divorce rumours CCA and DA

I have a new theory on how this story started. After reading that Davids' dad, Lewis, died on Saturday - I'm thinking that maybe they knew he had heart problems (I don't know if he had been ill beforehand) and so David maybe went to spend some time with his dad and was not 'ordered out of the house by Courteney and staying with his parents' as some UK papers stated. And why, maybe, they didn't look that happy in certain pics at the 'Snatch' premiere the other week. What do you reckon? Jusy my thought that might make sense .....

Mrs C

I heard CCA denied everything on Entertainment Tonight, and that she was quite upset about the rumors. I didn't see it though, so I'm just reporting what I heard. It doesn't sound like it's true, or else the US papers and Entertainment shows would be all over it.

yeah that does make more sense. the british papers said that she was fed up with his partying and watching of sport on tv!!!!! surely she would have known this before marrying him as they had known each other a while.

flygirl Paul Clarke wrote in message news:96f2qr$9k6$[email]...

'Snatch'

In article , "Paul Clarke" wrote:

It's a reasonable thought, but unless Lewis Arquette was living in the UK before he died, it's still very suspicious that the story began in a British local newspaper.

Tennant

True, Tennant but British press do have their spies/contacts (whatever!) all over the place so anything is possible!

Mrs C PS I like my theory better (not the Lewis Arquette bit though) than the original story and as it never actually appeared anywhere in the US papers/magazines I doubt it was true anyway.

Tennant Stuart wrote in message news:[email]...

Davids'

the

stated.

In article , "Paul Clarke" wrote:

They are even better at making stuff up.

Indeed, Pauline. :)

Tennant

Paul Clarke wrote in message news:96ht74$78l$[email]...

all

It was on the IMDb news... but two days later they published another story saying that Courteney's PR had denied it.

In article , "CandiGrrl" wrote:

Indeed so. Compare this gossip with the real story of the Cruise/Kidman break-up - virtually no whispers beforehand, then the news is announced in the locality where the couple operate, rapidly confirmed, and *then* it's picked up around the world, hitting ALL the newspapers & TV news.

Tennant

On Sun, 18 Feb 2001 12:38:06 GMT, Tennant Stuart wrote:

Ive been checking National Enquirer since the report appeared in the British newspapers, and nothing, Ive sent an e-mail to the NE letters section but I guess as they get a train load of letters every day it'll be a while before I get some kind of reply. :\

In article , [email] (Christopher) wrote:

Lol, I can't help thinking that if the story is not in the National Enquirer, then it definitely isn't true.

Tennant

On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 00:27:36 GMT, Tennant Stuart wrote:

Well, the NE does have better sources then us lot do, so maybe...

Davids'

the

stated.

I havn't heard anything since that initial report on Radio 1 so I'm just assuming that their not bracking up, I mean I havn't found anything on the net.

Owen

In article , "Owen Shiers" wrote:

Nope. But then, one day they might break up (Cruise & Kidman only lasted for 11 years) and then people will be saying they told us so...

Tennant

Forgive my intrusion here, but I just saw previews for Courtney's new movie with Kurt Russell & ? (can't remember) & in the movie trailer it showed Courtney "Cox", not Courtney Cox Arquette... I thought that was a little strange, especially since such a big deal was made when she decided to add David's last name to her Friends credits...

Just my observations here - check it out...

"Tennant Stuart" wrote in message news:[email]...

In article , "C Schick" wrote:

I would have said that "Courteney Cox" remains her stage name, and that the "Arquette" in the Friends credits was no more than a concession to her interferring hisband.

Tennant

Tennant Stuart wrote:

Er - no. Precisely 9 years and 11 months, as discussed pointedly on the radio last week - if it had gone another month the pre-nup would have been invalid... (or something). I think the money balance is probably different to what it was when they married, but the initial money was on Cruise's side. He was protecting it. Yawn.

Jac

Jacqui wrote:

They married in 1990.

Maybe the agreement wasn't signed until March 1991, (making it a post-nup), or it was a pre-nup which came into force in March 1991.

Tennant

On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jacqui stated this considered view. Waking from my doze, I hastily scrawled -

I'm uneasy about the whole concept of prenuptial agreements, they seem so unromantic.

IMO, if there's doubt enough in a couples mind that they want a pre-nup, they shouldn't even be considering getting married.