It was more than a phone call. Kelly was an informed (if despicable) participant.

I get your fatigue, but I think you are missing the point. At it’s root this trial was about Kelly’s attempt to move from CA to NY and switch from 50/50 physical and legal custody to sole custody. Kelly opened Pandora’s box and got more than she bargained for with the whole Visa thing. There was more than a call to…

Your issues with your parents aside, the in the order that sent the kids to live with their dad, the judge said

But that’s exactly what Kelly was trying to do. They had 50/50 physical and legal custody in California and Kelly was trying to move to New York and get sole custody. She opened Pandora’s box with the Visa issue, but at it’s root was Kelly trying to eliminate Daniel as a parent.

I think the confident posters have read the court documents. The tell a different story that is contrary to the VF article and Kelly’s spin. For example, Kelly claimed that she wanted to share custody and Daniel wanted sole, but the judge said the exact opposite:

I get it. Vanity Fair expects to use the photos to portray Kelly as wonder mom, ignoring that both are claimed to be good parents. The kids have lived with their father for the last three years and while it is distressing to Kelly, they seem to be fairing quite well.

Kelly is being disingenuous when she talks about custody. She’s taling about legal custody, not physical custody. Legal custody without significant if not equal physical custody is almost worthless except in the most extreme cases. Much to Kelly’s distress, they actually had 50/50 physical and legal custody. The whole…

Despite her pleas to the contrary, Kelly has always sought sole custody. Kelly was trying to move from California to New York and get sole custody. Prior to that they had 50/50 legal and physical custody.