Linda Evangelista claims Francois-Henri Pinault asked her to get an abortion

Last summer, I was genuinely surprised to learn that the father of Linda Evangelista’s son Augustin was none other than Salma Hayek’s husband, Francois-Henri Pinault. Pinault fathered Augustin before he and Salma met and married (although the timeline seems wonky to me). Linda kept the paternity under wraps for several years, but then she sued for child support and now the whole thing is being worked out in a New York City courthouse. Linda is still asking for $46,000 A MONTH in child support, which Pinault is fighting tooth and nail. I’m including photos of Linda in court yesterday, and a photo of Salma and Pinault at a Lakers game a few weeks ago. Linda and her lawyers have officially “taken the gloves off” in the legal proceedings – you can read the NY Post’s extensive coverage here, and I’m including some of the juiciest parts below. Linda’s lawyer says that Pinault asked Linda to get an abortion.

Linda Evangelista’s billionaire French baby-daddy Francois-Henri Pinault wanted her to have an abortion, the supermodel’s lawyer claimed as their contentious child support trial kicked off today in Manhattan Family Court. The two spent the afternoon embroiled in a bitter child-support trial set to determine Pinault’s obligations for their 5-year-old son, Augustin, conceived during the couple’s fleeting, four-month affair from 2005.

The gorgeous Evangelista, 46, has presented Pinault with a list of Augie’s monthly expenses totaling more than $46,000 a month — in hopes Pinault will pay all or most of it. Pinault, meanwhile, has blasted Evangelista for seeking not just child support, but “mom support” as well, claiming through anonymous sources that the cover girl’s requests “don’t pass the smell test.”

Augie’s expenses include $15-16,000 a month for gun-toting, ex-NYPD detective chauffeurs, plus a 24-hour nanny costing almost $7,000 a month.

“After some initial happiness, he told her he wished she would terminate the pregnancy,” Evangelista’s lawyer William Beslow told a support magistrate, taking the gloves off in describing a conversation from Jan. 2006.

Evangelista, who was then in her early 40s, told Pinault she would keep the baby.

“She would support the child herself,” Evangelista told him, “since he had made it perfectly clear to her that he had no interest in doing so,” the lawyer said. “And she did. ”

On the stand, Pinault said he met Evangelista in May of 2005, began dating her in September, and learned of the pregnancy in early 2006.

“I asked her what was her intention with the pregnancy. I was not involved in the decision of having babies,” he said. “We were dating four months and I didn’t even know her very much.”

The Frenchman admitted he dumped Evangelista because he wanted nothing to do with the baby.

“She was so happy to be pregnant,” he remembered. “But it was not planned. I decided to stop the relationship at that point.”

Asked then by Beslow whether he believed Evangelista had intentionally become pregnant, he answered: “Well, she can answer that but I guess… I was not involved in the decision of having a baby,” he said. “Then of course, I told her I would recognize the baby which I did. I would take my responsibility and I did. ”

The four-month affair crashed and burned before — four months later — Pinault met his future wife, actress Salma Hayek. He was due to spend most of the afternoon on the witness stand, describing his finances under questioning by Beslow. In opening statements shortly after 2 p.m., Beslow insisted that Evangelista is not seeking to elevate either her or her son’s station in life. But for the first four years of Augie’s life, she has paid all of his expenses, “without one penny, franc or euro in financial contribution from the father,” Beslow said — despite Pinault’s in excess of $3 billion dollars in worth, plus annual income approaching $5 million.

Evangelista suffered a “tremendous diminution in her income in 2011,” Beslow said, due to the conclusion of her contract as the face of L’Oreal.

“Ms. Evangelista is not looking to piggyback on the lifestyle of Mr. Pinault,” Beslow insisted. “She is looking for a continuation of the reasonable lifestyle of Augie.”

Pinault’s lawyer, David Aronson, countered in his own opening statement that Pinault had repeatedly tried to broach the topic of support payments with Evangelista’s prior lawyers, only to be met with a “deafening” silence. Now, she is trying to shake Pinault down for what is, in effect, alimony, he complained.

“Most of the expenses [in Evangelista's list of $46,000-a-month in child care expenses] do not relate to Augie but they relate to Ms. Evangelista,” he said. “It is the classic case of someone trying to bootstrap herself to something that is alimony. Is Mr. Pinault a comfortable man of substantial means? Yes.” Aronson said. “But in the four years preceding 2011, her average income was $1.8 million,” he said.

“These people have more money than a lot of people,” Aronson conceded. “But our position is that what we understand is being asked for is just ridiculous.”

Evangelista hasn’t been able to provide a clear accounting of how much the chauffeurs work for Augie, and how much they work for her, Aronson has complained in prior hearings.

“The great majority of these expenses … are expenses that Ms. Evangelista claims on her tax returns are deductible business expenses,” he said today.

But Augie is just seeking a comparable lifestyle to what Pinault lavishes on Valentina, his 4-year-old daughter by Hayek, Beslow argues. Pinault spends $50,000 a month just on the taxes, upkeep and loan payments for the $12 million Los Angeles home he’s put in trust for the girl, Valentina.

[From The New York Post]

So… Linda supported her son herself until 2011, and that’s when she asked Pinault to contribute something to support his son, and his lawyers balked. So she sued for $46,000 a month. While I can’t even imagine how awesome it would be to be have $46,000 a month, when you think about it… that’s $552,000 a year, presumably until Augie turns 18, which will happen in about 12 years. So… if Linda gets what she wants, Pinault will be paying out about $6.6 million for his son. Once again, a huge amount of money. But Pinault is a billionaire and he’s spending much more than that on his daughter Valentina, with Salma Hayek. I don’t know… I think both Pinault and Evangelista seem kind of crazy here. *shrugs*

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

199 Responses to “Linda Evangelista claims Francois-Henri Pinault asked her to get an abortion”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Cherry says:

    I agree. Both seem kind of crazy. Poor kid.

    • brin says:

      Crazy rich folks problems!

    • OlsenTriplet says:

      Imagine growing up to learn your father (at least as far as your own mother’s accusation) wanted to abort you.

      • layla says:

        I don’t have to imagine… my father wanted my mother to abort her pregnancy with me. Such is life…

      • bluhare says:

        He admitted it on the stand. I hope the money helps her feel better for letting this stuff get on the record so her son can see it.

      • mimi says:

        While I think he should have paid much more and support his son in proportion to his wealth from day 1, I can totally understand why he told a women to get an abortion when she got pregnant without his consent.

        Women who do such low tricks and get pregnant on purpose just to get money or marriage in such a way, are bringing a child to the world as bargaining chips.

        She should not have done that, and his reaction is spot on.

      • LAK says:

        He has just told the court that in the four months they were together, they only met 7 days in total!!

        That is approx *$1M per day they spent together.

        Her rates went up! from $10k to $1M. well done Linda.

        *my calculation is based on a judge making him pay for next 14years with no back payments.

      • Alarmjaguar says:

        Imagine wearing a condem so you wouldn’t ever get to that point…

    • sullivan says:

      Yep. They both sound crazy and highly unlikeable. Do I think she was serendipitously impregnated by a billionaire? Nope, but it doesn’t matter, does it? A father is lawfully bound to support his child whether he’s a billionaire or working-class. Ugh, with parents like those two that kid is doomed.

    • Whoa!! says:

      Crazy is people having UNPROTECTED sex with strangers and men of such wealth leaving ‘deposits’ all over the place with woman they hardly know.

  2. Julie says:

    Why do women even want to date/have an affair with such a guy? oh yeah because he is loaded.
    i really cant feel with women who in the year 2012 still choose to spread their legs just to avoid to work themselves.

    • Cherry says:

      Who can accuse Linda Evangelista of not working? She was THE supermodel in the nineties. She must be loaded herself, too, which is why she has no clue of the value of money (46.000 a month “for a continuation of the reasonable lifestyle of Augie.”???). I think it’s more likely that Evangelista just wants to get back at Pinault for leaving her for another woman.

      • LAK says:

        She never turned herself into a brand like the other supermodels.

        All the other supermodels branched out into singing/acting/fitness videos/homeware/restaurants etc and made serious bank.

        She has been mostly retired until recently. And she is still only doing modelling jobs.

        She’s the only ‘poor’ supermodel.

      • marie says:

        she is the model who said she would never get out of bed for less than $10,000.. she made money, and lots of it,so don’t think for one second she doesn’t know the value of it. however, my personal opinion is, if you pay that much for one child then you should pay that much for the other as they are both your children..

      • pandabear says:

        She was a raging coke head in the 80s. I always wondered if her “return to modelling” was due to not saving enough and/or curtailing her jet set lifestyle.

    • HadlyB says:

      She has always worked and lost a child many years ago late in pregnancy.

      I think adding up all these “expenses” is her and her lawyers way of coming up with a high monthly amount since this guy refuses to pay up..he sets up millions of trust funds for his daughter with Salma yet ignores this other child? Wrong.

      Maybe Linda has her own money, great but whose is to say she doesn’t want to save that money or the money he will give her for her child so he has some millions of his own when she dies? It’s pretty obvious the father will leave this kid nothing especially if Salma has anything to do with it and considering Salma couldn’t hold onto a man or get one to marry her for a long long time she should really not be so smug about anything.

      I just hate when men ignore kids just because they no longer want to be with that women anymore… too bad. And he doesn’t want to spend time with the kid then pay up. It’s the only way to hurt a man is through his wallet no matter how much money he has. I imagine even if he wasn’t with another women, ignoring your kid is still hurtful and wrong.

      • Lurker says:

        I agree. The guy should have to pay. I don’t think that what she is asking is unreasonable considering how rich this guy is and also considering how much he is spending on his other child.

    • hatsumomo says:

      I have a sneaking suspicion she got pregnant on purpose solely for financial security. I read somewhere about reproductive statistics and what jumped at me was that women, ON AVERAGE, spend 25-30 years of their lifespans actively avoiding pregnancy and collectively 2 years actively trying to become pregnant. You mean to have me believe that woman whose career is based on her looks and whom cant reproduce when she wants because it could hurt her revenue, just got pregnant “accidentally” the moment she was banging a billionaire?!? And even the hardest bitch in the room isnt throwing her a side eye??? Unbelievable!

      • mamiejane says:

        Linda Evangelista had a history of unsuccessful and heartbreaking efforts to have a child and it sounds like she was very happy to have her son. And she has not sought child support until her own income declined. It’s incredible that we blame the mom when we have a billionaire father who has not been voluntarily paying substantial sums of money as support to make sure his son has a good life.

      • Original Lucy says:

        um…I’m sure the billionaire could afford a package of condoms..his fault too…

      • Bex says:

        Yes, like Liz Hurley and Heidi Klum also accidentally got pregnant in their short relationships with billionaires!

  3. really says:

    Why wouldn’t someone this rich have frozen some sperm and had a vasectomy year ago?

    • autumndaze says:

      I think the hot button quote for me was when Pinault said he “was not involved in the decision to have a baby.”
      What? Were you not present for the sex and obviously resultant orgasm? Man up, billionaire. Pay for your child.

      • Victoria says:

        Preach it, girl! My thoughts exactly!!

      • LAK says:

        MAy i present this about Boris Becker’s ten minute encounter with a random ‘model’ that speaks to the very notion that a man can indeed be just out for sex but not baby.

      • TheOriginalVictoria says:

        Sexual intercourse equals potential baby. I’m not sure why people don’t consider this before they get their sexual freedom on.

        And unlike Pinault’s dusty ass at the very least that precious little girl is included in Becker’s life and he takes care of her. That model he screwed is on some ho shit and even though Becker is a slut I’m on his side.

        Linda on the other hand..I’m on her side. Why should her son not be given all the advantages that his sister has from the father financally speaking. He was born first.

        Salma, I commend you girl. She popped and locked before he dropped it.

    • Jill says:

      A-freaking-men. God God people, learn how babies are made! :)

  4. serena says:

    They both seems crazy. But he’s a bastard, so he better pay.

  5. Roma says:

    Has her nose been tweaked? I can’t figure it out.

  6. Hautie says:

    I would suspect that Evangelista intentionally asked for an outrageous amount.

    So she will end up with a healthy monthly child support check. I suspect she will probably end up with half of what she ask for.

    Plus a healthy trust fund established for Augie.

    And I find it hard to believe that Linda is hard up for work.

    If she wanted to front a fashion line of her own. She could do it. Keep it priced reasonably. And sell the sh*t out of it.

    • Ming says:

      It isn’t an outrageous amount of money – for a celebrity.

      These people are rich, they are used to be rich and they live an expensive lifestyle, in other words, they burn money on a daily basis.

      $46.000 is not much for Linda Evangelista.
      But for us.

    • carrie says:


    • layla says:

      I beleive the $46k is the same amount as he puts into a trust (or similiar) each month for Valentina…. So I’m guessing Linda feels her son deserves the same.

  7. Cel says:

    On the stand, Pinault said “I was not involved in the decision of having babies,”. “We were dating four months and I didn’t even know her very much.”

    Good grief! He was involved in the decision by choosing not to use condoms. Going on to say he didn’t know her very well makes him look like an even bigger idiot.

    Wouldn’t want either of them as my parents, as both seem very selfish.

    • LAK says:

      People have sex with people they do not necessarily want to know better especially if they only view them as simply a good time rather than take home to Mama types. It happens. It’s called a fling.

      Also, 2 points that are not in the report above:

      1. Linda only pursued child support AFTER her relationship with BILLIONAIRE founder of Hard Rock Cafe PETER MORTON finished.

      So her paychecks from L’oreal stopped, and so did the Billionaire ride from Peter Morton, so she’s now using her son to get on another Billionaire ride.

      2. He is already paying something. Perhaps not as much as she would like hence the court case.

      Irrespective of the fact that he is the father, he made it VERY VERY clear that he wanted no involvement, and would prefer a termination. Given that attitude, it became solely HER choice to continue with the pregnancy. This isn’t a case of he continued the relationship whilst she was preganant and finished it afterwards. In his own words, as soon as he learnt of it, he asked for an abortion, she refused, he finished with her.

      She is now trying to shame and embarrass him into keeping her in her lifestyle.

      This is a woman who claimed ‘she wouldn’t get out of bed for less than $10K per day’ so of course she wants the Billionaire lifestyle.

      She’s a Billionaire chasing Gold digger.

      I don’t care that he is the father or that he is a billionaire. She told him she would take care of the baby without him. So she should stand by that and have some dignity.

      This is what equality means. Not cry wolf because you failed the supermodel retirement plan 101.

      As she is suing for other people to take care of the child because she is to busy keeping herself beautiful to raise her own child, then perhaps HE should sue her for full custody.

      • Eleonor says:

        Plus she is reach enough to take care of her own child.

      • MJ says:

        I have no opinion on the amount being requested since these people are way too rich, but a man is not released of his responsibilty to pay for a child just because he states that he would prefer the woman to get an abortion.

      • OlsenTriplet says:

        “Irrespective of the fact that he is the father, he made it VERY VERY clear that he wanted no involvement, and would prefer a termination. Given that attitude, it became solely HER choice to continue with the pregnancy. This isn’t a case of he continued the relationship whilst she was preganant and finished it afterwards. In his own words, as soon as he learnt of it, he asked for an abortion, she refused, he finished with her.”

        Wow. It’s awfully chilly in here…

        No wonder there’s an over-abundance of good fathers in the world! If only some deadbeats would surface and wash their hands of their offspring to balance things out.

        Seriously–is this a common belief? That a man’s responsibility to his children is voluntary and he has no duty to them if he asks the mother to have them vacuum-sucked from her uterus?

      • Leticia says:

        OlsenTriplet, I agree w/u

      • irishserra says:


        True, people do often hook up merely for a good time, but that does not absolve either of them of the responsibility to take precautions to ensure that the outcome does not result in an unwanted child, which in this case Augie is to Pinault.

        Erego, he can dig into his pockets and provide the same standard of living for this child that he does for his daughter. End of story.

      • LAK says:

        This man made it very clear that the child was a deal breaker for him. She made it clear that SHE WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE CHILD HERSELF.

        Jeesh…i have so much respect for Liz Hurley at this point because she had a child under the same circumstances, vowed to take care of him herself without support from her Billionaire baby daddy and she has done just that.

        It is very suspicious that Linda Evangelista sort to claim any kind of Child support AFTER BREAKING UP with another Billionaire, after keeping the name of her baby daddy private and off the public radar. Now all of a sudden she names him, he turns out to be a billionaire and oops she now needs armed guards who can only be paid for by said baby daddy. What about before? Surely the child was in as much danger? And in need of 24/7 nannies.

        To defend a woman who needs 24/7 nannies because she doesn’t want to be alone with her child is preposterous. Especially when that woman is not offering to cover any of the so-called expenses herself and she can damn well afford it.

        Having a child isn’t an ooopsy thing even if you are a delinquent teenager. The conception might be, but you have 24weeks to decide if it is the right decision for you and the baby.

        And you better make sure the babby daddy is on board with your decision. If, as in this case, he immediately bails on you, you have to know that going forward it is just you and the baby. You can not blame someone else for YOUR OWN decision.

        Just because he is a billionaire is no reason to shake him down, which is what she is doing. She is dead beat dad shaming him as if their relationship was more profound or profunctory when it sounds like she was just a fling.

        PLEASE. Boris Becker’s broom cupboard baby mama has more dignity, and she asked for a trust for her kid.

        If in any of those transcripts she was seeking a trust for her child, i might be on board with what she is doing. All of these expenses are current living expenses, which are excessive and are more about her than the child.

        A man who asks for an abortion and BREAKS UP WITH YOU WHEN YOU REFUSE, and then promptly fathers a child with someone else who he then marries is sending a pretty clear and loud message. Especially when he shows every reluctant sign of having any interest in the child, let alone the mother.

        i don’t agree with the Halle model of parenting because that father wants to be with his child, but i also don’t agree with Linda because the father doesn’t want to be in this child’s life.

        And at the end of the day, it is simply about money and gold digging.

      • OlsenTriplet says:

        “A man who asks for an abortion and BREAKS UP WITH YOU WHEN YOU REFUSE, and then promptly fathers a child with someone else who he then marries is sending a pretty clear and loud message.”

        His message isn’t the final word. Actions and behaviors have consequences.

        But I hate consequences, too. Funny unrelated story:

        I was getting sick of my kids bothering me all the time with their dumb crap–”I’m hungry!” “We need clean clothes!” blah blah blah–so I told them to go outside and I locked the door. Sure, they cried for a few hours, but eventually they wandered off into the night, barefoot and holding each other’s hands. Not sure if they were still crying.

        I’m pretty sure they got my message.

      • Mich says:

        @ OlsenTriplet


      • Lol says:

        I’m sorry but he can kiss me behind. If tomorrow Linda lost every penny she had and went on welfare ( money/stamps/housing/medical) it would be US stuck paying. I’m suck to death of men having sex and going NOPE I don’t want to be a dad. I don’t care that she is rich today WTFabout tomorrow. Do you realize how much money is spent taking care of kids whose moms ” thought” they could do it alone but now need daycare funds or school lunches to get by. If Liz Hurley died tomorrow in debt ( eventhough she supported her kid alive) depending on where he lived a family member could get all kinds of gov’t handout to continue to raise him. For awhile in NY it was so bad that if you took in child in need related to you they would give you almost 900 a month regardless of what job you personally had. If you have sex and someone gets pregnant YOU PAY ( put it in a trust fund). God I HATE people.

      • LAK says:

        @olsentriplet – oranges and apples.

        @lol – but we are not talking about welfare moms here. It has been shown in the transcripts that the sum she is asking for is for living expenses rather than Trust. The fact that the sums involved match the other child’s trust is making people assume that she is asking for a trust fund when she is not. He has said that he does pay for something, which has not been denied by her. If her arguement was about setting up a trust for this child, i am on board with it.

        As it is, i am not on board with a woman, who can take care of herself and her child, asking for living expenses, no mention of trust, that is this excessive. Especially when in the first 4 years of that child’s life, she could apparently do without, oh wait she couldn’t she was living with BILLIONAIRE Peter Morton.

        she’s merely swopping one Billionaire for another. If she wins, they should put all the money into a trust for Augie. Then we shall see what her motivations truly are.

        And i quote from Linda’s original transcript last year, ‘I need a nanny 24/7 because i am afraid to be left alone with the child. I work 16hr days. On my days off i have to maintain my looks like an athlete, go to the gym, beauty appointments’

        Does that sound like a mother taking the dead beat dad to court because she has to? she doesn’t want to be alone with her child. Ever.

        Perhaps he should pay. that child is going to need major therapy just from being LE’s kid.

      • LAK says:

        @Olsentriplet – you know who else failed the supermodel retirement plan 101?

        Heidi Klum. Should she now also go after Flavio Briartore? same circumstances as Linda Evangelista.

        Her daughter should also have the same lifestyle as his son. *sarcasm*

      • Raven says:

        ITA with your original comment, LAK. Well put!

      • Samigirl says:

        I really, really hope this doesn’t happen to you, with that kind of attitude. My oldest, Emerson, his father wished me to have an abortion, I refused, we broke up, and now, he’s paying me child support. He was as equally irresponsible in not using a condom as I was. His wish for the termination does not mean that Ems is not 50% his responsibility, regardless of the fact that we could survive without his money. That’s how it works. you create a life, you take care of it.

      • Veruca says:

        Amen, Samigirl!

        (Now, would you please explain that to my ex?)

      • LAK says:

        @Samigirl – I am very much of the school that you should go into every life situation expecting that your decisions and consequences for those decisions are yours and yours alone. Should people come along who want to take care of you or participate in those decisions, treat it as a bonus rather than a right, and always be prepared for the day that bonus help/participation is not available anymore.

        On that note, should i find myself pregnant and the father is relunctant, i fully expect to look after that child by myself, bills and all.

        I come from a long line of women who have done just that.

      • Sunny says:

        I agree. At the end of the day, as unpopular as this statement will be, conception is on the woman. Minus horrific tragedies of rape or if protection fails, it is the woman’s final say that determines if a child will be conceived. Is it the man’s responsibility to use a condom? Absolutely! Should a woman be on the pill if one wants to avoid pregnancy and condoms? Absolutely! But if no condom is available, or either party doesn’t want to wear one, or you don’t like/believe in the pill, whatever, the woman is assuming all responsibility if she decides to go forward. It is not fair, and morally I’m sure many people would love to debate this, but women conceive the child, carry it and give birth to it…they have no choice but to be involved with the child. A man is never guaranteed to stick around. It is very unfair and a total double standard, but it’s a plain fact. Marriage does offer a certain amount of perceived security, and *usually* that kind of commitment supports bringing a child into the world. If you are an unmarried woman sleeping around with people not taking proper precautions then yes, you are assuming responsibility. Again, not fair. But if you’re a woman who doesn’t want to be pregnant and the guy you’re seeing doesn’t feel like protecting himself, don’t sleep with him or go on the pill. It really is that simple. Of course a man should be just as financially responsible and in a perfect world just as emotionally supportive, but that’s not the world we live in and it never has been. No child should have to pay for that, and that’s MORE reason to make sure precautions are taken. If the pill makes you sick, use a condom. If those are uncomfortable, don’t have sex or use something else, there’s nothing else to say, and there’s absolutely no reason to let one time slide and be totally shocked when something happens. Men and sexual behavior is a completely different argument, but women can be aware of what kind of man they are choosing to have sex with (in this case a rich man with an established and well known shifty track record) and protect themselves.

      • OlsenTriplet says:

        This woman wasn’t sleeping around with random people. She was in a relationship with this guy.

        And we really need to stop making excuses for deadbeat fathers, whether they’re on welfare or have a billion dollars.

        It doesn’t matter if you’re providing the baby batter or the oven. Sex makes parents just like it makes babies. It’s not optional.

      • polk8dot says:

        @ samigirl:
        ‘he wa as equally irresponsible in not wearing a condom’, and ‘That’s how it works. you create a life, you take care of it’
        I’m sorry for your kid. I’m sorry for the father of your kid. You seem like a typical, entitled, spoiled ‘little girl’ who never grew up, never learned responsibility, never realized that life is what you make it.
        Life is not about forcing your will upon others. It is a woman’s responsibility to not get pregnant, if she does not want a child, whether or not the man gives a crap. It is a fate we women were dealt when we were given the right, the privlege, the power, to get pregnant and give birth to another human being. A man cannot have a baby by himself, he needs a woman for it, no matter how much he wants it or how rich he is. As a result of this power we have, this control over who we allow to procreate, it is our responsibility to ensure that if we bring a life into this world WE wanted that, and WE are ready to take care of it, regardless of what the father wants.
        It is so HATEFUL to say ‘he wanted to have sex, I GOT PREGNANT, now HE WILL PAY for my lack of preparedness by having to support me and another human being for the next 18 years’.
        No, if you are not in a long term, committed relationship, and you get pregnant, an the man is not ready to be a father, I consider it spiteful and vengeful for a woman to then say ‘Oh, he was not wearing a condom, he is equally responsible’. NO HE IS NOT! IT IS YOUR BODY! YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE!
        And if you decide to have the baby regardless, you should have enough pride to also say ‘I wanted that baby myself, I will take care of it’. Anything else is gold digging, grabbing for a handout, punishing the man for having sex, and most likely ensuring the kid will have an unhappy life filled with emotions of rejection.

      • Samigirl says:


        “It is a woman’s responsibility to not get pregnant”

        Why don’t you go join congress? Since you feel you are in charge of everyone else’s uterus and all.

        I’m spoiled and never grew up? HA. I’ve been through more in my life than you could possibly imagine. I’m a 25 year old about to become a CPA and I work at one of the oldest, most prestigious firms in my city. Hows that for grown up? And you feel sorry for my son’s POS father and my son? Please, get off your high horse and try to walk in my shoes. You know NOTHING about the situation in which my son was conceived. You weren’t there when I told him I wasn’t on birth control…he knew the risk involved. His response? He didn’t care if I got pregnant, because he knew I’d be an amazing mom…and he would LOVE to be a dad. We were supposed to start a family together. Naive? Absolutely. I was 20 and “in love” with a VERY handsome man who told me all the things I wanted to hear…up until the moment these things actually happened. Then, he dropped me like a bad habit bc I refused to terminate the pregnancy. Yes, it’s MY body and I refused to abort the little boy that became the BEST thing about my life. And I sacked up. He wasn’t involved for the first 18 months of Emerson’s life. I moved back in with my parents, went to school and waited tables to support us. NO monetary help from anywhere. My mom never even bought diapers. I refused to let her because he was MY responsibility. I stayed up late nights with a screaming baby, changed all the diapers, and was the best damn mom AND DAD to that little boy. When he was 18 months, his dad decided he wanted to be a part of his life. It was the STATE COURTS decision to make him pay me the paltry amount of child support he does. Excuse me if I feel that their rulings on the subject are just a tad more important than some woman who obviously isn’t a parent and hasn’t been in this situation before ;-)

        It is NOT JUST THE WOMAN’S responsibility to not get pregnant. A man plays an equal f*cking part in it and they should take precautions if they don’t want to be a parent. Period. The end. Not the woman’s fault if they man they are seeing turns out to be a douche canoe, as in my case.

        Go feel sorry for someone else. My son is amazing and has a better, happier life than you could ever imagine. He has tons of friends and family that love him and would lay their life down for them…including his father. He sucks, but I’ll be damned if he doesn’t love his little boy. You should try putting your energy into pushing your anti female views elsewhere. My little guy doesn’t need a bitter c*nt feeling sorry for him.

    • geekychic says:

      Vow, Sunny, I haven’t heard that kind of argument since I introduced my grandmother to little something called “equality”. And she was 95 at the time (10 years ago).
      Man and woman are needed to make the child, man and woman are responsible for the child.
      The concept that responsibility (and fault) is on woman bc she carries the child (and the implication that she is more connected with the child because she’s a MOTHER)-is, IMO, ridiculously’s typical patriarchal archetype, set by society centuries ago.
      You go, Evangelista and you go Samigirl!

      • LAK says:

        I love how equality has turned into entitled behaviour where someone else has to pay for our decisions. I am woman, someone pay for me!

        Getting the pill gave us the power to unchain ourselves from being at the mercy of our reproductive system not turn into welfare recepients. Because whether you get it from the government or a dead beat father, that is what it is.

        With that kind of thinking, every man who has ever left a deposit at a sperm bank should be chased down for child support should his sperm be used to precreate successfully.

        @olsentriplet – They were not in a relationship. They were having a fling. He has testified that they met for a total of 7 days over the course of the four months. Given he is very clear about not knowing her much, i would speculate that they never communicated in other ways to have it turn into a relationship where they could know each other.

        And as for whether or not she was sleeping around, neither you or i can know that. What is very clear is that she was having a casual at best fling with this man, got pregnant and is now shaking the money tree.

    • LAK says:

      @samigirl – With that statement you dishonour every female including yourself who proves that woman are prefectly capable and capable of raising children without child support.

      Men walk out of marriages, let alone relationships,and leave women literally holding the baby or several babies. with no roof over their heads, no recourse to anything.

      At 25 do you really think you are the first to have gone through what you describe? At least you had parents who were willing to put a roof over your head.

      Child support is supposed to help those mothers who have absolutely nothing. Who are literally left holding the baby with no options at all. It is not a right.

      Telling women to be more responsible is not anti-women. It is removing them from the idea that they are victims who can not help themselves.

      If we relied on men, we would not get very far. The entire history of women is testament to that.

      Look how far we have come in the 100years since we got the vote. I refuse to allow some man to make me a victim just because i was naive enough to fall for his lies.

      • UniqJazz says:

        @ LAK I agree with everything you have said from all your comments !

      • Alarmjaguar says:

        LAK therenis a big difference between alimony and child support, and I don’t think you are making it. It is one thing to ask a father to help support *his* child (it takes two) and asking him to support the woman. This isn’t about women’s rights, it is about child’s rights.

  8. VV says:

    This makes me uncomfortable. He’s so rich. He has one child he ‘recognizes’ and lavishes with so much and another he pretty much wanted nothing to do with and now is digging in for a fight all because he and the mother ‘barely knew one another’.

    Rich people are such a-holes.

    • Katren says:

      I agree that this is so unfair/awful to just ignore one child, but it’s not just rich people that do it, unfortunately it is very common :(

    • Holly says:

      Yeah, and the fact that Salma kind of co-signs this makes me think so much less of her. Whether it’s that she doesn’t support his other child getting equal treatment or just that she married a d-bag who claims that, at his ripe old age, he apparently didn’t know how babies were made–or that they could only be made if he “knew” the woman!

      Someday this kid will be able to read about this, it sucks.

    • Dap says:

      Actually, it’s not exactly true: he has three children he recognizes: 2 with his first wife (before the time he “discovered” American actresses and models), one with S.Hayek and one with L.Evangelista. The two first one are the real left behind here: they are the one who don’t see anymore the guy who used to be their father. And I bet he never spend 46k a month on them.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      “Rich people are such a-holes”.

      A statement that I find is generally true. I work for rich people in an industry rife with VERY rich people (hedge fund managers, investment advisors etc.) and I am consistently reminded that money can’t buy class, morality, or even common social courtesy. The wealthiest people often display a unique brand of ignorance that comes from an insular attitude and isolated lifestyle that is really off-putting to me. That combined with the sense of entitlement makes me realize how arrogant some rich people can be. PS Not meaning to offend anyone as I know some very wealthy people that are wonderful as well, just making a general observation…

      • lucy2 says:

        I don’t know, I think it depends on the people. The majority of our clients are pretty wealthy too, and we’ve seen the full range of personalities. There are those who think they’re entitled to be jerky simply because they have money, and those who are down to earth and great – oddly enough, our wealthiest clients have turned out to be the nicest.
        The insecure ones who feel like they have something to prove are the worst.

        I think self made vs. brought up in wealth can make a difference in personality too.

      • Carolyn says:

        A few jobs ago I worked for a very rich man who was into his third marriage. He was a real moron, self-entitled and arrogant. I unexpectedly found a draft of a letter (on the printer) to his solicitor detailing why he felt he shouldn’t have to pay increased child support to his two former wives. Yes I read it and it made me despise him even more. A rich father shouldn’t pay pittance for child support (or zero). At the same time exorbitant “lifestyle” expenses shouldn’t have to be paid by him. There will be a balance struck and everyone will be happy. Except Salma. She wants all his money to be spent on her, dammit.

    • polk8dot says:

      @vv ‘He has one child he ‘recognizes’ and lavishes with so much and another he pretty much wanted nothing to do with’
      That is not necessarily accurate. He has a child now in a committed relationship, as in a marriage. So he lavishes this child as part of her normal upbringing. It is not true he ‘wanted nothing to do with the other child’. He wanted NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER MOTHER! They were not married, they barely had sex 7 (SEVEN!) times by the time she ‘happened’ to get pregnant, they never had any plans of getting married, heck, they were never even that serious as a dating couple. I mean, come on, sex 7 times in 4 months of ‘dating’? It is obvious she was just his booty call for a while, and he had a right to assume that she was protecting herself since I’m sure he never expressed any desire for a marriage and fatherhood.
      She then turned around and said ‘fine, you do not want the baby, I WILL TAKE CARE OF HIM by myself’.
      Even though not wanting the kid, he still tried to do the right thing after the son was born. He wanted to pay her support, it was she who said ‘I DON’T WANT YOUR MONEY since you did not want the kid’ I’ll support him by myself’.
      Very commandable, if she
      TRULY WANTED TO HAVE A BABY! But in her case it is jarringly clear she did not want a child for the child’s sake (‘ I’m affraid to be alone with him’ WTF?!?!?)
      She wanted the child as a crutch in life, as a bargaining chip to force the father – very well off one – to caugh up money for her lifestyle. She has no love for the son, she has no interest in him, she could not care less about him. He is but a tool to getting herself to a better situation in life.
      She is a totally selfish, narcissistic woman who tricked a rich guy into fathering a child neither he nor she ever truly wanted, and she is now expecting to be taken care of for years and years just because she hitched her uterus to a gravy train. Not gonna work like that! The kid should have a trust established, the father already said he was paying some amount to her in support, now instead put that money into the trust, even raise the amount, but ensure this woman has no access to it other that for legitimate child care expenses. She is clearly on the mission to secure herself a prosperous life now her other sources of ‘support’ dried out (as in another rich boyfriend).
      I totally support the father providing for a child, especially since he seems to be willing to do it, if not already doing it. But I am totally against her getting the ‘lifestyle expense account’ sponsored by him simply beause at some time the had sex and she figured it was her best shot at an easy, gooood life because she found a ‘sucka!’ to drain for the next 14 years.

  9. Elvynn says:

    Why now? She didn’t want anything from him before why now?
    I think she is jealous of Salma and bitter because he didn’t marry her.

    • bluhare says:

      I don’t know, but something tells me Salma pays a pretty big price for her life. And I bet he’s fooling around on her already. The guy’s a gazillionaire; you know he’s got hot young things sniffing all over him. He’s getting laid on the side. I hope he had a vasectomy if he doesn’t want more child support suits.

      • Carolyn says:

        A lot of European people have a different view to infidelity to Americans. They accept it happens and as long as the wife has first place it’s ok. And the husband knows this too. Especially if they’re rich. If Salma’s husband is fooling around she’d be Ok with it because it’s just sex. She still has a billionaire lifestyle. I wonder what’s in their pre-nup?

      • bluhare says:

        @Carolyn: Actually, I didn’t mean to imply infidelity is the price she pays. I think that’s a given. I think someone with as much money and power as he has is probably not someone who brooks a lot of “disobedience”, can get anything he wants, and I mean anything, probably isn’t very nice when crossed.

        Exhibit A: Dominique Strauss Kahn.

      • sauvage says:

        @ Carolyn: Who spread the rumor that Europeans were fine with infidelity? I sometimes read that on American websites and it is news to me every single time.

        And I AM European, so I should know.

        Plus: Europe is a continent of quite some diversity, culturewise. You can’t compare the French mentality to the Polish mentality, for example, so to call something European only works if meant to describe a geographic location.

      • Hypocricy says:

        Europeans though not having a homogeneous culture are no more tolerant towards infedility than Americans. It’s more complex than that.
        Some women or man tolerate their partner/spouse infedility in each part of the Atlantic Ocean, some don’t.

        However, what we have in Europe compared to the US is that certain aspects that are taboo in the US are more perceived as private business from Europeans, hence Belgium has a well known gay prime minister, former head of the socialist party and who never had a problem being shown with his partner in the street, hence the norwegian princess Mette Marit is a former drug addict who had a child from an imprisonned drug dealer when she met the future King who then moved in with her long before they got married, hence Mitterand had his former mistress and their daughter next to the l’Elysee while his spouse rebuted firmly one of the reporter asking her what she thinks about it by saying :’what has happened between me and François is none of your business and has nothing to do with his function of President of the French Republic’, ect…

        All those things are not possible in the US because your private life is linked to your public image and closely intertwined percepyion wise while in most European countries many things are perceived as private from the public, even having affairs or other children (as many royals do) as long as you don’t go against the law by sleeping with underage women or doing some criminal things like financial scandals, bribes, ect….Berlusconi anyone ?

    • To boil this whole situation down to a matter of girl-on-girl jealousy is to grossly undermine not only the responsibility of bringing a child into this world, but the overall status of women everywhere who find themselves in this situation. Just because he stated he wanted nothing to do with a child doesn’t absolve him of his legal obligation. If he really felt that way, and he “barely knew” her, he would have used protection. Lets not boil this down to the lowest common denominator and call it a cat fight. It does none of us any favours.

      • LAK says:

        yes. let’s blame every pregnancy on the assumption that the man failed to wear a condom.

        Women are completely helpless with regards there own reproductive system.

        it’s a 2 way street.

  10. Naye in VA says:

    i would feel horrible if the father of my child treated his other children better. but i also know that my BD wanted his kid so my foot would be all the way up his a**. Pinault told Evangelista he didnt want the baby she pulled a “i dont need you anyway” card and did her thing. So even tho its an a**hole thing to do he kinda loves the child he wanted to make more than the one he didnt with the woman he didnt want. so… moral of story here is dont expect the dude to not be an a** when you get pregnant with his unwanted child. youd think she’d have known that at 40. Pinault should pay, especially if he can afford it, but i dont understand why Evangelistas lawyer thought this statement would do her good in court.

  11. Blue says:

    mmmm i don’t know who’s side to even be on. They both have valid points.

  12. Linda says:

    Wasn’t she the one who said she wouldn’t wake up for less than $20,000 a day back in her modeling days. I understand the child has the right to get support from the dad but why she needs a nanny 24/7? She only has 1 child. Is she incapable of taking care of him by herself. Does she want to raise the child or the 24/7 nanny?

    • paola says:

      I agree 100% with you, and i stick to my theory: some women shouldn’t be allowed to have children.

      • Kidasaurus says:

        She shouldn’t be allowed to have a child because, as a single mom, she wants a full time nanny? Good lord that is harsh!!! I used to be a single mother, and if I had the option for full time help, I would have taken it, too! What about if she gets sick? Or hurts herself? These are the things that two parent households take for granted. Even just having ONE child is a ton of work. This guy has a moral responsibility to provide support for his child, whether he wanted him or not.

      • k says:

        Goodness, Paola, shame on her for creating a baby all by herself!

      • paola says:

        ok it sounded wrong in the post, but i think women shouldn’t use babies like ATMs, i mean she was rich before, she was a super model. i just don’t get it when women get so greedy and they are ready to sell their kids out for money (like in toddlers and tiaras) i know this is a completely different story but there are women who just have kids only for the sake of getting money out of them.

      • Dap says:

        It’s not the single parent part which is disturbing, it’s the “I can’t be alone with my child, ever!” What is she afraid of? That he might bite her?
        Fot the record, I have 4 children and a husband who has to travel a lot for his work. As much as I would appreciate some help sometimes, I can’t imagine never be alone with my children. What’s the point of having a family if you can’t stand it?

  13. lamamu says:

    Here’s the thing: Pinault is a billionaire who brings in an income of $5 million a year. She’s asking for $550,000 a year. That’s 10% of his income (not touching his billions). That’s not crazy money when taken in context.

    • bluhare says:

      Only $5 million? That actually surprises me. I’d have thought a lot more.

      • Mari says:

        He is not the super billionaire, his own older father is the richer guy. He is a heir, even if he makes and has a lot.
        Complicated story.

    • Jill says:

      Agreed. Pay up and shut up. He made a baby. Writing a check is not nearly as difficult as actually raising a child (24hr nanny notwithstanding).

      That said, I do see how many times men do get the short end of the stick, just like in many DIFFERENT ways, women do, too. We could go round and round about this forever.

      • Here here Jill, but at the end of the day, I think the “you broke it, you bought it” approach works here. If he really didn’t know her that well, and he wanted nothing to do with a child, why the hell didn’t he use protection to insure himself against such a situation!? Surely a billionaire has people who advise him on such matters. Women certainly aren’t the only ones who can take control of the contraception in the modern world. He has treated both her and his biological son like they are disposable, and from a legal standpoint, that doesn’t wash, whatever your intentions.

    • Samigirl says:

      In my state, the party paying child support pays on average 27% of their yearly salary. 10% really isn’t a big deal when it could be way more.

  14. Jayna says:

    I read an itemized list of what she needed an why. It slayed me. She needed a 24-hour nanny and a chauffeur because of all the hours in the day she needed to work on her looks and body even when not working. The way it was stated was so far-fetched that this had one thing to do with the child.

    • LAK says:

      This is the very reason i am all over this board defending him even if he is an a$$.

      She stated in her original transcript that she was afraid to be alone with her child.

    • claire says:

      Yeah, the other quotes I read in a different story basically made it sound like she need the $ to employ others to raise her son, because she will always be at the gym, at the spa, or at parties socializing to keep her connections going. It kinda lowers my empathy level for her.

  15. paola says:

    When i hear stories like this one, i’m so happy to be single!

  16. Jenny says:

    Both his kids have weird faces. I guess that’s what happens when you use an old man’s sperm.

    • LAK says:

      Both his kids look like him. He has a wierd face. I guess we should all be careful who we choose to procreate with.

      For these kids, it won’t matter, they are rich. Rich trumps looks.

  17. JoeBanana says:

    ATM baby.

  18. Sue says:

    What a jerk! He acts like it was not his decision to have a child. In that case he should have worn a condom! If you have s^x you need birth control. Even 16 year olds know that. Also is his daughter more important then his son. He is treating this child like a nobody just because he dislikes his mother. REally sad for such an old man. And yes 46,000 is a lot, but not according to what he makes and not according to what his other child is getting. What a disgusting man!

    • Mich says:

      Condoms fail pretty regularly but otherwise I agree with you 100%.

      It is beyond cruel to put on the public record in a highly reported on case that he did his SON a favor by ‘recognizing’ him but never wanted him and could care less.

      I’m actually disappointed in Salma. As a mother I could never condone such behavior from my husband.

      • Jenny says:

        Uhh condoms don’t fail “pretty regularly” if you use them correctly. *Correctly* is the key word.

      • Blue says:

        What could Salma possibly do or say to make him be more involved with his son? For all we know she is upset about the whole thing, but he is her rich and powerful husband and if he says “forget that kid” what can she do?
        I don’t understand why people are trying to put this on her shoulders, really she has no say in this. He could completely dismiss her opinion and tell her to stay out of his issue.

      • LAK says:

        He has other kids. He was married before. Salma is a very happy step mother to his other kids.

        Linda must be bringing some kind of nasty that is making the other two behave this way.

      • Mich says:

        Jenny – condoms have 98% success rate when always used perfectly and a 95% rate with typical use. The pill has a 0.02% failure rate when used correctly. According to the Mayo Clinic two out of every 100 condoms break. I consider that a high failure rate given what is at stake. Obviously not as high as other bc methods but high all the same.

        Given that this man only has one unplanned child (that we know of) and that he was 50+ when the child was conceived, I’m thinking he knew a thing or two about effective condom use.

        Blue – I don’t know what she can do or if she even has an opinion. I just know that *I* think her husband is being very cruel to his own flesh and blood and the consequences could be devastating for the child. Of course I also don’t know all of the factors at play.

      • Marnie says:

        Salma is miffed because the initial story was that Salma and Scrooge McDuck were “on a break” when he got Linda pregnant. So Salma won him back, only to realize he got her knocked up as well! Linda deserves what the other child is getting. It may seem outrageous, but for her lifestyle, that amount of money for child support is normal.

      • MST says:

        That’s why rich old men should date post-menopausal women — like ME!

    • LAK says:

      Here in UK, there are stories every so often of women who fish used condoms from the waste basket when the chap is asleep or in the shower after sex.

      The first the fathers find out about their progeny is when child services is knocking on their door demanding alimony.

      There have been cases where the father was a sperm donor [at a clinic], and the mothers found them, and demand alimony…

      Yes, it takes two to make a baby, but sometimes women are devious and in the case of rich men, looking for an ATM.

      Also, BORIS BECKER fathered a child after having sex with a woman he had just met at Nobu restaurant. They did it in a broom closet at the restaurant and presto…baby. Lady set for life.

      • Good grief says:

        You are presenting these incidences as more than they are. There is no major social problem of women hooking rich dudes into child support via an ATM baby. No, there isn’t. No, really, there isn’t!

        Further, you’ve noted nothing to indicate that Evangelista is so terrible that she and her son deserve this, and that Hayak is an amazing superstepmommy to the other kids. Nothing remotely factual whatsoever.

        I agree with those dismayed by the father’s attitude towards this child, and to posters who feel Evangelista was scheming to hook this man with her dastardly ways of forcing him to nail and impregnate her. As others have noted, Evangelista was likely at the very end of her natural fertility when she conceived and lost a late-term baby in her 30s. Get some humanity before smugging about how you ‘know’ someone else makes these decisions.

      • LAK says:

        @goodgrief – my examples are not about Linda or her baby. Merely a rebuttal to commentor who thinks a person has to know someone before they procreate.

        And ATM babies are very common among the rich. there is a reason the cliche exists.

        Just as the supermodel retirement plan cliche exists.

  19. lucy2 says:

    He didn’t want the baby, so he shouldn’t have to pay? That’s his defense? If you don’t want to risk kids and being on the hook for 18+ years of financial support, get it snipped or keep it zipped.

    But if she really said she’d do it all on her own and has for years, why is she now asking for money? Can’t have it both ways. And that amount of money to raise one kid is nuts, but pretty low when considering his income and worth.

    • bluhare says:

      My guess is she doesn’t like seeing Salma and Valentina everywhere, and doesn’t like hearing he put a $12 or $13 million house in California in trust for Valentina. She probably also doesn’t like seeing her discretionary spending dropping now she doesn’t have a billionaire picking up a lot of expense.

  20. Gossip PHD says:

    I recall the following: He was dating Salma and started seeing Linda. Linda got pregnant which was very inconvenient (it was during a “break” with Salma!). In order to calm Salma down, he agreed to have a kid with her.
    That is why a 50 yr old man with no children suddenly has two babies at the same time!

  21. Tiffany says:

    While this seems ridiculous I can see why she wants care service and security. The son of a millionaire and billionaire, he could have a target on his back. Now more than ever now that this is becoming more and more public. Poor kid. We really cannot control who conceives us can we?

  22. Devon says:

    Condoms break, b/c pills get missed or “forgotten,” so it’s not a stretch to think that either the protection failed or someone wasn’t truthful.

    He told her he didn’t want this kid, didn’t want to be a part of his life (kind of an a-hole thing to do but it’s within his right to do so) and she told him fine, I’ll do it myself. Now that he’s married to a gorgeous woman and has a family with her, she wants something? I’m not trying to excuse his behaviour but you can see where he is coming from. If it was me, and the dad said he didn’t want anything to do with it, I’d make damn sure from the get go I was getting my kid’s fair share. I don’t blame him for fighting her. Is it fair to Auggie? Nope. But life isn’t fair and these are the consequence Linda has to deal with and take for her lack of action in the beginning.

    My mother in law did sort of the same thing when she split with my husband’s father after he cheated on her. Didn’t ask/fight for child support, didn’t ask/fight for alimony but then bitched and moaned because she had to work 3 full time jobs to be able to support my husband and his sister. Yeah, my FIL should have paid, should have wanted to pay but she didn’t want to deal with the courts and didn’t want to fight for her kids. Don’t have sympathy for her now and the position she’s put herself in. Sucks, but that’s life.

    Linda should have put a little effort into her kid’s future. Francois should have wanted to do these things but some men are idiots and Linda is the person raising Auggie. She should have thought about all this beforehand. It’s not about the amount of money that she’s asking for, if that’s what Valentina is getting or close to it, Auggie should have it too but you can’t say “fine, I’ll do it on my own” then bitch and moan when he doesn’t want to pay up.

    • Blue says:

      I completely agree. When my daughter was born ( before actually) I told her father he could stay or go, pay or not pay. He chose to go and not pay. He was wishy washy about the whole thing, calling acting like he wanted to be involved, then disappear for months at a time. Everyone around me was pissed he wasn’t involved but I told them, I’m not going to force him to do anything. Luckily for me when I did ask for child support when she was about 8 months he started paying up. I can complain now because he’s being an ass, but I couldn’t before because I told him to do whatever he wanted and he did.

    • LAK says:

      Isn’t it interesting that she only became interested in HIS billions after her relationship with another Billionaire broke down;)

      • Mich says:

        Oh for heaven’s sake. The woman is worth an estimated $18 million. There is obviously something larger going on here.

      • bluhare says:

        mich, she’s worth $8 million, not $18. Not chump change, but a big difference.

        I don’t like her; never have, but he’s an idiot for not making her sign an agreement agreeing to him doing nothing, so now he’s paying big time since she changed her mind on that.

    • Good grief says:

      Pinault, and the father of your husband, got free rides. The respective mothers may have made errors in judgment, but how harsh to shrug and sneer, too bad, I don’t feel sorry for you, when the men who fathered these kids didn’t show any interest in caring for them. And it’s ri-goddamned-diculous to act like the fathers have any right under the sun to be affronted by having their no-support-asses finally called on the carpet.


      • Devon says:

        They did get free rides and no where did I say that it was ok. It’s not ok, definitely NOT OK. I said that I can understand why he’s fighting her. She told him she was going to support him herself and now is taking that back now.

        From the article,

        “Pinault’s lawyer, David Aronson, countered in his own opening statement that Pinault had repeatedly tried to broach the topic of support payments with Evangelista’s prior lawyers, only to be met with a ‘deafening’ silence. Now, she is trying to shake Pinault down for what is, in effect, alimony, he complained.”

        Francois doesn’t seem to be that bad of a guy. Salma Hayek doesn’t seem to be the type to be dealing with a first class a-hole, which is how he is being portrayed here. He tried to work something out before hand and she didn’t want/respond. She breaks up with her billionaire boyfriend (Peter Morton) and now is hitting up Francois for money? I dunno, seems fishy to me.

        I do think that Francois should be helping to raise Auggie whether it’s simply financially or financially and spending time with his son and letting him get to know his half siblings. But I do think that he has every right to question her motivations and the amount she is demanding.

      • Mich says:

        @ Devon

        Of course she said that, the man was trying to pressure her into having an abortion she didn’t want. An obviously emotional situation with a very rich and very powerful man. Who knows what tactics or language he used? And then he broke up with her BECAUSE she was pregnant as if that gave him some kind of responsibility pass.

        p.s. I’m not judging you here;-) I’ve read what you’ve said and you clearly feel that he isn’t free from responsibility.

      • LAK says:

        I am staunchly feminist but on this argument i am standing with the men who do not want to be fathers but are forced to be.

        I am not talking about those fathers who are perhaps wobbly or undecided about kids.

        There are many reasons why some men don’t want children, but when someone goes so far as to recommend an abortion and is 100% clear he does not want to be father, and you wilfully go ahead with it anyways, and he still does not come running…..

        HOw much therapy is that child going to need knowing all this? And whose fault is it?

  23. Talie says:

    I can’t wrap my head around why he didn’t just offer her a lump sum of money. It’s so strange.

  24. slc says:

    why shouldn’t evangelista’s son get the same treatment/benefits as hayeks kid? both are his (the fool should have gotten fixed if he had any sense)and he should treat them all equally, what one has so should the other. i vaguely recall that while she,hayak, was pregnant he had dumped her and before she gave birth they got back together, i think it was insinuated that she badgered him into marrying her, hence his continued infidelity…sorry i spend way too much time reading gossip columns,sites, etc

    • jc126 says:

      That’s my memory too, that he and Salma split. I thought she got pregnant on purpose too, pretty much like Linda E., who btw didn’t disclose his identity for a couple of years. I think they were both eager to have his child, to become moms finally. (I’m sure his being a billionaire didn’t hurt, either.)
      Salma and FHP did split after the baby was born at least briefly. She just was the lucky one (@@) he chose, I guess.
      I will not boo-hoo for him at ALL. He’s a billionaire playboy, he is not some guy who is getting squeezed for a ridiculous percentage of his income and can’t pay his mortgage or something.

  25. sans says:

    All the people saying that she should have just put up with no support because he didn’t want the baby are basically saying that baby daddies should have the ability to tell you to have an abortion or shut the fuck up. That’s just sick. When you have sex, you accept responsibilities. Clearly he didn’t use birth control for himself and now he has a child. He is legally required to support that child and he refused until the court was brought in. What’s even more sick is he supports his other child and appears to love her while not even mentioning his son’s name in the testimony quoted. Sick and disgusting behavior.

    • k says:

      Well said.

    • MJ says:

      I agree. I don’t get why people are being so harsh – maybe she’s making a couple of ridiculous demands, but this poor kid is going to grow up with a major inferiority complex. When I step back and try not to judge, I can understand how difficult it would be to watch your child’s father lavish attention on one kid and ignore the other. I can see how those emotions could spill over into the legal battle.

      The comments she made about not getting out of bed for less than $10K a day are 20 years old. I’m guessing she’s grown up a bit since then.

      As I said upthread, a man is not released from financial responsibility by saying he’d prefer the pregnancy to be terminated. If a woman would rather he have no involvement in exchange for no child support, that is her own decision, but a man can’t just say, “Get an abortion! No? Well, then it’s not my problem” and get away with it in the eyes of the law. I am really shocked by the majority opinion in these comments!

    • Dap says:

      I understand what you say, but at the same time, there is a kind of injustice because a woman who doesn’t want a kid, even if the man/husband wants one and is ready to raise him all by himself still can have an abortion and the man/husband won’t have anything to say about it.

      • sans says:

        I think that men and women should both have the choice to create the baby and women should have the choice about whether or not they want to carry it. He made his choice when he had casual sex and didn’t adequately prevent conception. Now the reality is he has a child who looks to him as the only father they have and he’s acting butthurt. Pathetic.

      • Mia C says:

        Well, when men can die childbirth they can get to have a choice on whether or not to have an abortion.
        My body, my risk, my choice.

      • MJ says:

        Meh, boo-f*cking-hoo – I would not call that an injustice, at least not any more than the one done to a woman when a man takes the risk of having sex with her and does not accept responsibility when she gets pregnant (which is ALWAYS a possibility, even with protection.) A real injustice is when a woman does not have the right to decide what she does with her own body.

      • Dap says:

        To clarify my post. I of course think that woman should have the final word on whether to have an abortion or not. I just think it’s completly delusional to expect a man to love and care as much for children he has chose to have and for children who were made against his will. As for the “he took the risk/ he should suck it up”, sure, but nobody was in their bedroom at that time, what if she asured him she had a contraception? That’s kind of harsh to insist to wear a condom in thoses circumstances

    • Devon says:

      A quote from the article,

      “‘She would support the child herself,’ Evangelista told him, ‘since he had made it perfectly clear to her that he had no interest in doing so,’ the lawyer said. ‘And she did.’”

      This is the issue I think most people are having. She said he was off the hook and now wants something from him. While I don’t think it’s right he’s not supporting his kid, I can understand why he’s fighting her and wanting to go over the finances with a fine tooth comb. It’s not like they were together for a long time, Auggie was accustomed to a certain lifestyle with both his parents and then suddenly they split and that financial resource isn’t there. Linda has been doing just fine on her own (a lot better than the majority of the world) and in all reality doesn’t need Francois’ money. I do think that in order for it to be fair, and if he can afford it (yes he can!), Auggie should have the same as his half siblings but unfortunately life isn’t fair and we can’t have the same things.

      Also, how do you know HE was the one not using protection? Two people are responsible for making a baby and two people are responsible for protection. There are a myriad of reasons as to why she got pregnant and you can’t blame it all on the man.

    • Anna says:

      @Sans (original comment in this “block”)

      You stated it perfectly

    • LAK says:

      @Anna and @sans – Regarding the original comment on this block- you are wrong regarding this particular court case. He has testified that he reached out to her and offered support only to be repeatedly rebuffed by her. He has also testified that he does support the child.

      So he is not refusing to pay, he is merely objecting to the level of pay. And she is clearly taking him to court to get that higher pay.

      She’s no better than that Oksana chick who was shaking mel Gibson down and i hope the judge rules in the same way.

  26. TG says:

    The person(s) raising Augie is/are the nannies. And $7,000 a month for 24 hour nanny is dirt cheap. I did a quick math check and that comes to under $10 per hour for the son of a billionaire and a supposedly fabulous model mom. I get the feeling she is a terrible and selfish mother but he isn’t any better. I understand his side too but once the child is created you have to deal with the situation and the child is innocent. Tom Brady did the right thing by his son and we all know he didn’t excpect or plan for his child. I would hope that he would want to see his child and provide equally for it. Also, I am not good about investments but doesn’t it seem like a waste of money purchasing a home in CA for his daughter as Trust for her future but then paying a ton of fees a month in upkeep and taxes? Wouldn’t it be better to be either sitting in the bank earning interest or have the money in investments? I know real estate is often better than the stock market but I wonder if she would have more if instead of spending money on upkeep and taxes he just plunked it down in her account and let the interest grow forever. I can’t stand any of them and I don’t like Salma for being with a cockhead like him and she sounds like a gold digger herself if the story is true that he gave her a baby too so she wouldn’t kick up a fuss over another child. That sounds about as low life as it gets.

  27. Jennifer says:

    It’s hard for me to have sympathy for a woman who claimed she wouldn’t get out of bed for less than 10K per day.

    LE has a ton of money, even by the standards of the rich. But she doesn’t have quite as much as FP. She said at the get-go that she wanted to do this herself- no money from him = no visitation either. She’s a petty PITA who decided that if Valentina got a ginormous mansion, then so should her son. She needs to just stuff it. If she’s not working- like she said her contract with L’Oreal is over so she needed the money- the why does she need a nanny? Her son is school age- so what she needs help with the other 12 hrs. a day her son is home? Get over yourself.

  28. Mitch Buchanan Rocks says:

    A tabloid dream – Linda Evangelista getting with Gabriel Aubrey, they’d make a good looking duo, and since both are models of the high maintenance variety, they could spend quality time at the salon getting mani-pedi’s and talking about clothes, makeup and hair.

  29. Dhavy says:

    I’m all about him paying up but I think it’s more about her keeping up with her lifestyle. The fact that she was a high paid model back in the days means that she made a lot more than the models these days which only tells me that she blew that money and now she needs more. She is asking now because of her contract ending so did she think that she would be hired forever or she just figured he would pay once she was out of work? If I was a single mother chosing to have a baby with a father who clearly doesn’t want him then I would plan to provide for my child until he is an adult, rich father or not, that way no one can say I asked for a handout when I was going through a tough time. She had the means to give that child a very comfortable life if she didn’t have such a wealthy lifestyle. It irks me when women do that and treat their children like an insurance. She was never poor and she made the choice to keep the baby without him and now when it gets “tough” she goes and files a lawsuit? Please b*tch, welcome to the real world where real women raise their children without a man’s handout. Yes the guy is an a-hole but she’s no better IMO

  30. cupidityrox says:

    This Linda chick sounds like a piece of work. Poor kid.

  31. tru tru says:

    he needs to pay, simple as that.

    Linda is still looking good for her age.

    Team Linda

    look out for your son’s future, don’t disappear because this does not fit in w/his supposed perfect life NOW.


  32. LV says:

    Keep it in your pants or wrap it up, if you don’t want kids. Otherwise, you’ve got no right to claim you want nothing to do with the child and it’s not your responsibility.

    I also think she’s slamming him now because he has another child and she’s seeing how much that other child is getting because he married the woman he had it with. Her son is progeny too, and there’s no reason he shouldn’t benefit and feel any less. Part recognition for her son, but probably part revenge too.

    As for the amount asked however, it’s completely ridiculous. Have some decency, for crying out loud!! Do they realize –obviously not– that ENTIRE FAMILIES don’t even make that much in ONE YEAR and somehow have to survive? I hope that the Judge is sensible and give them a piece of his or her mind.

  33. another nina says:

    Regardless of who is right in this situation, Is it even worth such a discussion and all the dirt surrounding it? Cash out, sign non-release, and move on…I would imagine $6.6 mil is like a pocket change for him, why is he arguing?

  34. clumsyme says:

    I think its better that Salma stay out of this. Usually when the new gf/wife gets involved the old baby momma has a fit. My sister was in a similar situation she got together with a guy who had a 5 yr old with his ex and hadn’t seen her since she was 2. When my sister and he got together she blamed my sister for his crap. My sister trying to help succeeded in getting him to see his child again. Well baby momma had a fit and told my sister to mind her own business. So sometimes its better to stay out of it.

  35. Bad Irene says:

    Feel sorry for this little boy, he will read all this in years too come. Didn’t Linda have a baby die a few years ago when she was dating Fabien Barthez? , if I am remembering correctly the baby was stillborn at 6 months. So knowing this, this asshat says get rid when he gets her pregnant- that has to hurt. First time commentator so hi everyone!

    • bluhare says:

      Hi Irene!

      I agree with you; didn’t know she’d had a stillborn baby. No wonder she refused. Still can’t stand her though. :P

  36. bea says:

    That guy didn’t know that his sperm could cause a baby when he has unprotected sex with a woman?

    Or was his bare-back pleasure so worth it to him that he just thought he could use abortion as birth control?

    Oh well, hope he learns something from this experience. If I were a rich sexually promiscuous male, I would be very picky about where I would let loose the juice.

    • hatsumomo says:

      And in that same vein, women dont know that sperm can fertilize their eggs when introduced via their vagina?!?! The nerve of women!

  37. Marley says:

    I told my husband that every time a man has sex with a woman he is acknowledging he would be ok with her getting pregnant and being the mother of his child since no birth control aside from sterilization is 100% effective. He looked at me like I was insane. Guys simply look at it as sex which is sad. Its also why women need to be more proactive and not slut around in casual relationships unless they are sure they are fine with potential parenthood with that person. He’s worth billions and 46k a month is nothing to him. let her have it.

    • anonymoose says:

      Marley said “I told my husband that every time a man has sex with a woman he is acknowledging he would be ok with her getting pregnant and being the mother of his child since no birth control aside from sterilization is 100% effective.”

      Good policy and so true. People must accept the consequences of their actions.

    • GeekLuva says:

      “..not slut around in casuel relationships..”
      Wow. Way to be harsh & judgemental. Your post made sense but after that line I’m more inclined to disregard it.

  38. Booka says:

    I can’t believe how stupid Pinault was to not use a condom. She’s as bad as he is. Her demand for such a big monthly stipend for one child makes her look like a greedy opportunist. Two middle aged people acting like immature teenagers, including the unplanned pregnancy, well at least on his part.

    Why not pay the woman half the money and take the boy half the time, so he can get to know his Dad? Sounds like a good solution to me.

    • LAK says:

      why is everyone assuming he didn’t use a condom??? Condoms are not 100% proof.

      They both could have been irresponsible and rode bare backed or the contraception did not work.

      It’s a 2-way street.

  39. Loulou says:

    My guts as much as I try to not hear it, says she was up to no good. First, she was married to someone. They divorced. Why not have had children with your husband? So, she’s 40, childless and divorced. She’s still working as a model so why wouldn’t she be on contraception? What Pinault isn’t saying is that clearly Evangelista was not what he had in mind as the mother of his children. He got married to Hayek, they had a girl and that’s how he wanted it. Considering Evangelista’s ex-husband is a French agent lowlife, Pinault had to wonder about being set up by that gang. I don’t blame him.

  40. mymy says:

    So you play . You pay. Big deal. He has billions. I would fight tooth and nail for my son. If his billionaire father denied him much of anything. For a great life while raising him and a better life when he was a man. this is the man’s flesh and blood and the fact he did not
    plan him makes no difference. Salma should tell him to do right by his son.
    She is threatened. And it is a good point that just one investment by him for his daughter cost 50,000 a month. that is the tip of the iceberg. And I think she may well win. Go girl.

  41. OXA says:

    Pinault spends $50,000 a month just on the taxes, upkeep and loan payments for the $12 million Los Angeles home he’s put in trust for the girl, Valentina.

    He slept with the moms & donated his sperm for both kids, so why is his son worth less than he pays for a mostly empty home he keeps for his daughter. Both children should have the same lifestyle and he should provided it just like he did his little tadpoles.

  42. LeeLoo says:

    Linda is wrong but so is he. There’s no victim in this case.

    I believe that fathers should be involved in their children’s life and play a financial role but I hate it when women like Linda exploit these laws for their benefit.

    Francois should pay child support. But I fail to see why he needs to pay 46k. I think he should pay 10k to Linda but be forced to put 36k a month in trust for his son. Linda doesn’t deserve 46k but Augustin does deserve that amount. It’s the least this father can do with a child he didn’t want.

  43. Blue says:

    They should just offer to create a trust fund for the boy and see what Linda says. That way they can get an idea of what her motives are.
    Really I think he should pay for the boy’s schooling, health/dental, extracurricular activities, a clothing/ fun allowance and if he needs a driver to from places and a nanny for when his mom works. Also bring the boy on family vacations. Anything above and beyond that LE should pay herself. The kid should be in school, add sleeping and that’s most of the day so why does she need 24/7 nanny care?

    • bluhare says:

      Perfect solution. Problem would probably be that they wouldn’t reach agreement on the Trustee. Couldn’t be either of them.

    • LAK says:


      In her deposition last year, she said she did not want to be alone with the child, hence the 24/7 nanny.

      • bluhare says:

        LAK: You’ve been saying that, and it’s true, but if I recall correctly she said it as an argument for armed security, that she was scared he’d be kidnapped.

        I think she’s a bit over the top on that one; given that he’s pretty “meh” on her son I’d be really surprised if he’d pony up ransom, but what do I know.

      • LAK says:

        @bluhare – i hadn’t even thought about that angle ie would he pay the randsom.

        I am with you there. He really is pretty ‘meh’ about the child.

  44. fabgrrl says:

    Pinault sounds like a dick, but I don’t think him asking Linda Evangelista to terminate the pregnancy is all that dickish. That is a choice, remember? And he did not want children with her (but totally really wanted them with you, Salma, right?). I’m not saying he shouldn’t have taken precautions before hand, and I’m not saying he shouldn’t be responsible now. But I think that Linda, or her lawyer, is the one being a dick to air that publicly. And, really, how does that help her case? I thought that court cases like these were kept private. And for good reason.

  45. Jeannified says:

    The dude should just step up and assume responsibility with dignity. He’s loaded, he has a son, Linda has covered all for Augie’s expenses from day 1. The court will surely come down on her side, particularly since she has paid all from the beginning. The child support is manditory…now it’s just a matter of how much she will end up getting. I say Auugie should get all of what his mother is asking for. It won’t hurt Francois. It’s a drop in the bucket for him. He should show some class and man up.

  46. Theresa says:

    I am no expert in the area of family law, but there must be a formula or a set of guidelines surrounding child support that takes into account the income of the parties involved. This is not an alimony/palimony case, there was no marriage or common-law arrangement established, so she should not be entitled to any of the benefits that are taken into consideration in those cases. That is why I question the argument of keeping the son at the same financial level as his daughter. Is that truly an argument that anyone can use, even if the child was not born into a legally recognized union? I think there is a fair and equitable way to distinguish child support, and I hope that this “list” that she supplies is vetted properly and objectively. I do not wish her to enrich herself in anyway, regardless of the bank account of the father. And if the money is awarded, I think there should be a trust set up, so that the mother cannot use any of this settlement for any other reason than for the expenses agreed upon by the courts. Just my opinion.

  47. Theresa says:

    On another note, it is a universal truth, children do not need money to live successful and wonderful lives. They need love and attention from their parents. Even if Linda succeeds in securing all the money she wants from Henri, I have this sinking feeling that her son will live without that which he needs the most and costs nothing at all. THAT needs to be recognized as much as the financial responsibility of biological parenting.

    • Dap says:

      Totally agree with you. Unfortunately, the court can’t order parents to love their children or even to spend quality time with them

  48. s.jisa says:

    $46,000 per month is not nearly enough for all the therapy this boy will need. Poor kid, both of his parents are money obsessed nutjobs.

  49. The Original Mia says:

    Pinault provides trust funds for all of the children he recognizes (2 with his ex & Valentina). He can damn well provide the same financial security to Augie.

    I would side-eye him if I was Salma. His behaviour during all of this would make me wonder how he’d treat her if she had been in the same position as Linda.

  50. Lisa B. says:

    I can’t believe there are still people defending this guy. It doesn’t matter if Linda got pregnant on purpose or if she was interested on his billions when they got involved. Augustin is his child, whether he likes it or not. Nothing will change that.

    And it’s just not fair that he won’t get the same kind of financial support his half-sister Valentina does, just because Mr. Billionaire wanted to stick his d-ck on someone but now doesn’t want to live with the consequences of that.

    I’m pretty sure he knows how babies are made. And that no contraception is 100% safe. So if he didn’t want to live with possibility of an unplanned pregnancy, he should be waaaay more careful before having sex with women, I guess.

    Linda may have her flaws, but she’s not demanding anything absurd. One can say she’s wealthy enough to raise the child herself, but she didn’t make the baby alone and most certainly did not steal his sperm! The money she’s asking is a triffle for someone so rich. If I were her, I’d ask a whole lot more, because I bet Salma and Valentina easily spend this value on a day out shopping.

    The guy should just pay the goddamn money and become less of a selfish asshole. His boy is gorgeous and I’m sure he would be happy to get to know his dad and sister better.

    • Rena says:

      I agree with everything you said. Bravo. Stop the whining and be a father. Take care of your child that you helped to create.

    • LAK says:

      Except she’s not asking for a trust for her son. She’s asking for living expenses so that she does not spend any time with the child. She’s made it very clear that she does not want to be alone with the child and the money will go on 24/7 carers.

      I think he should sue for full custody. That way, she’ll have all the time to do whatever it is she does with her time that does not involve spending time with her child.

  51. valleymiss says:

    The dude should be contributing equally to the financial well-being of each child he’s fathered. He’s a billionaire and if he didn’t want Linda to get pregnant, he should have used protection.

  52. stinky says:

    I think ive read about 90% of the comment thread – i say its pretty likely that she presumed her baby-daddy (being the billionaire that he is) would do the right thing, whether he wanted their baby or not. She had class. Relaxed w/ it. Lived her life, and did NOT terrorize him. All the while witnessing him run off w/ a fresh one and make another baby in no time flat. Again she waited. Expecting, trusting he would ‘get it’. He likely led her on or brushed her off in ways that suggested he would come to the table. She allowed him time to deal w/ his new life, new family, and then …uh… tick-f’g-tock muthaf*cka…yo whatup? Baby needs shoes over here!!! I say she was laying back being totally cool until she finally realized he was seriously dissing them for real. She then started to squawk. Team Linda. They’re rich people & their shit stinks like everyone else’s.

  53. Liberty says:

    Hugh Grant provided a house next to his own for Liz H and her son. He is paying for his new daughter’s upkeep. He is not a billionaire. Mr. P should take lessons.

  54. Liberty says:

    Oh and I think they are both money- hustling jackasses (LE and HP) but the children exist so take some responsibility as parents. Poor little boy didn’t ask for this mess.

  55. Isa says:

    I could never be with a man that abandoned his own child like that.

    • LittleDeadGrrl says:

      I was struck by the same thing. My best friend was abandoned by her father, thankfully she had an awesome step father, but she still wanted to have a relationship with her father. She called him up in her teens just to talk to him and he told her he wouldn’t give her any money. Sometimes men are piece of shits.

  56. ZenB!tch says:

    It was not his “decision” to have a baby? Excuuuuuuse me?

    I’m not a fan of Ms. Evangelista as she was the most arrogant of the super models – even worse than Naomi, albeit less violent.

    I can see her colluding to have a billionaire’s baby BUT unless she went and poked holes in every one of his non-existent condoms – he made the decision.

    While the lifestyle is *ridiculous* it’s fair that her child have a similar standard of living as that of his sister.

  57. Charlotte says:

    Maybe I am wrong for saying it..whatever..but I just don’t know if I believe that a woman should have the right to refuse child support. The money is not for you. It is your child’s money which they are entitled to. It is not about you and whether or not you hate the child’s father. Get over yourself.

    • LAK says:

      But that’s what women’s rights are.

      The right to make our own decisions on whatever we like even if we have dependants.

      You can not pick and choose which rights to champion to justify whatever situation you are in.

      We have fought hard to have our rights recognised. And that falls into the good and the bad areas.

      It is outrageous that he suggested an abortion because it’s a woman’s body. And it’s our right to decide what we want to do with our own bodies.

      Had he forced an abortion on her, we would all be up in arms about it. As it is, people are already calling him an a$$ for daring to suggest such a thing even though he is within his right NOT to be a father if he does not want to be.

      But she forces a child on him and it’s

      Further, people saying he should have worn a condom are saying women are at the mercy of their own reproductive systems??? Really?? Apparently we do not have that choice or right either.

      At the end of the day, having a baby is still within the remit of women only.

      A man can not have a baby. Even if he is in a loving relationship. The woman must always give consent. And if she refuses, he can not do a thing about it.

      This is the flip side of the same thing. I will say that he is an a$$ for not making her sign a legal document when she decided to keep the child without his help, that hopefully allowed for a trust for the child.

      Not to sound too callous, the main point about her deposition is that she wants money so she doesn’t spend any time with the child. She does not mention anything about the child’s expenses but her own. So As much as he can afford it, this is about her lifestyle rather than the child.

      • Mari says:

        It’s weird and There Are grey areas in this topic.
        My brother in law is/has been an unfaithful SOB during his life. When he was married some childless single woman he knew asked him to help her have a baby. They had sex until she got pregnant and called its quits. She told him she did not want any of his money, as she just wanted to have a baby, and would not bother him because he was married with children. Supposedly That was their agreement.
        Fast forward and he is now divorced with a new girlfriend and a new baby that he dotes on. When the other baby mom saw that (that he was not married anymore), she went to introduce her baby girl to his family and to ask for child support, etc. He does not acknowledge that girl, he does not want to at all. Sad for the little girl, but her father does not want to have anything to do with then, nor be tied to her mom, whom he calls a traitor.
        When I ask a lawyer friend about that, he told me that even if she wanted to relinquish the right for child support, in our country it is not possible for any of the parents to relinquish rights that are not theirs, in this case the money for child support is not a mother’s right. It is the child’s.
        Pinault’s and Linda’s boy has a claim for support money. I think he wants to make sure that the money is used for the child. I hope they finaly agree on something.

  58. Lizzie says:

    This bunch really should be placed under a gag order for the protection of the child. The excellent part of this is Ms. Holier Than Thou’s hubby not only cheated on her, but had a child outside the marriage. Guess all your narcissistic rants about enjoying the perks of being rich are just poor Selma covering up her obvious short comings. Apparently, besides being a witch, she sux in bed. Money won’t fix that you evil wench!

    • Mari says:

      Er… They were not married at the time, nor were they together for a while. They had broken up and he was publicly with other women during that time.
      They went back together and got married after Valentina was born, so as it seems he could not forget Salma and he saw something in her that the other women he was with did not have. So there.
      I commend him that he was always seen with women around his age, not a huge difference, and not dating young girls. He may has been and is a dou**e but at least he is not into young bimbos, and Salma is not just an empty headed actress, she very much has her own life, and he has been willing to work his schedule around her life and her work, not forcing her to dump her career.

  59. Marianne says:

    I know that he’s a billionaire…but how can she really justify needing 42K a month? Does she really need that nanny service?

  60. e.non says:

    if he didn’t want to risk pregnancy, he should have worn a rubber.

  61. aang says:

    In New York State I think child support is 17% – 25% of the non custodial parents income depending on the number of children but 17% is the minimum.My brother pays 17% of his $35,000 a year income for one child. Why not the same for a millionare? The % should be the same no matter what the income.

  62. lafairy says:

    As a huge 90′s supermodels something strikes me greatly: Linda Evangelista is JUST 46 NO WAY…That’s one big lie, she is at least 50!
    She was older (by a good 5 years at least) than the Cindy Crawford, Tatiana Patiz,Naomi, Claudia Pack and these women are early to mid forties.
    She begun her career in the 80′s there is no way she is under 50, same for Stephanie Seymour (who is at least pushing 50, at the very least! even if each years she shove a couple of years more to her real age!), and if you take a look to older pics is clearly obvious..There were women when the others were still teens!
    And she was supposed to be 44 when she gave birth to her son… her son is now 6 and she is 46!!! in what world???
    She had her miscarriage from an international soccer player here in France in 1999 nad she already was 37!
    I hate these age lies!!

  63. Meanchick says:

    I believe she made sure she’d be impregnated on purpose. Although he was very jerk-ish about it, he told the truth about the short amount of time they dated and if his attitude was that way, then why would she want to have a baby with a man like that unless it was to secure money and maybe force his hand to marry her? If he tried to work with her from the start and was ignored, it was probably because she wanted him to marry her, I’m sure she wanted that. She WAS a great model and now an aging one and soon enough her jobs will dry up. She was looking for security. He is no prize, but I respect his honesty. He was looking for a good time, not to have a family with her. She’s smart enough to get that vibe from him. $46K per month is outrageous. Her son needs that type of security? Really? I do believe she’s looking for ‘alimony’ not child support. She wants to live a certain lifestyle, say perhaps the one she was scamming for in the 1st place? What child has $46K/mo in expenses? This is IMO a punishment for not marrying her and the ‘abortion’ comment? Tacky. It supports what his intentions were; to bang a former supermodel until he got bored. I think for the sake of ‘Augie’ that comment shouldnt have been used as a weapon in court. He admitted to it, so the only person that will be hurt eventually is Augie. I abhore women who scam to be impregnated by wealthy men and let’s face it, he’s no Luke Evans, so shagging him had purpose. If she really wanted a child so badly, she could have adopted one. She wanted a baby attached to some serious coins. If they had been in a serious relatonship for a long time, maybe I’d feel a bit sorry for her, but this is the risk when you play the game. She’s being greedy and jealous. No angels here.

    • LAK says:

      THANK YOU!!!

    • Zimmer says:

      Whatever her intentions were, he was also being a shallow jerk by wanting to add her name to his”list”. I don’t think any one person deserves the blame. They both got what they wanted. It is the child I feel for.

  64. Sunny says:

    Not to sound crude, but ladies, keep your legs closed if you don’t want children and can’t/won’t/forget to use protection. Of course pregnancy is a 50/50 thing, but that’s ideal and unfortunately not always reality. Saying he should wrap it up or keep it in his pants is totally right, but if he decided not to and she didn’t want to get pregnant, she could have prevented this by taking her big girl pill, taking responsibility for her body, and shutting her legs. If you don’t take b/c and the man doesn’t protect himself, do not have sex! If he doesn’t care about being safe, then the woman has to take control of the situation. Him being an a-hole does not excuse a child’s conception if the woman failed to protect herself. No child deserves to have s*it parents like this, or a s*it parent period, so take pregnancy seriously and take responsibility. It is NOT ok to demand men protect themselves and not demand women do the same thing. Sure b/c can fail, but for the most part if a woman knows no protection is involved she has every right and ability (minus extreme cases) to stop the encounter. Saying conception is 50-50 means you need sperm and an egg. Unfortunately, unfair as it it (and minus extreme cases of course or if b/c fails) it is 100% a woman’s choice to accept her egg will be fertilized by continuing. A man doesn’t have the responsibility of carrying and giving birth to a child, a woman does. Not fair, but it’s kind of a biological fact.

  65. JRenee says:

    I thought she had problems either getting or maintainin pregnancy previously. At any rate, it only takes one encounter and the child is here. This child should be entitled to anything his other children receive, regardless of who the mother is.

  66. LittleDeadGrrl says:

    I can’t believe anyone is defending him. I can understand people saying she doesn’t deserve that much money but half the comments on here are from the 1940′s. Are you people for real? She was in a relatively stable relationship of several months and I can’t understand how the pregnancy came as a surprise to HIM. Was he wearing a condom? Did she lie to him about being on birth control. If she didn’t then he should have f-ing expected it cause he’s not an 18 year old dumbass but a man well established in life.

    Has he been part of this child’s life all these years? I just don’t understand how f-ked up half the world is. You create a life and don’t give one f-k about it. Awesome. I can’t imagine what a dirtbag it takes to say on record so your child will one day read that you wanted it aborted that you didn’t know its mother very well and dumped its mothers as soon as she got pregnant cause f-k her. That seems normal to people? Wow.

  67. Why are people talking legitimate or illegitimate? Both of these children then were technically born as illegitimate. He married Salma a few years after Valentina was born. He was sleeping with two not so bright women (who only did so because he is rich), he knocked them up at the same time (though technically Linda gets to claim dibs for firstees), then convinced Linda to keep quiet (certainly he didn’t think that would be free), then decided to marry Salma. Both children deserve monetary support and love. I can see where the supermodel is a bit put out over the whole sordid thing.

  68. Tee says:

    In response to “mimi” (and anyone else with similar/same thinking), yes there are some women who are calculating money when deciding to sleep with a man hoping that the end result of that decision is a baby. However, when you say that she became pregnant without the man’s consent that to me is an asinine statement to make – here’s why…

    1. He consented/choose to engage in a sexual act/intercourse with her.

    I would list more but really the first one is sufficient. Any man/woman that who does want to have children with the woman/man they are interacting with should not have sex with her/him, because having sex (repeatedly or once) increases the probability that a child may be the result of their union even if she is taking birth control and they are using condoms.

    Sex comes with risks, especially if you are not married to the person, sex is serious, and should not be taken lightly. This is a disgusting situation, to have some well dressed business man who is worth a fortune get away with bringing life into this world and abandoning their child and the responsibility of making sure they meet the needs of that child because well gee they did not like the situation and/or the woman after they decided to have sex with her so they should not be held accountable for their actions is sickening.

    That is not the actions of a man, that is the action of a coward, a blackguard who acts without thinking.