Hollywood Divorce Three Ways

Oliver Rose: I think I can swing this over to the balcony.
Barbara Rose: Stop it! Stop it! stop it!
Barbara Rose: I loosened the bolt, I was gonna drop it on you.
Oliver Rose: Oooh. That’s a good one.

There is a little bit of fresh tea about three couples related to either a previous divorce  (Tameka and Usher and Camille and Kelsey) or an ongoing on-going one (Adrienne and Paul). I figure I might as well just give it to you all at once before I head out into this gloriously perfect Saturday.  So here is the quick and dirty.

Let’s start with Camille and Kelsey because it is basically a non-story I wanted to address one more time. I don’t know why stuff keeps coming out about this divorce. It was a fairly simple one. Despite a lot of animosity, the legalities were simple and undisputed for the most part. It’s a fifty-fifty split with Camille getting the old kids and Kelsey just making some new ones. Before we start, I am not interested in what some of you think you know about the “net worth” of celebrities based on some site that claims to know the financial bottom line on everyone in Hollywood. They don’t. Nor do I. I do know that website, in general, is pitifully inaccurate.

The bottom line on Camille and Kelsey is that when Camille married Kelsey he had mismanaged his money and was, by Hollywood terms at least, broke. Camille wanted a celebrity husband and Kelsey wanted a hot blonde. It’s not a new story. However, in this instance Camille had, as they say, “a head for business and a body for sin.” She got Kelsey sobered up (sent him to Betty Ford) and back on track and together they amassed a fortune in real estate. Much more than the $100 mil you hear about in the tabloids. The properties have been on the market off  and on for years. It seems they are waiting for the market to rebound. The sales will be divided fifty-fifty. Neither party is in a hurry to liquidate right now. I don’t know why this is suddenly a headline story.

In Usher v Tameka  custody news, Usher’s attorney has filed a response to Tameka’s motion for recusal.  Essentially, Usher’s official response, according to TMZ, is that attorney’s contribute to the campaign funds of judges all the time and if the court rules in her favor it would open the door for all cases where an attorney has contributed to a sitting judge’s campaign to be tossed. Which sounds reasonable on the surface, but a look at the particulars of this case shows that Usher’s judge has an uncommon frequency of presiding over cases by Usher’s attorney. This is not going to be a cut and dry issue. In 2009, the SCOTUS ruled on a recusal motion (Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., Inc., 129 S.Ct. 2252, 173 L.Ed.2d 1208 (2009) if you are interested) in a split decision (5-4) in favor of recusal and that instance seems to my non-legal evaluation to be a much bigger deal. I predict this will be a battle of the lawyers. In my opinion, Usher has the better lawyer. Stay tuned.

Finally, in the wee hours of the morning, TMZ took to their site to report further on the custody battle between Paul Nassif and Adrienne Maloof.  Their interpretation of public record indicates that Paul is claiming that Adrienne turns into a violent bitch when she drinks vodka. Paul’s legal motion cites, as an example of her repeated aggression, a violent event he alleges occurred in Las Vegas last July. Paul says Adrienne physically attacked and verbally demeaned him hitting him repeatedly. He alleges she accused him of cheating, was verbally abusive and hit him multiple times in the face, chest and legs (legs? really?). That July attack was apparently the impetus that led him to file for divorce. Paul has asked for custody of the kids and for Adrienne to vacate the martial home so that he can move back in and care for the children. The judge denied his request in the emergency trial and the nastiness will now be held over for the primary custody trial. Both sides now seem to be feeding the media all the nefarious allegations so I’m sure we will be at no loss for drama and gossip fodder.

It’s interesting to note that both Usher and Paul are the plaintiff’s in their kids custody cases.  As for me, I’m whole-heartedly on Paul’s side and rather reluctantly on Tameka’s side so far, but that could change as solid facts emerge in the courtroom. What do y’all think about this?  Is anyone considering the children? Tameka’s kids are already traumatized by their sibling’s death  and a drawn out custody battle is even more traumatic. Adrienne and Paul’s kids never looked very happy in the few pictures we saw of them prior to all the public drama. It seems the “winners” in all this will be the child psychiatrists who will probably all have Bentleys before the therapy is done.


Filed under Camille Grammer, Kelsey Grammer, Real Housewives of Beverly Hills, RHOBH

4 responses to “Hollywood Divorce Three Ways

  1. Tc

    The Nassoof thing is funny because for a long time she tweeted exclusively about some vodka she is promoting. And the suit specifies vodka instead if just alcohol. That said she never one appeared drunk at any celebration on he show. Which I guess in the long run is smart if she does drink.

  2. Joi

    I agree ! No one ever thinks of the kids and I’m willing to bet that these guys are doing this just to cause more hurt to the situation. I mean didn’t Mr.Grammar try to get custody of the kids as well until he started his new life with his mistress I mean wife I really feel like it’s a new trend with the men in the public eye

  3. yeah, I think Kelsey pretended to want custody briefly but his the new blonde started making new babies so it was all good after that. Mostly. Not saying he wasn’t a dick, but he couldn’t sustain it for long. His focus was elsewhere.

  4. Vp

    Joint custody is best. Usher sounds like a dick. That is all.

Please Read the COMMENTING RULES before commenting.