| If this is even remotely true then I don’t blame his children for not wanting to see him. |
It's been over 6 years. They probably don't even remember what he (used to) looks like. |
Agreed, very hard to trust a parent after experiencing that. Very sad for them. |
The little ones may not remember much, but the boys he hit and choked were teenagers at the time. And are old enough to form their own views on his ongoing efforts to control and humiliate their mother. Never liked her much, but I definitely see things differently now. She seems to have stood up for herself and the kids in very reasonable ways, and kept the details quiet until he sued her, unfairly from what I can tell. |
The US Weekly article says the exact opposite - that the FBI has released everything. All of these new allegations are from Angelina via court filings, which have feck all to do with this winery. |
You clearly did not look at the report, since about 70% of it is redacted including the kids' notes and drawings appended at the end. And the connection to the winery lawsuit was explained in detail above, even if you conveniently ignored. |
Very telling that it's the older ones who want nothing to do with him. Please remember they know the truth of what happened. |
Right, but good to know Pitt's getting his money's worth from his PR firm. Wonder if it's the same one he hired when he left Aniston for Jolie. |
You're right - I didn't look at the report because, Christ, who has the time? It's two movie stars whose existence has no effect on my existence. Sort of an interesting story about an interesting couple that I kind of follow. |
Yet you formed an opinion based on little data. That's how PR is effective, swaying low-information consumers. |
Yes, amused by the people taking tabloid stories crafted by his PR firm as truth. |
| It's been 6 years - they need to move on. This is not healthy for anyone, especially the kids. I feel like they are both stupid and in the wrong, but Angelina needs to be the bigger person and walk away at this point. |
He filed a lawsuit to force nullification of the sale of her share of the winery. She should just walk away from the bulk of her assets being tied up in a business she wants no part of? According to her countersuit, after the split he wouldn't let her see the books and wouldn't distribute her share of the proceeds either. While putting out lies about an agreement not to sell--no evidence of any agreement--and saying she refused to sell to him--also not true since he walked away from an agreement out of anger over her custody filings and her unwillingness to agree to a gag order. Would you let an ex control your finances when you see no benefit from your investment or would you fight back? Would you let an ex constantly minimize and deny the trauma he inflicted on the kids when they're old enough to read his lies? And are now adults, able to handle it? I did not start this whole debacle on her side, but I've come around. |
He had first right of refusal if she wanted to sell, and she sold it to a Russian oligarch anyway. |
NP. Let me break this down to a kindergarten level, so that you understand. Pitt and Jolie had an agreement in which Pitt was to buy Jolie’s share. Pitt became angry with Jolie and backed out of the sale. Jolie reevaluated and went to the second offer, the Russian. Pitt did utilize his right of first refusal. He did not realize Jolie had other options and it irks him that she does not have to depend on him. |