so did they ever file a marriage certificate? i dont remember if there was ever any proof of a legal union. anyone know? Is that [public record ? Is it as
trustworthy as the mysterious suri birth certificate? and why didn't anyone investigate her BD further? I feel like the press dropped it after a day or
so..?
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
0 Kudo
were they reeeally married?
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 raynardm |
were they reeeally married? |
Lead | ||
|
Posts: 816 04/14/08 09:08:54 |
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
psychoticstate |
#1 | |||
|
Posts: 3960 04/14/08 09:49:23 |
There has never been a marriage certificate released to the public. However, California does have private marriage licenses, so if the Dastardly Duo chose one
of those, we will never see it.
However, I personally believe they are not legally married. Their shmedding ceremony in Italy wasn't legally recognized and not being legally married would make the eventual separation that much easier. Particularly if they are together less than 7 years (7 years used to be the standard for being considered married by common law, don't know if that's the case any longer).
******************
They're idiots, which I don't necessarily find offensive. But I do find it offensive that they think I'm an idiot and would believe what they're saying. ****************** www.psychoticstate.blogspot.com 
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
char2008 |
#2 | |||
|
Posts: 324 04/14/08 10:09:34 |
psychoticstate wrote: CA has some strange laws to protect celebs I guess. No real birth certificate for Suri either. In CA, I believe that property becomes community property after 10 years but I think the 7 years is still common law marriage?? Not sure.. I am in FL LOL far awary from wacky Hollyweird. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
princesspeach |
#3 | |||
|
Posts: 9669 04/14/08 10:21:35 |
Nope, common-law marriage isn't recognized in CA.
Today's Deep
Thoughts
A day without sunshine is like night. The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese in the trap. On the other hand, you have different fingers. 
Kitsch In Sink. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
posterchilde |
#4 | |||
|
Posts: 1514 04/14/08 11:42:21 |
And community property begins from Day 1 of the marriage in CA.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
tomali02 |
#5 | |||
|
Posts: 832 04/14/08 12:18:55 |
My guess is they were never legally married. The Rome extravaganza wasn't legally binding and the reports put out that they sealed the deal in LA
beforehand are BS imho. Surely there would have been pics if they had held a civil ceremony?
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
gigglemuncher |
#6 | |||
|
Posts: 1909 04/14/08 12:25:50 |
Hmmm...if they were legally married, what are the chances they could get it annulled? I mean, they'd never admit it, but you know they never consummated
that marriage!
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
char2008 |
#7 | |||
|
Posts: 324 04/14/08 13:19:10 |
princesspeach wrote: ok thanks But I thought years ago that Kurt Russell and Goldie Hawn had a common law marriage because of their time together. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
posterchilde |
#8 | |||
|
Posts: 1514 04/14/08 14:03:34 |
Couples like Hawn and Russell are referred to as common law, but they really technically are not so in California.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
KidLawless77 |
#9 | |||
|
Posts: 9093 04/14/08 14:19:57 |
I read somewhere that Goldie Hawn & Kurt Russell had a 'commitment cermony' years ago which is totally non-legally binding and is for symbolic
reasons only. As others have pointed out, CA does not recognize common law marriages nor does my home state of VA.
Getting back to the question, I do not believe TomKat were ever legally married. No freakin' way. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
outofzbox |
#10 | |||
|
Posts: 468 04/14/08 15:38:13 |
I don't believe it cuz of what their publicist said at the time of the Rome circus. Before the Nov 18 ceremony, he was quoted as saying "We
are doing everything we need to do to assure the marriage is legal" Then after the ceremony, he released another statement saying they had wed
in a civil ceremony back in the States. OH!!?? So NOW you tell us. RIGHT!!!! BULLSHIT on the whole thing is my call. They are not legally wed.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Omega40 |
#11 | |||
|
Posts: 467 04/14/08 15:43:24 |
I agree with you all here. Their whole life together is nothing but a total sham!
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
amyeh |
#12 | |||
|
Posts: 740 04/14/08 18:55:49 |
tomali02 wrote: I agree tomali, I mean there were even photos of Eva Longoria and Tony Parker's civil ceremony before they had their big party in Paris, and they are no where near the publicity sluts that TomKat are. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
MamaJunebug |
#13 | |||
|
Posts: 2872 04/15/08 00:55:17 |
A little something on OCMB about a "24" actress getting married in a $cieno ceremony brought it home like an MLB shortstop:
If they'd been married in the US in a $cieno ceremony, they'd have pimped that for all it was worth, ennit?? And they didn't. So I have to logically agree: They aren't. Does a pre-nup "count" if there's no legal "nup"? Would either of the attorneys-at-law Holmes of Toledo, Ohio, have thought to check that li'l loophole? If indeed it is a loophole. Scary, Miss Mary. Katherine Noelle Holmes, could you really have been so blind and/or starry-eyed as to imagine this would come to any good? |
|||
|
|
||||
|
sxpnce |
#14 | |||
|
Posts: 3085 04/15/08 06:04:54 |
I don't believe for a minute these two are legally wed.
The comment about the civil ceremony only came out after the the hupla during the Over The Big Top display in Italy. Even the Mayor of Bracciano, Italy said that they had not filled out one bit of paperwork in Italy. I think the CCC PR Machine was in crisis mode and came up with the "civil ceremony in L.A." to cover their backsides. As for KAK's parents, they could have told them that they were legally wed in a civil ceremony just to appease them as well. All I know is that they looked less than thrilled about their daughter marrying the "biggest movie star evah" during the ceremony. 
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
posterchilde |
#15 | |||
|
Posts: 1514 04/15/08 08:00:56 |
I think Martin Holmes knows that the Gruesome Twosome aren't legally married and the "pre-niup" is most likely a business contract between MTP
and KAK that spells out how they will carry out the shamarriage, that MTP will agree to the farce that he is Suri's bio-dad, that KAK will be a Scieno,
that Suri will be raised as a Scieno, blah blah blah. I think if they aren't legally married, it will make it easier for KAK to retain custody of Suri
after they split up.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
MamaJunebug |
#16 | |||
|
Posts: 2872 04/15/08 08:42:48 |
think if they aren't legally married, it will make it easier for KAK to retain custody of Suri after they split up.PC, I'm not quite following what you're saying here, though I sure like the sounds of it! I am also here to possibly recant my supposition, above. In the US, for whatever reason, a couple don't need to get a civil ceremony, a religious ceremony suffices, with the state marriage license, which as we know is kept private in Calif. OK, so Dainty Davey's an ordained minister of Scientology. So he performed the ceremony in Italy. So is that recognized by the US and California governments as a marriage ceremony? If it was performed by a registered religious minister, but not on California (US) soil? BTW ... writing the words "ordained" and "minister" in connection with Scientology makes me feel sick. 
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
psychoticstate |
#17 | |||
|
Posts: 3960 04/15/08 09:14:39 |
PC, I don't think it will matter whether Tommy Boy and Katie were married or not. Fact is, based on the only birth certificate we've seen, Tommy Boy
is listed as the father and he has presented himself as Surly's father since her birth. So even if Katie got primary custody, Tommy Boy would have
parental rights, married or no. Unfortunately.
******************
They're idiots, which I don't necessarily find offensive. But I do find it offensive that they think I'm an idiot and would believe what they're saying. ****************** www.psychoticstate.blogspot.com
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
posterchilde |
#18 | |||
|
Posts: 1514 04/15/08 09:21:24 |
MamaJunebug wrote: I think PS is probably right about it not mattering whether they're married or not where custody of Suri is concerned. Rats!
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
MamaJunebug |
#19 | |||
|
Posts: 2872 04/15/08 09:58:00 |
Thanks, PC! Got it, now.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
posterchilde |
#20 | |||
|
Posts: 1514 04/15/08 10:01:57 |
Oh, good, because that was one big confusing run-on sentence I wrote up there!
|
|||
|
|
||||
