Well, they fought, of course. When last we heard from them, Christie Brinkley and her ex-husband, Peter Cook, had just exited court, where they were fighting over the proceeds from the sale of their boat, Sweet Freedom; a passport mishap that left their 14-year-old son unable to go see the pyramids; and just because they apparently love fighting more than they ever loved each other, or, one wonders, their own children. The onetime golden couple was due back for round two this morning, after the long weekend. Here are a few niceties that happened in between.
Friday afternoon: One of Brinkley’s people called to tell us all about how unfair it is that Peter “dragged” Christie back into court. She told us that Christie had been paying for the boat forever, that she had not given it to Peter for his 40th birthday as he claimed. She then broke our minds with a long story about how Peter had said that he wouldn’t let his girlfriend, Suzanne Something, on the boat, but “he broke the agreement,” and when Christie came by one time, he “decided to play a game with the kids, called ‘Let’s hide Suzanne.’” This upset Christie, the spokeswoman said, not because she is a crazy jealous nutcase but because “the kids were told to lie to her.”
Saturday: Peter Cook gets in our comments and says that no, he has been paying for the boat, it was totally his, and “had there been any question of ownership she would have kept it as she did everything else I accumulated in the first 47 years of my life.” The only reason she wanted the boat, he said, was because it “provided a great deal of enjoyment for me with my children” and Christie, apparently, hates enjoyment.
He then apologized to our readers “for continuing to pollute your homes with this dreck,” which was thoughtful. Commenter eastvill1, however, was not easily assuaged.
Sunday: Day of rest.
Monday: We accidentally read this quote from Christie Brinkley: “I wanted fabrics that are great looking and casual, and as a mother of three and longtime environmental advocate, I wanted fabrics that were also environmentally friendly.” We tried to take Peter Cook up on his offer to call him for THE TRUTH, but his lawyer, Steven Kuhn, didn’t return our calls.
Tuesday, 2 a.m.: Later, we realized it might be because they were busy. Around 2:30 a.m., a statement from Christie Brinkley’s lawyers floated victoriously into our in-box. “Ms. Brinkley is completely vindicated,” it announced, and added that the parties had settled without granting any of Cook’s “vindictive requests,” such as the following:
• A request for Ms. Brinkley to undergo anger management.
• A request for the appointment of a parenting coordinator.
• A request that the children’s passports be held by a third party.
None of which sounded particularly vindictive, unlike the following paragraph, which also appeared in the statement:
Since Mr. Cook lost the custody battle in the divorce trial, he has staged a relentless smear campaign against Ms. Brinkley. Mr. Cook has tried repeatedly to tarnish Ms. Brinkley’s reputation by making defamatory statements during national television broadcasts, in print media and blogs. Ms. Brinkley chose not to exercise her right to hold Mr. Cook in clear violation of their original confidentiality agreement until Ms. Brinkley was served this unfounded and unwarranted court action at her children’s school holiday concert this past December. For the sake of the children, she is hopeful that Mr. Cook will cease his attacks on the children’s mother.”
Tuesday, noonish: Cook’s lawyers tell the Daily News that actually, the judge had not approved the terms of the agreement, and Brinkley’s rep had jumped the gun by issuing a “false and improper press release” declaring Christie’s victory. The couple was ordered back to court, which meant Christie had to turn her car around, according to the Daily News. Annoying! Anyway, now they have finally, apparently settled.
Until next time.
