Yesterday Kelly Rutherford announced in a statement that she would not take her children, Hermes and Helena, back to Monaco, violating the court order that allowed her children to come spend the summer with her in the United States. Now her ex-husband, Daniel Giersch, has responded.
There’s more information on Kelly’s legal reasoning for keeping the children here in the US. Both California and New York courts ruled they didn’t have jurisdiction over the children since they have been living in Monaco since 2012. Now Kelly is questioning whether the California judge who ordered her children to live in Monaco had jurisdiction then, arguing that since none of them had lived in California for six months before the judge issued his ruling in 2012, he didn’t have jurisdiction at that time. She explained:
Legal advisors have informed me that when jurisdiction is wrongfully asserted by a state, all orders issued thereafter, such as the one that sent my children to live in France and Monaco in 2012, are null and void.”
Hmmm. That does make sense, although if the courts are refusing to hear the case, then does it matter? I guess that’ll be decided in court.
Meanwhile, as you can imagine, Daniel isn’t simply willing to accept Kelly’s decision and allow their children to stay in the States. He’s always maintained that he wants Kelly and their kids to have a relationship and said he’s even given her money to travel to Monaco for visits in the past. His attorney, Fahi Takesh Hallin, has released a statement.
Daniel will continue to protect the children from any harm and any media exposure. Unfortunately Kelly has now added child abduction to extortion and false statements on her list of actions. Daniel will make sure that the children’s safety and well being will be restored as soon as possible. He is very concerned about the traumatic impact that Kelly’s behavior will have on the children. Kelly was to have delivered the children in France to their father on August 7, 2015. Child abduction is a crime, and everyone involved in kidnapping or abducting the children will face the appropriate legal consequences. Anyone associating themselves with Kelly and her abduction is violating the law.”
If everyone agrees that the Monaco courts have jurisdiction (and Kelly is arguing they don’t), then she has violated a court order by not returning the children, which would suggest she is kidnapping them. I can understand a mother wanting to be with her children, regardless of what any court says, but this is serious. Not only could she lose custody of her children, she could be charged with a crime. Oh my goodness.
Photos by FAMEFLYNET