Angelina Jolie Wants To Fire The Private Judge In Charge Of Her And Brad Pitt’s Divorce Case

August 11, 2020 / Posted by:

Angelina Jolie, remember her? Sure you do, dark hair, kinda spooky, a bunch of kids and was married to Brad Pitt? Not much has changed over the years, in fact, all of those things are as true now in 2020 as they were in 2016 when she first filed for divorce. In fact, I suspect that the specter of Brad and Angie’s divorce proceedings have contributed to the evil forces we’ve been living under since that day. According to the AP, there’s still no relief in sight as Angie has decided she doesn’t like the private judge who she and Brad have been paying so that their personal business doesn’t become public, and has asked for his removal from the case. Page Six reports that it’s a stall tactic because things weren’t looking good for her. So yeah, we could be looking at four more years in purgatory for us as a nation if Angie doesn’t get her way.

Cast your weary mind back to October of last year and you may recall that Brad and Angelina had asked for more time and a private judge to help them figure out a custody and child support agreement that didn’t include having the entire world know that these two extremely wealthy people were taking up the court’s time fighting over who would hold on to the $60 million vineyard in France. So they ponied up for the judge, and behind closed doors, continued to not agree on one single fucking thing. Now, a year later, Angie’s decided the judge they hired may be biased because of his professional relationship with Brad’s attorney. According to the AP:

In a filing in Los Angeles Superior Court, Jolie argues that Judge John W. Ouderkirk should be taken off the divorce case that she filed in 2016 because he was too late and not forthcoming enough about other cases he was hired for involving Pitt attorney Anne C. Kiley.

It says that during the Jolie-Pitt proceedings Ouderkirk has “failed to disclose the cases that demonstrated the current, ongoing, repeat-customer relationship between the judge and Respondent’s counsel.”

It goes on to say that Pitt’s attorney “actively advocated for Judge Ouderkirk’s financial interests in moving — over the opposing party’s opposition — to have his appointment (and his ability to continue to receive fees) extended in a high profile case.”

This move is as transparent a ploy as the gossamer cloud of tulle that miraculously floats in front of the camera every time Angie has her picture taken. Her filing even states that “it doesn’t matter if Judge Ouderkirk is actually biased,” as long as a person “might reasonably entertain a doubt.” And Angie has invited doubt in for tea, which she probably spiked, and now doubt is going to get chained up in her basement with its eyes taped open and forced to watch as Angie entertains it with dramatic readings from the collected works Rumi.

A source tells Page Six that Angie’s doing this “because she believed things weren’t going in her favor” in terms of child custody and her request for increased child support.

“Jolie is basically trying to fire the private judge overseeing their divorce case. She has every right to do this, but if she thought she was in a good place in this legal proceeding, she wouldn’t need to do it. This is a classic case of someone expecting a bad decision trying to delay the process by asking for a new referee.”

If Angie delays this much longer the child army is going to become an adult army, and instead of worrying about which parent gets to will them the vineyard, she’s going to have to worry about the twins getting conscripted into the Jenner/West administration’s Army: Sponsored by Amazon. I told you, this divorce has got some dark sided mojo.

Pic: Wenn.com

Our commenting rules: Don't be racist or bigoted, or get into long-ass fights, or go way off topic when not in an Open Post. Also, promoting adblockers is not allowed. And some comment threads will be pre-moderated, so it may take a second for your comment to show up if it's approved.

src="https://c.statcounter.com/922697/0/f674ac4a/1/"
alt="drupal analytics" >