Jon Gosselin wasn't the first to admit he's made some mistakes—but he has finally boarded the bandwagon.
Almost three years to the day since he and Kate Gosselin revealed to the world that divorce proceedings were underway, the former reality-TV star is looking to make amends with those he has hurt, starting with his ex-wife.
And, if that works out, maybe with TV audiences, as well.
MORE: Jon Gosselin $3,500 Behind in Child Support? Former Reality Dad Fires Back on Twitter
"I am sorry, because I did stuff I wouldn't want done to me," Jon tells People in a new interview.
Tabloid stories suggesting that Jon was cheating on Kate—quickly followed by rumors that Kate was more than friends with her bodyguard—first shook the Jon and Kate Plus 8 foundation back in 2009.
Both spouses, married since 1999, denied being unfaithful, but they filed for divorce on June 22, 2009.
In additional papers filed that September, Jon admitted to using "poor judgment in publicly socializing with other women so soon."
MORE: Kate Gosselin: Is the Mother of Eight Planning a Return to Reality TV?
"I was passive-aggressive," the 35-year-old divorcé now tells People in reference to the various things that led to the end of his marriage. "Then I'd get mad, but I was the one who wasn't communicating."
Jon, who dropped off the reality-TV scene when the show he once costarred on became Kate Plus 8, recently took a job as director of sales and promotions for Gameface International, a sports event and management firm. He's also dating a single mom, 27-year-old Liz Jannetta, according to People.
But while he shunned the spotlight for awhile and wanted his kids to do ths same (Kate won out on that one), guess what? He's willing to put himself out there again if the right opportunity comes along.
"I've been offered a lot of stuff," he says. "Crazy stuff. It wasn't the right fit, then or now. I don't want [my kids] thinking I take every show just to make a buck."
Jon took to Twitter in April to deny a report that he was $3,500 behind in child support payments, writing that the Pennsylvania Department of Child Welfare's website was just showing his amount due, and that he reliably pays up every month.
Source: www.eonline.com
Mother jailed for killing young daughter eight years after coroner halted inquest when he suspected foul play - Daily Mail
- CPS had felt there wasn't enough evidence top prosecute Lesley Dunford
- In 2009 East Sussex coroner Alan Craze demanded the case was revisited
By Leon Watson
|
Lesley Dunford was onvicted of the manslaughter of her three-year-old daughter after an inquest into the 2004 death was dramatically halted by a coroner
A mother has been convicted of killing her young daughter eight years ago after a coroner dramatically halted the tragic tots inquest.
Lesley Dunford, 33, who lives in Exeter, Devon, was imprisoned for seven years at Lewes Crown Court today after being found guilty of manslaughter.
Dunford's daughter Lucy was found dead in February 2004 and after two conflicting post mortems her mother was arrested, however at the time the CPS felt there was not enough evidence to prosecute.
Sentencing yesterday Judge Richard Brown said: 'The jury have convicted you of manslaughter of your three-year-old daughter Lucy.
'It may well be you are the only one who knows exactly what happened on that dreadful day in 04 which took you from carer to killer.
'Since then you have done your level best to lie your way out of any responsibility.
'This indicates you have little or no remorse for what you did.'
Dunford's daughter Lucy was found dead in her bed at the family home in Camber, near Rye, East Sussex.
An original post mortem found that Lucy may have died from a sudden onset of a bacterial infection which led to her choking on her own vomit.
However, during a second examination this was disputed and the idea put forward that suspicious bruising on the tot's upper body may mean her airways had been compressed forcefully.
At the time Dunford claimed her daughter had been 'perfectly fine' earlier in the day but that she had been tired so she had put her to bed - she later told paramedics she thought her daughter had had a 'fit'.
After she had found her daughter Dunfold refused to ring the emergency services until she had spoken to her husband - whom she told 'it's happened again' in reference to Lucy's younger brother Harley who had been found dead in his cot six months previously.
Paramedics at Conquest Hospital in Hastings noticed two marks on her neck which had started to bruise and requested the attendance of police at the hospital.
Dunford's house in Camber, East Sussex, where her daughter Lucy was found dead in her bed
Dunford was arrested in February 2004 and interviewed by police then and again in May.
Her case was passed to the Crown Prosecution Service who decided there was not enough evidence to charge Dunford with the murder of Lucy.
'This was a difficult and complex case that involved evidence from a number of medical experts.'
Simon Ringrose, CPS
But during her inquest in 2009 East Sussex coroner Alan Craze demanded the case was revisited.
The inquest threw up new information which had been given by medical experts in 2005 during a Family Court hearing into Lucy's death.
This information had not been passed on to the CPS. Dunford was then rearrested and charged in July 2011.
Prosecutor Sally Howes QC said during the trial that the inquest had 'excluded the likelihood' of a serious infection and found that injuries to the airways were consistent with an 'application of force'.
On July 12, 2011, Dunford was therefore rearrested and Ms Howes said she told officers: 'I have been waiting for this to happen.'
Dunford, 33, was arrested in February 2004 and interview by police then and again in May
During his sentencing Judge Brown told the court he took into account Dunford's 'childlike manner' and the 'long delay' in bringing the trial to court.
However he said courts have a duty to 'protect little people like Lucy from violence'.
Speaking afterwards, Detective Chief Inspector Nick Sloan, of the Surrey and Sussex Major Crime Team, said: 'There was a thorough police investigation at the time but the forensic evidence then did not support a prosecution.
'The death of Lucy was immediately treated as suspicious by Sussex Police. Her mother was arrested and interviewed and there was a thorough investigation.
'However, based on the information available at the time, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decision was that there was insufficient evidence to support a criminal prosecution.
'The CPS decision turned largely on reports from two pathologists, which were conflicting.'
Simon Ringrose, of the CPS, said: 'This was a difficult and complex case that involved evidence from a number of medical experts.
'The reinvestigation into the circumstances of Lucy Dunford's death included obtaining further medical evidence.
'This evidence effectively ruled out a natural cause of death and was consistent with Lucy having been suffocated.
'The only person who could have done this was her mother, Lesley Dunford.'
After the sentencing Wayne Dunford declined to comment.
Source: www.dailymail.co.uk
A-level student predicted to achieve top grades is escorted from college by police after 'refusing to stop REVISING' - Daily Mail
|
Barred: Jamie Gagliardi claims he had 'nowhere else to revise' and did not have a computer at home
An A-level student who was 'obsessed with revising' had to be escorted from school by police after ignoring a classroom ban.
Jamie Gagliardi, 18, had been told to stay home from Ifield Community College in Crawley, West Sussex, for one day after interrupting the headteacher during a meeting on Wednesday.
But he went to the college - whose students notched up a 100 per cent A-level pass rate last year - the following morning, claiming he had 'nowhere else to revise' for his psychology A-level on Monday and he did not have a computer at home.
He was asked to leave but began 'causing a nuisance and a disturbance'.
At 8.45am college officials decided that the only option was to call in the police after the teen refused to leave the premises.
The pupil, who is also taking A-level law, English and history, was escorted from the college and his mother was called to pick him up.
Police confirmed that the teenager would not be charged with any offence.
Speaking this week, Jamie said he was given a one-day ban from the college last Wednesday for interrupting the headteacher during a meeting, meaning he was not allowed in the school the following day.
He said: 'I have been punished for wanting to do well.
'I am a hard-working and dedicated student and this could have such an impact on my future.
'The college has overreacted in what is probably the most important week of my school life.
Ban: Staff at Ifield Community College (pictured) called police after Jamie Gagliardi refused to leave the premises
'I have told teachers many times that I do not have a computer at home so would not be able to work at home.'
Bosses at the 1,090-pupil college - rated good by Ofsted in February this year - said the teen is ‘obsessed’ with after-school tuition and the police were called because he was ‘causing a nuisance’ by refusing to leave the premises.
Marilyn Evans, the school’s director of administration, said Jamie was a 'very bright boy', but added: 'He became vociferous and irritated that he couldn't have after-school revision.
'The teacher has already given up her time to give extra revision in half term and during the school day, when she was meant to have free time.
'On Thursday, he was causing a nuisance and a disturbance on the premises.
'He is obsessed with doing after-school revision.'
She added: 'He probably feels that without those extra sessions he won't get the grade he wants, but he will. He is a top student.'
A spokeswoman for Sussex Police confirmed today that officers were called at 8.45am on June 14 to remove a 'disruptive' pupil who was refusing to leave the premises.
Splash: How the Crawley News reported on Jamie Gagliardi's removal from the school by police
Source: www.dailymail.co.uk
Custody battle forces high court to plan teen's life - Times of India
AHMEDABAD: Thirteen-year-old Bhagyesh spends more time in court than in his school. This is due to the unending legal battle between his warring parents regarding his custody.
The courts have been planning vacation for the kid for last three years, as his parents were not ready to compromise on any formula. The matter did not end here. As the case could not be resolved even for visiting rights, the Gujarat high court intervened and decided to send the boy to a boarding school.
Bhagyesh could not go to the school that was finalized by the high court because his father approached the Supreme Court, which stayed the process as for now.
As per case details, Bhagyesh's lecturer mother Nita Patel left her matrimonial home six years years ago, and the kid was looked after by his father Nirmal, an interior designer in Valsad. Four years ago, the mother instituted a case in local court demanding custody of the child. The case is yet to be decided, but the mother got visitation rights and entire problem began with visiting hours.
Bhagyesh, who according to Nirmal's lawyers has been attached to his father from the beginning, refuses to go to the mother., which she perceives this as tutoring on part of the father that the boy is avoiding to see her
. The courts on time and again passed orders fixing in details the time and place for the mother's visit to her son.
The formula for visitation kept changing, and the high court involved lower courts as well as police so that the custody schedules were followed properly. The father also assured courts that he would persuade the boy to go to his mother so everyone did not have to face unnecessary trouble
. However, things could not be sorted out and the mother filed a contempt petition against her husband for not following HC order. Earlier this month, the proceedings began and it was discussed that the boy could be sent to a boarding school. Accordingly, the court finalized a school in Vadodara out of four boarding schools suggested by the father. In March, Justice Anant Dave directed the school to admit the boy from this academic year.
Against this order, the father moved the SC and sought a stay on the HC order. He requested the apex court to grant more time expressing hope that he might be able to convince the kid to go and stay with his mother as per meeting scheduledd by courts.
Source: timesofindia.indiatimes.com
Divorce woman wins house-move fight - Belfast Telegraph
Wednesday, 20 June 2012
The woman, who has two children, was ordered to live at a specified address nearly two years ago by a district judge overseeing divorce proceedings.
But a High Court judge lifted the restriction after ruling that the woman should be allowed to find work and support her children as she wished.
The woman compared the restriction to being under "house arrest" and complained that it limited her chances of finding work, hampered her children's relationship with relatives, and left her struggling to pay bills.
Mr Justice Charles disagreed with the "house arrest" comparison but told a High Court hearing: "It seems to me that she should have the opportunity to seek employment, and therefore to support herself and her children, as she wishes."
He heard that the restriction was part of a "prohibitive steps order" made by a district judge in 2010. The woman's estranged husband lived near the specified address and the arrangement allowed him to have regular contact with the children, the judge was told.
The woman, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, challenged the restriction at a private hearing in the family division of the High Court in London. Mr Justice Charles gave permission for a journalist to attend the hearing and for parts of the proceedings to be reported after an application by the Press Association, which argued that coverage would be in the public interest.
The judge said the woman and her children had to remain in England or Wales - within the jurisdiction of the High Court - while legal proceedings continued. A further High Court hearing related to the divorce fight is scheduled to take place later this year.
Mr Justice Charles said he had to decide whether to continue the restriction to ease contact arrangements or allow the woman to move. He said the balance lay in allowing the woman to move. The estranged husband had argued the woman's "true agenda" in wanting to move home was to "frustrate" contact arrangements. Mr Justice Charles said the estranged husband had a right to regular contact and the woman had to comply with the provisions of a separate court order relating to access visits, regardless of where she lived.
"I'd tried to get the restriction discharged before but failed," said the woman, who was not represented by a lawyer at the High Court hearing. "I was a bit overwhelmed when it was actually lifted." She added: "It was a sledgehammer to crack a nut. I hope Mr Justice Charles' decision helps other people in similar situations."
Source: www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk
'Someone's after more money': Katie Price blames ex-husband Alex Reid for deliberately delaying their divorce - Daily Mail
|
It looked like Katie Price and Alex Reid's brief marriage was finally over when they were granted a decree nisi in March.
However, the glamour model today complained the final divorce ruling has been delayed because her estranged husband wants more money.
Although a High Court judge initially granted the couple a divorce on the grounds of Reid's 'unreasonable behaviour' in March, they are yet to have it finalised.
Feminine look: Katie Price wears a pink top and orange skirt as she arrives at ITV studios
Following the decision in March, it normally takes between five to six weeks for a divorcing couple to be given a decree absolute.
However, appearing on Loose Women today, Katie bemoaned the fact she was unable to move on properly with new fianc Leandro Penna because she was still wed to Alex.
The 34-year-old said: 'I'm still married.'
She then claimed: 'It would have been quicker, but obviously someone's after more money.'
Holding things up? Alex Reid, pictured outside his Essex home yesterday, has been blamed for delaying the divorce
Katie and Alex famously split in January 2011 after just 11 months of marriage.
The mother-of-three ended up marrying Alex in Las Vegas just nine months after she was dumped by first husband Peter Andre.
On reflection, she concedes she was on the rebound from Peter when she started dating Alex eight weeks later.
Speaking on Radio 4's Woman's Hour today, she admitted: 'The public was right about Alex, I was on the rebound.
Glam: The glamour model is promoting her new novel In The Name Of Love
'Yes, I know I was on the rebound and I'm not rushing into getting married again. Yes, I'm engaged, but I've actually grown-up and thought there's no rush for anything.'
For her appearance on Loose Women, it was quite a surprise to see the former glamour model looking demure in a pink top and flowing orange skirt today.
However, it was only when she turned around, she was given a cheeky flash of bra, which she had co-ordinated with her top.
On Woman's Hour, she praised her 'intelligent' Argentine fianc for learning English, admitting it was difficult when they first started dating.
Pink to make the boys wink: Katie flashed her pink bra in the partially-backless top
She explained: 'I said, "yeah, yeah, I'm gonna learn Spanish" but you just don't. I think, "everyone speaks English, he'll end up speaking English." And he does.'
When Jenni asked if she had tried to learn Spanish, Katie replied: 'I haven't had the time. That's awful isn't it?
'He's made the time and the effort and we can actually have a conversation now. He went to English school and properly learned English. In fact, he speaks it better than me.'
Addressing her split from Peter, she added: 'I never wanted to split from him. Its just unfortunate he thought I was having an affair with my riding instructor.
English lessons: Katie said her Argentine fianc Leandro Penna spoke better English than she did
'He always says "I can never say why", because he knows he's married with his family and if he does say it, we'll all jump on the bandwagon and say, "prove it."
The mother-of-three is currently promoting her new novel In The Name Of Love, which tells the story of a holiday romance between sports presenter Charlie and Spanish Olympian horse-rider Felipe.
The book is her eighth novel and has been ghost-written with author Rebecca Farmsworth.
Speaking about their partnership on Woman's Hour, she said: 'I feel sorry for Rebecca. I speak into the Dictaphone. You've definitely got to have a talent to sit there and write the book and she's amazing at it.
'I come up with the plot and we go through each chapter together.'
I'm here too! Carrie Underwood was also pictured at the ITV studios
Source: www.dailymail.co.uk
Geek! He needs to get out more!
- Champagne Girl, An Exclusive Bar You Can't Go To, 20/6/2012 18:19
Report abuse