Jolie, who had previously tried to disqualify Judge John Ouderkirk from the case, said Monday that he refused to hear evidence that she said was relevant to the safety and well-being of their children before an interim decision is not made.
“Judge Ouderkirk denied Ms. Jolie a fair trial, improperly excluding her evidence concerning the health, safety and well-being of the children, evidence essential to justify her case,” according to the Court of Appeal’s file. district of California.
She added that the judge “did not properly consider” a section of the California courts code, which says it is harmful to the child if custody is given to someone with a history of domestic violence. – but did not give more information on this point.
However, a sealed document submitted to the court in March is believed to provide more details.
The actress filed for divorce in 2016 in the days that followed a fight between the two men on a private flight between France and Los Angeles.
She accused Pitt of abusing their then 15-year-old son during the theft – but an investigation by the FBI and child welfare officials closed the case without any charges.
Jolie’s latest case says the judge “declined to hear comments from underage teens about their experiences, needs or wishes regarding their custody,” citing a law that says children over the age of 14 should be allowed to testify if they wish.
Three of Jolie and Pitt’s six children are teenagers: Pax, 17, Zahara, 16, and Shiloh, 14.
Subscribe to the Backstage podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Spreaker
Maddox, 19, is unaffected by the custody decision. The couple also have 12-year-old twins together, Vivienne and Knox.
In response to Jolie’s case, Pitt’s attorneys said: “Ouderkirk has conducted a thorough proceeding over the past six months in a thorough and fair manner and has reached an interim ruling and order after hearing from experts and impactful witnesses. “
According to Pitt’s record, the judge ruled that Jolie’s testimony “lacked credibility in many important areas, and the existing custody order between the parties must be varied, at Mr. Pitt’s request, in the” best interests of the children ”.
He adds that Jolie’s objections and delays in reaching a deal would cause “serious harm to the children, who will still be denied permanence and stability.”
Due to the sealed records, it is unclear exactly what the current custody arrangement is, but at the start of the process, Pitt requested shared custody while Jolie wanted primary physical custody.
Divorce lawyers on both sides declined to comment on the new filings.