady D says:

        Susanne Too, I was dying half way through the first sentence. That was a good laugh.

    • Bridget says:

      Don’t forget that TMZ is famous for paying for leaks in the courthouse. Usually when stuff comes out quickly, it’s because they’ve been given a heads up.

      Court proceedings are automatically sealed when the Defendant is a juvenile for the very reason of privacy, and CPS investigations are supposed to be confidential as well, but the issue is when they’re included in a declaration in court.

      • Sixer says:

        Thank you. We do similar for criminal court proceedings. I love the open justice in the US (here too) but I do think the priority should be to protect the privacy of minors, whatever their parents want or don’t want. Unless, of course, it escalates to criminal charges.

    • Who ARE these people? says:

      I agree Sixer. There may be greater protections where you are. Once allegations are made it seems nearly impossible to control them in the US and there must be such a strong impulse to fight back, correct the record. Ugh.

      • Sixer says:

        Don’t get me wrong though. This thing I think we do better than you in that we do manage to shield children better. But there’s plenty we do worse. Superinjunctions, libel, the list is endless!

  3. Aims says:

    I think there’s a legitimate concern if a third party is involved . I tend to believe there’s an issue here if the boys school is worried . So I don’t know why the judge isn’t taking it seriously . As a mother if I felt my child was in danger, then I would do whatever needed to be done to protect them. I also believe Robin has had drug problems as well . He been open about it .

    • BeBeA says:

      100%- I have seen so many bad comments that say she is telling the boy what to say, well she must have a lot of power because teachers and others feel something is going on. If she did not fight for her child to be with her and then something happened to him I could only imagine the pain of it all….. she has the right to make sure her son is not being hurt by anyone yes that includes dad!

    • Fa says:

      The judge refused because the DCFS is still investigating and the judge don’t have all the facts from DCFS, it still she/he say case from both parents, only DCFS can determine if he can see the boy if the charge against him are bad. The Brad and Angelina case the DCFS recommendations is to limit Brad visitation with supervise therapy and they signed that recommendations voluntarily until the children’s are ready and have good communication with their father

      • crogirl says:

        What I don’t understand is why would Brad sign that SO. His lawyer had a lot of clients who were dealing with DCFS. If he was innocent wouldn’t it be smarter to advise him not to sign and go to the judge while the investigation was still ongoing?

      • Fa says:

        Is very risky to go before the judge when you are still under investigation, and according to his lawyer his 2 boys were still reluctant to do therapy with him and so the best he could do was to give his children’s time to heal and gain their trust again, litigation before the judge is not best option for their children’s

  4. OriginallyBlue says:

    I wouldn’t let my child go either. If Robin is being abusive and all this came out who knows how he will react to Julian. If the child is scared and saying that he is being abused I would air on the side of caution. A few missed visits can’t break a relationship, but not being able to trust your parent certainly can. That was my situation as a child. My mother knew of the things that happened, we left, and a couple weeks later she let me go with him and he wasn’t even my father. I never forgave her for that.

  5. IronMaiden says:

    Kaiser, the fact that the judge hasn’t intervened doesn’t say anything about Paula. The CA family court system is notoriously pro-dad right now. The system does what is in the best interests of the father, not what is in the best interests of the child.

    I know because I have been embroiled in a nearly 3-year custody battle. My (hopefully soon-to-be!) ex-husband was investigated by the Sheriff’s Department’s Child Exploitation task force for his interest in pre-pubescent girls. Although he managed to just skirt the law, he admitted to several people that he is sexually attracted to 12 year olds. I submitted 3rd Party, documented proof of his binge drinking problem. My child also tells me that he doesn’t want to go to his dad’s house. But you know what? The judge is going to give my ex 50% custody anyway. Every single person involved in my custody battle has been a man, and every single one has made excuses for my ex-husband, from the judge to my own attorney and even my own father!

    We are living in one of the worst modern times to be a woman. I am scared for myself and the following generations of women.

    • Kitten says:

      This is awful. So sorry you’re going through that.

    • Chaine says:

      Wow, that is terrible.

    • teacakes says:

      IronMaiden, I’m so sorry the system is so awful. I hope you and your child are safe and don’t come to harm 🙁

    • Shambles says:

      Holy hell, Iron Maiden. It sounds like you’ve definitely earned your name. I’m so sorry you’re dealing with this mess. Stay strong. Xoxoxo

    • Feedmechips says:

      I can cosign this. My dad terrorized my entire family for years, and despite his abuse and outrageous behavior, the judge still forced us to have visitation.

    • Kate says:

      I’m so sorry you’re going through this. I can’t believe in 2017 we are still punishing women, famous and non famous alike, who want to protect themselves and their kids.

    • Magdalene says:

      So sorry about that. Sad to say that having a woman will not guarantee you justice. At least your soon to be ex is not a beloved celebrity or else, you might not get a sympathetic ear from them either. Good luck and I hope it all works out for you and your child.

    • Lady D says:

      Do they actually make and sell chastity belts for children? How horrific that you have to send your child/children to a monster. Can you imagine how fast you would end up in court if you did put one on your child?

  6. CommentingBunny says:

    The way he behaved when she left him
    was classic narcissistic abuser behaviour. That creepy album he made to try to shame her into getting back with him – ugh. I have little difficulty believing that he has mistreated his son.

    • Shambles says:

      Right?!? I think the context of who a person is matters a lot in situations like this. So let us please not forget that RT is most famous for a song about getting a girl drunk enough to f*ck you, and he also wrote an album trying to stalk Paula into coming back to him. I have zero trouble believing that the creep factor is real with him. Like another poster said the other day, he oozes the creep.

  7. Z says:

    I think the judge denied her an emergency hearing, but made no decision on the underlying claims? I’m guessing she has to go through the regular hearing process before the judge decides on the custody issues. Regardless, it is so sad for that little boy.

  8. Chrissyq21479 says:

    In my state (Illinois) teachers are mandated reporters so anything a child reports they are required by law to call DCFS to report it. DCFS will then determine if there is a safety issue and will change placement based on that.

    • imqrious2 says:

      As I said in the post yesterday, I’m a retired teacher (living in So. Calif.). I can tell you, when a child says *anything* like this, we are mandated to report it, and let CPS take it from there. Even if you’re not sure if you should call, you call!

      FWIW, I totally believe the child, and Paula. RT just oozes sleaze.

  9. mint says:

    I´m not American so I have no clue about this system but how come that in the Jolie/Pitt case a Therapist determines the visitation / access to the children and in this case it´s a judge? Shouldn´t it be the same procedure for all? I really don´t get why the judge limits Thicks access. These are serious allegations. At least the time he spends with his son should be supervised.
    I feel very sorry for the son. I have no doubt that Thick has a drug/ drinking problem.

    • Magdalene says:

      In that case, the DCFS found cause that in order to rectify, Pitt had to follow those measures and it was only after the measures were put in place that they closed the case. In th Paula case, I guess the investigation is still on going and was the report is ready the relevant course of action will be implemented.

  10. detnow359 says:

    So many interesting things going on and I don’t believe Paula is coaching. One article mentioned that Julian has begun to studder and has become withdrawal. The studdering is huge. DCFS investigation came after the school opened the case, no Paula, after he told teachers of his father’s physical interactions. I’m sure they also took his change in behavior into account.

    Folks don’t want to believe Robin has a drug problem but he admitted it under oath in the Blurred Lines lawsuit saying he was high for over a year in every interview he did. He seemed high at the deposition, too. Things like that don’t just go away no matter how much one loves their child and is likely still an issue. Paula told Robin that the son is scared of him. Maybe he has not only been subject to physical abuse but witnessed violent outbursts by dad. Julian is only 6. The way he processes what he witnesses can be hard for a child. Heck, what has he seen Robin do to his young girlfriend? Paula knows Robin has a drug problem. It is said to have contributed to their divorce. You can’t force a child to go where there is fear. It’s a sad situation that hopefully with be throughly investigated and keeps the child’s safety in mind.

  11. Shambles says:

    I’m so done with this “She’s just mad because _______” narrative. Because women are overly-emotional harpies that are only concerned with vengeance, and men can never do anything wrong. Ugh.

  12. Ladiabla says:

    Robin Thicke has always seemed like a mega-sleaze. I feel for Paula and her little boy.

  13. minx says:

    Team Paula.

  14. Lady Rain says:

    You would think on the heels of his dad’s sudden passing, Robin would commit to being a less bitter person and keep things as smooth as possible with Paula to protect their child but he’s doing everything to the contrary.

    He’s disgusting and I really feel for Paula and their little boy.

  15. Pinetree13 says:

    All I know is, if this turns out to be true, then I will wish all the bad everything to him. Anyone who would punch a child deserves death. I passionately hate child abusers. Nothing makes me angrier. There is no excuse to harm a child ever. I don’t care if you’re on drugs, if you’re drunk, if you were abused yourself, it doesn’t matter. You don’t harm a child EVER. You walk out of the room. You call someone. You leave the house. You don’t ever hurt a child. EVER.

  16. Sage says:

    These two were once teenage sweethearts…tragic.

    • Bread and Circuses says:

      Addiction is one of those things that can be a game-changer on an otherwise-strong relationship. :-/

  17. AmunetMaat says:

    Seen too many times of kids being coached by mothers to hurt the fathers to really jump on either side. Robin Thicke, however, doesn’t have an upstanding reputation because he is a known coke head. I hope CPS does their job and determine the best interests of that child. It’s true that parents can be drug addicts or do drugs in front of their children and they still will not lose custody, but CPS will at least site that in their reports and include measurable actions that must be done in order to re-establish safety and well-being for the child. Whatever findings CPS states is what I will trust.

  18. kibbles says:

    Think twice before procreating with a loser, an abuser, or a philanderer. This is what happens in the end. I don’t know if these allegations against Robin Thicke are true, but I probably wouldn’t want my son growing up and being influenced by a manchild who enjoys clubbing, sleeping around, and exploiting women in his music videos and in real life. One of my friends went through a divorce with a man who is extremely lazy and dependent on his rich parents. He refused to work nor did he want to do any housework. My friend had a full-time job and had to come home to be the full-time parent and housekeeper. My first question when she divorced was whether she wanted to give her husband primary custody of their son. Is this the type of man you want to have such a major influence in your child’s life and upbringing? If not, then have higher standards for when you plan on settling down and having a baby. That might mean waiting a bit longer to meet someone worthy of the task of being your child’s father, but it’s worth it.

  19. Chaz says:

    There is nothing worse than a child not being heard, especially after they have come out of their comfort zone to tell someone about the abuse and/or scary situation.
    In my personal experience there is a bias and assumption that parents use the abuse card during custody issues. Particularly women accusing men. There is an automatic assumption that the kids have been coached.
    In my really nasty custody battle the male social worker, the psychologist and at first the judge also, all systematically ignored what my children were saying. My husband said I was brainwashing them. I had proof of domestic violence, but apparently that doesn’t make a bad parent according to the courts.
    It wasn’t until the kids went to an independent family therapy centre for sessions that the therapists were concerned enough to intervene and go against the state appointed social worker and court appointed psychologist. The judge finally started to listen properly.
    It happens. Courts make mistakes and often it is about how good your lawyer is.

    Robin is a toerag with substance abuse issues. If I were Paula I would do what I had to to keep my kid safe.

  20. Lucy2 says:

    I’m really sad for their child that he is in the middle of all of this, and that it has gone public. I hope he is safe, and that the courts do the absolute best they can for him.

  21. Fan says:

    I like Paula.