Usher and Tameka Raymond’s fight over custody of their children isn’t as resolved as you’d imagine it to be following a judge awarding the singer primary custody with the two kids he shares with his ex-wife. Since then, lawyers for the stylist and business owner have filed two motions that allowed the original joint custody order to be stayed temporarily.
Michelle of Straight From The A! was in attendance of their most recent court hearing and here’s some of what she reported:
Fulton County Judge Tipton-Lane was asked to recuse herself from hearing the motion for new trial due to her “financial relationship” with one of Usher’s attorneys, John Mayou. Tipton-Lane refused to recuse herself, so Tameka’s attorney was forced to present her argument that the judge was biased to…. the judge that they were saying was biased. *sigh*
It was argued that Tameka’s due process was violated by the judge and John Mayoue’s non-disclosure.e.
Tameka’s attorneys spoke of the inconsistencies with the judges ruling, stating the it was “inconsistent with the evidence presented” as well as that it was “inconsistent with the psychological reports obtained”.
It was also brought to the court’s attention that Usher INTENTIONALLY failed to disclose that he had secured a position on “The Voice” – if you recall, the news of his joining the show was made within days of the final hearing.
Another issue brought up to the court was that Usher had been out of the state 17 days in these 24 days of October 2012 and that it was undisputed that he would NOT be in town at least 70/80 percent of the time.
During the original trial, Tameka’s side requested Usher’s schedule and the judge never ordered him to produce it. Her attorney surmised that they needed it to prove he was lying about being able to maintain primary custody in the state.
In the original trial, Usher maintained he had a “village” to help him care for the children ie his mother, grandmother, aunt, new girlfriend (?), however, those people never appeared before the court for the judge to determine if it was actually in the best interest of the children.
(The views contained herein are solely the views of their respective authors, and do not express the views of TV One. TV One does not take responsibility for their content.)