Breaking: June 15 Family Court Hearing for Kelly Rutherford

Hold on Media, Kelly Rutherford merely got a temporary Family Court Custody Order. Before Dan Abrahams, Nancy Grace, People Magazine and Kim Kardashian  have parental alienator Kelly Rutherford greeting her kids at the airport or at the U.S. Embassy in Monaco, here are some questions and issues the media should be investigating and reporting:

1) A U.S. Judge certainly signed the exparte order. Was it the same U.S. Judge in her Custody Case or was that Judge on vacation and did her attorney find a new judge to grant the “temporary order”?

2) Did the attorney get the order so Kelly Rutherford could start the long and grueling Hague Convention Process? There is the exception to the Hague Convention Article 4 that if the habitual resident parent demonstrates that the children are now settled in their new environment, the Hague Convention will not apply. It sounds like the children have been living in Europe for 4 years under the care of the father. If that is the case, Monaco would not have to return the children to the United States. There have been many American parents that were divorcing a European National. Although a U.S. Court granted the parent custody, the other country did not observe the court order.

3) Did the Judge grant the temporary order to get Rutherford’s former spouse and his Los Angeles Attorney back to Family Law Court? Protective Moms like Rutherford will violate terms of the custody order. Rutherford did not hand over the kids U.S. Passports to a third party and the judge’s order certainly put pressure on the parties to agree to a custody schedule. What the father in this case is doing and what so many protective moms do is to stop a visitation with a non-residential parent. To almost all non-residential or non-custodial parents, this occurs the protective parent will cease a visitation for sometimes months or years until the parent can go back to court.

4) Rutherford went to the media rather than negotiate with her former spouse. It is well known by those of us that follow these International Custody Cases is that it will take months or years to resolve. We’ve seen parental kidnappers who are Americans keep their children in the UK, France and the Netherlands. Why would Rutherford’s former spouse trust Kelly Rutherford to allow him to ever see his kids again if she had custody? The kids have an established residential country in Monaco and it’s unlikely that will change by a temporary court order. It sounds like her former spouse like the other parents in that position will not be so cooperative.

5) I still can’t see why Rutherford didn’t turn over the U.S. Passports to a neutral 3rd party and see her children. If she truly wanted to see her children, that’s what she would have done. But like the other protective moms, she is escalating the situation in the media. Like an abuser or batterer, she wants her kids living with her back in the United States — she is not stopping until she gets her way.

Rutherford could have stepped up to acknowledge her part in parental alienation and to become a celebrity spokesperson for International Joint Custody. Her children could go back and forth between the U.S. and Europe for months at a time. I recollect hearing a story of a some kids that lived 6 months in Europe and the other 6 months in the United States. Instead, she appears to be going the protective parent route. She wants the kids in the United States and to deny him custody. We certainly hope she doesn’t attempt a snatch back in Monaco. That would be the case of a bad gossip girl.

Finally, most parents interested in co-parenting are not interested in placing their children on the cover of magazines. They want to “protect” their children. This doesn’t sound like Kelly Rutherford. Her former spouse is represented by one of the top International Custody or Hague Convention Attorneys in the United States. All of those parents with International Custody Cases will be watching this case closely.


3 Responses to Breaking: June 15 Family Court Hearing for Kelly Rutherford

  1. I’m not sure I agree with you that Kelly is the “parental alienator” when dad was the one who deliberately didn’t renew his visa and dad was the one who illegally retained the children in Monaco.
    What does that tell you about him? It tells me that he’d rather use the children to get even with mommy than do what’s best for the children.

    • underwatch says:

      This custody dispute has been going on for 6 years before the youngest child was born. He had to go to court to get his name on the birth certificate. It sounds like he became the primary caretaker of the children due to her busy schedule. She also went to court to accuse him of not having a pool cover on his pool when there was no evidence the child was near the pool. During the dispute she accused him of selling drugs, weapons and not having a proper Visa. When he was turned into immigration, it sounds like Rutherford was behind it so the judge gave him custody. She spent millions on legal fees as well as her lifestyle which caused her to declare bankruptcy. Only both parties and the judge know what is in the custody report. It also appears that her legal team went to another judge for the exparte temporary order. It sounds like he is keeping the children out of the media and she is using them. She says the system is unfair but between her appeal to the federal court, petition and media campaign, it sounds like she was setting up a situation to kidnap them back. She has visited them 70 times in Europe in the past 4 years. Her former spouse is a venture capitalist that has been raising the kids. She lives in LA and NYC and it sounds like the custody evaluator believed he would provide a more stable environment for the kids. He only recently withheld custody to get her to turnover the passports. This story is far from declaring her the winner of a custody dispute. Millions of dollars later, she claims to be broke. She certainly does not look broke in any of the photos.


    • underwatch says:


      Here’s another:

      This story shows you how much today’s media gets things wrong. Most of the media is just copying what one or two reporters wrote. Kelly Rutherford has a huge team of lawyers including Wendy Murphy (pro bono), and celeb supporters including Dan Abrams of ABC. Abrahams claimed that France/Monaco would be in big diplomatic trouble if they didn’t turn over the children. That’s laughable! She had easily spun her past past parental alienation issues. But from this article it doesn’t sound like he is turning over the kids so soon. They are off celebrating the temporary court order with a new judge, but the child might be better off with the former spouse and grandmother.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: