I haven't watched it. But details leak into my world as is the way. They paint a picture of two wealthy, beautiful, damaged people without an ounce of insight about themselves or the other person. Maybe that's just the way domestic court cases work.
Both sides are describing a miserable marriage from their perspective. They each felt victimised by the other. They each responded by pushing back hard. It isn't our job to take sides, although the attorneys weave together stories to try to get us to do so.
To me, the truth is, it would be better for both of them to have the maturity not to wash their dirty laundry in public.
Her writing a piece claiming to be the victim of domestic violence when she was also clearly a bully and perpetrator of it was so foolish. They were both bullies and victims at the same time. Or rather it depends upon the 15 minute timeslot you are talking about. It was that sort of relationship, clearly. It was a war.
That she wrote a piece positioning herself as only victim and not as a contributor to the toxicity is doubtless what set him off. The problem they had in the marriage is the same one they are having afterwards. Now they are both in court claiming the other one is the baddie/ bully and they are the goodie/victim.
What they clearly had was an animal attraction. It wasn't love in a meaningful sense. They were two damaged people starving for attention and psychological support. People who crave attention and support should look for someone who wants to give them, not for someone who also needs those two crutches.
They just need to stop talking about it in the public space and move on. Bad marriages aren't pretty.
| 