Tue Oct 20 2009 13:39:05 By: Apostate ( 4993)
After months of having to furiously compete for media coverage with the Gosselins and Lohans,this messy custody battle emerges victorious today!

Tue Oct 20 2009 14:03:20 By: ipsofacto ( 1094)
From what I have just read I think the husband should have full custody of the children. If
she has been proven to be lying
about her substance abuse being
a thing of the past and other
things that she has done, I believe she is not capable of
being in charge of her children. The substance would come first and the children
second and that is scary!

Thu Oct 22 2009 00:59:29 By: Anonymous User
All lies. Peter Brant is a coward. He cannot accept that his beautiful, sweet, elegant, loving mother of their children is desperately trying to escape his ugly self. His ego cannot handle it and so he is hell bent on creating the appearance that there is something wrong with Stephanie. The fact of the matter is he has now done irreparable harm to her image by leaking allegations (not facts) that were supposed to be under seal in a desperate attempt to circumvent a gag order that was put in place to protect their children. Obviously he cares nothing about his children. His lawyers should be disbarred for going along with his scorch the earth tactics. Howard Rubenstein should be sued for his role defaming Stephanie and Peter Brant should go back to jail where he belongs. That is the only place he belongs. Let this be an example of how badly the family court system has failed a wonderful mother that, because her soon to be ex husband feels emasculated and rejected, felt it necessary to try to damage the mother of his children with the hope that she will settle for less money that she is legally entitled to under Connecticut State law. Peter Brant is perhaps the poorest example of human kind I have ever witnessed.