Top Stories

Kelly Rutherford Loses Right to Fight for Custody of Her Kids

Kelly Rutherford Loses Right to Fight for Custody of Her Kids

Devastating news has just come in for Kelly Rutherford – she has officially lost her bid to fight for custody of her two children in the state of California.

A judge in Monaco – where her ex Daniel Giersch and kids Hermes, 8, and daughter Helena, 6 – are currently residing, had already given him full custody of the children.

“We are extremely disappointed with the Ruling,” her attorney told Us Weekly. “Although the Court agreed with our analysis of the law, and in fact agreed with our position that citizens can have more than [one] residence for jurisdictional purposes, the Court ultimately did not agree with us on the facts.”

Daniel and Kelly have been in a custody battle for six years and in 2013, it was determined by the courts that he would no longer have to fly the kids from Monaco to the States to visit their mom. Currently, Hermes and Helena are in New York City with their mom for the summer.

Kelly was originally granted sole custody of the children back in May.

Just Jared on Facebook
kelly rutherfords kids coming to us for the summer 01
kelly rutherfords kids coming to us for the summer 02
kelly rutherfords kids coming to us for the summer 03
kelly rutherfords kids coming to us for the summer 04
kelly rutherfords kids coming to us for the summer 05

JJ Links Around The Web
  • Nev Schulman resumes filming Catfish after sexual misconduct allegations - TMZ
  • Sabrina Carpenter pens emotional letter to LGBTQ community - Just Jared Jr
  • Lala Kent says Jennifer Lawrence called and apologized for calling her the c-word - TooFab
  • Alec Baldwin invites Melania Trump to join him on SNL - The Hollywood Reporter
  • Madison Beer shows off her bikini body in Miami - Just Jared Jr
  • Batman0829

    I don’t get it. I thought you could only get sole custody, if the other parent was some kind of danger or bad influence on the kids.

  • j b

    I like that judges are finally starting to side with the men and making these women have to pay child support to the men for once. Britney Spears has been paying child support to Kevin Federline for years thanks to these non-sexist judges.

  • Delores Pauldo

    So sorry that hsppen. She wasn’t unfit to have them. She should had from America guy instead. Don’t know if it made in different but she still could see them here.

  • christopher

    I have to agree i am a bit confused by this whole situation since it started. I feel like there must be something we don’t know. cause i dont think someone just looses custody cause someone else lives in a different contry

  • deadre

    i agree with both of you.

  • shoes4life

    I hope she don’t do anything stupid this time and just do her best to be a part of her children’s life. This could have been avoided if she didn’t get him deported by trying to be manipulative towards him.

  • Batman0829

    Britney Spears is mentally unstable. Her rights were taken away from even managing her own finances, so obviously she’s wasn’t going to get custody over her children. Kelly from what we know is not an unfit parent.

  • Pat Kerr

    I was unaware that she paid anything for her kids. The ex husband pays for her travel to see the kids which she forgets to mention in interviews.

  • tia maria

    so basically if she wants custody of her kids, she will have to fight for it in a Monaco court which will most likely favour the father which is unfair. Although not sure how such a ruling can be made when the kids are American citizens so shouldn’t any court battle be held there?

  • whatsup

    I will never understand this situation. But it appears she made some mistakes in the handling of this situation. But it would be nice if her former husband and her and the governments involved can come to some kind of joint custody situation.

  • jane

    this woman is a mess. she dumped her first husband the second he was injured, like a month after their wedding, and she becomes a terror to his guy in a fight to get her kids back. she isn’t a caring person in general and obviously isn’t a caring mother either. if she was, she’d let it go. or move your butt to Monaco and be with them there. it’s not about her kids at all. she deserves to not have them.

  • MaryCHollars
  • Baseliner

    i wish i could like this comment 1000x

  • Baseliner

    or if you’re a woman.

  • londongirl75

    She could have avoided all this if her manipulative ways didn’t backfire on her – SHE had him deported.

  • tia maria

    one person can’t have someone else deported, there is obviously more to the story that nobody will ever know but he could have re-applied for a visa that would allow him back in America.

  • Kenneth Hollander

    Regarding Kelly Rutherord’s attorney, David J Glass PhD

    To all those with morals and to all
    those who love all children, that this David J. Glass Esq. PhD would
    giggle & laugh at me while waiting to see the judge. Shortly
    after this attached letter dated 2-12-12 was received by the
    community of Malibu, CA this David J. Glass Esq. PhD conspired to
    injure a 3rd party (myself), suborned perjury and falsified evidence
    just before he closed down his practice and went to FMBK Law. The CA
    State Bar has just received a 2nd complaint regarding this matter.



    Mr. Graham J Miller


    To The Principals of Malibu Elementary
    Schools and To Whom it may concern within the LAUSD and SMMUSD
    administrations, Directors or other persons.

    Dear Sir Madam or MS,

    I am writing to you firstly as a
    parent. I have a child in a Malibu public school. I am also writing
    as a Citizen, and therefore concerned in a more global manner with
    issues that I personally find disturbing and relevant. I believe a
    possible failure to perform to ethical codes of several professions,
    let alone what any normal person may find to be reasonable is about
    to, and could in the future lead to embarrassment, public
    consternation and at best a complete lack of faith ,trust and
    confidence in the above agencies.

    I have recently been informed by my
    daughter Lily-Jane Faith Miller that her mother has taken her out of
    Callahan elementary (Northridge); and she is now at some school in
    Malibu district. (Grade 2)

    My reasons for my concern follow.

    Within the Malibu school district there
    is a teacher, (C Cullen) who has accused her ex-husband of two counts
    of sexual abuse of their son, and 5 other counts of abuse of their
    son (11). This alleged abuse according to Ms. Cullen and her Attorney
    took place over the past 5 years.

    I would like a
    notation in my daughter’s file that she is never to be placed in
    class with the above person as her “(my daughters)” teacher. I
    apologize in in that I amenable to provide more details on my
    daughter’s whereabouts (school) but her Mom has not provided that
    info. I’m sure Dr Jacob the principal at Callahan would be able to

    In MS Cullen’s divorce and custody
    case she utilized the services of a Mr. D Glass Esq.(Attorney) Mr
    Glass is also a PhD in Psychology .Mr. Glass was also utilized by the
    mother of my daughter, Lily -Jane in my own divorce and custody
    matter. Mr. Glass a Psychologist/ Attorney and mandated reporter saw
    fit to bring allegations of sexual abuse of a child and 4
    allegations of other forms of abuse of MS Cullen’s son Sammy
    before family court. These all were investigated by the Police DCFS,
    and the District Attorney. They were found to be without either
    Medical or Credentialed 3rd party verification and closed therefore
    as unsubstantiated. These allegations were brought by MS Cullen via
    the services of Mr. Glass and occurred regularly before the summer
    school break on a yearly basis. MS Cullen had also recently remarried
    a Mr Brian Winsick another Teacher and coach in the Conejo Valley.
    Their marriage took place just prior to the allegations beginning.

    I will now outline my concerns and
    reasons for the request of the notation in my daughters file.

    It is my belief that the relationship
    between this teacher Ms. Cullen and her attorney and my own ex-wife
    and the same attorney is cause for reasonable concern. That to avoid
    any unfortunate incident where god forbid I was to be accused by my
    daughter’s mother of something similar as MS Cullen accused her
    ex-husband of it is imperative no establish able link is in place as
    could lead to suspicion of collusion. The worst case scenario that
    Ms. Cullen at some time becomes my daughters teacher and subsequently
    claims are made that perhaps my daughter had inferred to MS Cullen
    that I had abused her ( Lily-Jane) and MS Cullen then could relate
    this to my daughters mother through their mutual attorney, or
    contact at school is beyond horrific. I feel the separation of my
    daughter and this teacher protects LAUSD/SMMUSD and my daughter and

    In a more global sense I am concerned
    that a teacher married to another teacher and coach and an attorney
    who is also licensed as a psychologist made no attempt to make aware
    the LAUSD or the SMUSD of their concerns. (Two allegations of Sexual
    abuse and five other allegations of abuse.) Surely some ethical codes
    of their respective professions would demand other relevant or
    parties who could be impacted be advised.

    When a teacher finds the resources to
    pay $500 an hour to a Beverly Hills Attorney for 5 years surely there
    is a need for verification that such allegations will bring in terms
    of the expenses the County and State will bear during the protracted
    conflict. Especially if the accused has been made indigent by the
    continued claims and has suffered stress or work issues stemming from
    such accusations and is no longer paying taxes.

    As a parent I certainly would be
    outraged if I knew my child’s teacher was aware of a legitimate
    abuse situation and if, as in this case it included Sexual Abuse
    allegations and that teacher did nothing to bring attention to it as
    could protect other children I would expect answers. Specifically why
    and how a person(s) (2 Teachers, (Coach), An Attorney/Psychologist)
    would go ahead and consciously disregard accusations of such a
    serious nature, and then they having brought these allegations before
    family court and the district attorney go ahead and let other parents
    arrange activities with the person they were accusing of abuse in a
    manner as would expose other children to the accused.

    What is more disturbing and I expect
    the press will find disturbing is that repeated allegations of this
    nature are often utilized in family conflicts and that this is
    acceptable is in fact a failure of morality within our society. I
    believe this failure may have had a profound societal impact.

    That the failure of an application of
    evidentiary standards as are normally applied in criminal matters may
    have allowed credentialed persons possibly with questionable motive
    to use family court in a manipulative and deceitful way to achieve
    their own ends appears to me to be worthy of consideration.

    This epidemic of claims of abuse of
    children caught in such situations, (family breakups) versus
    children, who suffer actual abuse , desensitizes the general public
    and governmental agencies and allows real and dangerous criminals to
    hide and operate with virtual impunity in our society. It is beyond
    Peter and the Wolf it is an ongoing crime against humanity. To
    falsely perpetrate something that I believe leads to what we are now
    facing in the LAUSD and SMMUSD and may have exacerbated, perpetuated
    and indeed by lack of action condoned events and actions that
    possibly has led to emotional; mental and even physical harm to any
    child is heinous.

    I believe because of the actions as I
    have described many prior red flags have been ignored in many abuse
    situations and much suffering and harm and expense could have been
    avoided if a less commonplace attitude of children was the norm.

    Indeed in the immediate situation with
    (C Cullen, B Winsick )either the allegations were scurrilous and a
    product of vitriol, and an attorney(PhD Psych) with who knows what
    motivation (7 Claims) and that these claims were worthy of public
    expense .Or these persons were aware the claims they were bringing
    were false and therefore not worthy of reporting to LAUISD/SMUSD or
    other parents.? The alternative is an admission of negligent lack of
    reasonable due diligence and surely a great lack of concern for the
    school both pupils and other teachers and parents has been flagrantly
    displayed in total disregard for the safety and welfare of minors.
    Whether this is or should be a concern for the bond holders of these
    persons I do not know. Mr. Glass, Glass family Law and former
    associate of (Kolodny & Anteau) One of the most respected family
    law firms in the United States (Mel Gibson Getty, etc.) has been
    investigated by the CA Bar already in this matter and while the
    complaint was not upheld a letter suggesting the possibility of civil
    redress was issued by them.

    The APA also found he did no wrong
    apparently within their own ethics code.

    The fact remains an
    Attorney/Psychologist and a Teacher and a Teacher/Coach surely have
    some duty to the community. The positions of trust and respect they
    are afforded should allow the general public a reasonableness within
    their expectation of propriety and protection of the innocent by such
    credentialed persons.

    Perhaps the LAUSD/SMUSD could
    incorporate or suggest to the CA Bar a cooperative relationship of a
    professional nature that would allow this protection to be afforded
    our children as well as draft a code or the LAUSD/SMUSD’s own
    employees in such situations.

    Certainly recent events could lead one
    to surmise that a better clarified way of maintaining the safety and
    welfare of our children, from both bonifide and false claims of abuse
    would be helpful. The harm that both real and imagined events can
    bring to families, as well as collateral persons and an institution
    such as children’s learning environment should be minimalized at
    all times.

    Mr. Graham J Miller

    885 Avenue of the Americas

    Penthouse 1A

    New York. NY. 10001

  • Elenora

    They do have shared custody – 50/50. If she lived in France she would have access to them. She wants them in the US.

    This all came about because she tried to blackmail her ex into signing away parental rights, using his visa as collateral. He didn’t sign and her lawyer reported him (for attempted kidnapping, apparently?). The visa was revoked based on unfounded allegations.

    It’s all in the ruling:

  • Suzy

    The children are Americans born there
    But for some reason the US courts find that
    These children dont seem to be American?
    Its wrong to take young children away from their Mum and to another country I BET if he ex was a Muslim living in Middle east the court would award her the children. She didnt accuse him of anything nasty.Look at Halle Berry she wanted to take her kid to France her ex fought it
    Same situation he had a Visa hes Canadian
    He was a model so not a job USA needed
    Yet he managed to prevent her from leaving USA
    He too wasnt American and the daughter was born there Berry has to support him now
    Always think theres something undignified about a man taking money of a women Shows he cant Provide for himself and shows hes no male pride
    Moving to France with new husband and child
    JD made sure VP moved to USA before he anounced he was leaving her ensuring that the children didnt go back to France where they were born and raised for their entire lives USA was just holidays Wonder if thats why GP is going back to London to live with her children CM is reported to have said he wanted the kids schooling in Britain and as they were born there
    With USA seemingly favouring Dads she got one jump ahead to ensure she kept custody in UK
    Seems to me the wheels turning back it didnt last long did it Women getting custody of their children. Since time began and up to 50 yrs ago Women had almost no chance 40 yrs ago 50/50
    Since then its nearly always been the MUM
    Now its reverting back to the past. While Gays get to marry have children OH I forgot they are men Women still are classed as second class.
    Even in print its the couple are having a baby
    NO the WOMENS HAVING IT CARRYING IT not the man HES not having a baby his women is