Adding to the mud being slung at Christie Brinkley and Peter Cook's divorce trial is this little tidbit: Cook paid Diana Bianchi $300,000 in exchange for a promise to not sue him for sexual harassment, and also to "spare his kids…the pain of learning tawdry details of the affair," according to the New York Post. Or as they put it, Tryst Teen Cashes In.
When a guy is in his 40's, and a girl is 18, and they have an affair, I tend to put the blame on the guy. Not that she's without fault, but if you have to start assigning blame, let's think about it: she was working at his office. He was married. And she was 18 years old. So I don't know about "cashing in," especially since she hadn't filed a suit yet. She was, however, considering it, at least according to the Post's source. The $300,000 figure is apparently what it would have cost the Cheatin' Cook in legal fees to defend himself against a suit brought by the young Bianchi.
This follows a report by the Post that Christie will reveal in court that Cook, "has a penchant for Internet porn and loves to troll swinger sites." Considering why they're getting divorced in the first place, this doesn't really seem like much of a revelation. (Semi-related video below.)
Now you might think it would be hard for Christie's ex to get dates, what with being plastered all over the tabloids and all. But you would be wrong! Suzanne Shaw, a 38-year-old single mom whose kids go to the same elementary school as the formerly happy Brinkley-Cook couple, is Cook's current girlfriend and she's defending her new man. "He obviously made a mistake…But one mistake doesn't erase years of being a good person." She also expresses concern for what all these news reports will do to Cook and Brinkley's children, and thinks that Christie is "doing this to publicly flog him." She does say that she is "sensitive to Brinkley's situation" since her
own ex-husband ditched her when she was 6 month's pregnant, but feels
that "if their father's reputation suffers, the children suffer."
Um, Suzanne? Ms. Shaw? Here’s the thing. If you want to minimize the amount of news coverage that this trial is getting, I have a suggestion. DON'T TALK TO THE NEW YORK POST. By doing so, you have added at least one article to the pile. Right? Also, before you go all out defending Cook, think about the fact that he cheated on a supermodel. Yes, marriages fall apart for all sorts of reasons, but he had an affair with an 18-year-old. I'm not sure how much "good person" behavior it takes to erase that.
I will say that it's too bad that there has to be a trial at all. Couldn't they work things out behind closed doors? Apparently Cook had asked for the trial to be closed to the media but the judge refused, which sounds like we might have a budding Judge Ito on our hands (he was the judge in the O.J. Simpson trial who liked being on TV, in case you don't remember or weren't old enough to experience that fiasco.) I'm not a divorce lawyer (or any kind of lawyer, actually) but it seems like this should be an open and shut case. He cheated on her; she should get whatever she wants. Obviously, nothing is that simple, but that would be nice, wouldn't it?
The trial doesn't even start until July 2, and this stuff is appearing already. Could be a fun summer in the Hamptons.
Brinkley and Cook Outside the Courtroom (6/20)
images/video: NYPost
Related posts:
