On Air
Showbiz Music & Gossip A full round up to today's entertainment and showbiz news with our resident 'girl about town'

Paula Patton claims Robin Thicke tampered with court order to get her arrested

25 February 2017 Entertainment News

Fourth Estate Staff

Los Angeles, CA, United States (4E) – The ex-wife of Robin Thicke, Paula Patton, claimed in a new statement that the singer tampered with a court order in order to get her arrested.

The allegations were stated in a court filing released on Thursday and is the latest in the custody battle of the exes. The court filing came a day before a judge was set to begin a hearing on the allegation of Patton that Thicke was abusive during their relationship towards her and their six-year-old son. Thicke was ordered to stay away from Patton and to have only supervised visits with their son after a temporary restraining order was issued in January. Thicke denied that he abused their son as well as the domestic violence allegations.

More on the latest court filing, 41-year-old Patton said that 39-year-old Thicke “willfully, intentionally, and wrongfully changed/fabricated a Court Order specifying custodial timeshare of the couple’s minor child.” He also reportedly threatened to have her arrested for kidnapping “premised upon the false and fraudulent court order” before she was awarded with temporary sole custody last month.

In the court filing, Patton also alleged Thicke and his team engaged in conduct specifically designed to influence the outcome of the Children and Family Services. A worker from the department was said to be taken out by Thicke’s team to an expensive sushi dinner while the department was actively investigating the child abuse allegations.

A source for Thicke’s camp claimed that the pair had a custody agreement in February of 2015 with a mediator regarding their child after their divorce. The documents were signed and agreed by both parties. For the expensive sushi dinner claims, Thicke and his team claimed, “Robin took Julian to Nobu two weeks ago for one of their supervised visits, and by law a DCFS worker and a monitor had to be present. The DCFS worker and monitor would not and did not order food. They sat at a different table within eye and ear reach and only had water.”

Article – All Rights Reserved.
Provided by FeedSyndicate