As you might need heard, Angelina Jolie has requested a decide coping with her and Brad Pitt’s custody case to be eliminated and her former husband was fast to publicly reply through a authorized consultant that thinks the actress desires nothing greater than to delay the trial. This try, in accordance with Brad Pitt’s legal professionals, is certain to ‘hurt’ their six youngsters within the course of.
This comes per week after Angelina Jolie requested for Judge John W. Ouderkirk to be ‘disqualified’ from their case.
But whereas it looks like she desires to keep away from any conflicts of curiosity and human bias from the divorce and custody case, this may also, naturally, result in the case being delayed, one thing Brad and his attorneys suppose will solely damage their youngsters.
‘Jolie’s sudden cry of judicial bias reeks of desperation and unhealthy religion, to not point out, of careless disregard for the foundations supposed to root out conflicted judicial officers. Unfortunately, the people [that are] damage most by Jolie’s tactical gambit are the events’ youngsters, who proceed to be disadvantaged of 1 closing decision to all these custody points,’ Brad’s attorneys write within the authorized paperwork per week after Angelina filed her personal, asking for her request to be denied.
They go on to additionally name Jolie’s submitting a ‘thinly veiled attempt’ to delay ‘the adjudication of long-pending custody issues’ of the Hollywood stars’ longtime case.
Brad Pitt’s authorized group stresses that Angelina Jolie ‘hand-selected’ the decide within the first place and that he has a ‘well-documented history’ with each Jolie and Pitt so there is no such thing as a cause to fret a couple of bias affecting the case.
Furthermore, they level out that she by no means ‘objected’ to Ouderkirk’s involvement earlier than simply earlier this month.
‘It is disingenuous for Jolie to now take umbrage to Judge Ouderkirk’s participation in issues involving Respondent’s counsel when (1) — she has been properly conscious of this truth since January 2017 and (2) her personal attorneys have likewise served as counsel in different issues earlier than Judge Ouderkirk — each earlier than and through the pendency of this case,’ the doc concludes.