The most contentious — and entertaining — celebrity divorce in recent history has finally come to a close. Four years after their war began when he was busted gettin' it on with a 17-year-old, Christie Brinkley and her ex Peter Cook have finally settled their lingering lawsuits against each other.
Brinkley has accused Cook of shortchanging her on child support, breaking a no-contact rule and smearing her in the press. Cook said Brinkley actually owed him money and that she was a total famewhore who was using their split for publicity.
Last week in court, Brinkley snidely told Cook's new wife that she would be there when he cheated again — and wifey sniped back to "move on."
So who prevailed? That depends on who you ask.
In a statement on her Facebook page, Brinkley wrote:
"Once and for all, this is my last word on the subject. Let it be known, that I 'moved on' from my marriage to Peter Cook the moment a police offer tapped me on the shoulder and informed me that 'my husband had been cheating on me in a two year affair with his 17 year-old-daughter.' Since that moment, it has been an odyssey of frustration as I have navigated the court system with one goal to find peace and protection for my family from the various forms of abuse at the hands of a narcissist."
"I had a prenup, a confidentiality agreement, and a 'civility clause' that all cost a lot of money, but were for all intensive purposes ignored and useless against the extended character assignation and extortion attempts I have endured. While extortion for money he was not owed was Peter Cook's shameless goal in this last round, I was seeking respite from narcissist abuse by fighting for the right to enforce the 'No Contact Rule' which is imperative for persons, mostly women, dealing with a person diagnosed with Narcissistic Personality Disorder."
"In a late night settlement, I finally won the right to establish boundaries with provisions such as an intermediary to deal with email bullying, verbal and emotional abuse. I am hopeful the steps taken will now protect my Constitutional right to quiet enjoyment and peace and serve as a template for the courts to help others avoid the lengthy trials and tribulations that cost taxpayers money, and at a cost to families that CAN be calculated in dollars. But its the emotional toll which can only be measured in tears that must be considered by the courts and media alike."
The other side of the coin? Cook's lawyer asserted, "Ms. Brinkley brought a meritless lawsuit against Mr. Cook for the sole purpose of causing pain and suffering to him. Contrary to Ms. Brinkley's assertion that Mr. Cook was a 'dead-beat dad' and 'bully' this settlement agreement provides financial compensation exclusively to Mr. Cook and dismisses all monetary claims filed against him. Ms. Brinkley has publicly stated that Mr. Cook was attempting to extort money from her but this settlement demonstrates it was she who was wrongfully attempting to extort money from him. The settlement we reached proves Ms. Brinkley's claims were baseless and that a hearing would have only proved to be a further embarrassment for her."
The case may be settled, but we have a feeling this won't be the last we hear from these two.
And you'll see personalized content just for you whenever you click the My Feed .
SheKnows is making some changes!