Child Custody and Divorce

Jump to:     Highlights      Quick Tutorial      Gulliver Oldman Statement      Court Documents      Links

 

Oldman cleared in domestic violence matter.

 

For the first time, Gulliver Oldman publicly goes on record: "The event did not occur." See his complete statement below.

 

Spokesperson Douglas Urbanski:

“Referring to the painful lie about “spousal abuse”, regarding recent recirculated old rumors, and an apparent coordinated smear campaign, there are those with suspect motives who circulate this story hinting that there is some truth to it.

Anyone who circulates this story is doing so with complete rejection of the facts, malice, and is doing so with defamatory intentions.

The #TimesUp and #MeToo movements--good, honest, and critical movements--aimed at addressing Hollywood predators who have abused women have also unfortunately given a platform to some to misuse the importance, validity, and urgency of the movement. Those haters seem hellbent on convincing the public that Gary Oldman belongs in the rogues gallery of true abuser predators.

The misuse of these important movements by some denegrate and harm the many victim women whom have genuinely suffered.

Gary Oldman passionately and strongly supports the #TimesUp and #MeToo movements and the long awaited correction of these abuses. 

 

THE FACTS

Summary:

·       Gary Oldman was 100% cleared in the allegations of domestic violence.

·       The fact is that the City Attorney fully investigated this allegation. According to Family Court records, in June 2001 they let the court know that they did not find the allegations credible. The court agreed, and gave him full legal and physical custody of their children and took the children away from her.

·       The LAPD conducted a full investigation. Mr. Oldman cooperated with them in every way. Ms. Fiorentino did not.

·       No criminal charges or arrest warrant has at any time ever been filed against Mr. Oldman.

·       Conclusive evidence showed that Ms. Fiorentino created false evidence to support her invented claim.

·       The LAPD and the city attorney investigated thoroughly; they did not find her claims credible they alone decided no charges should even be filed.

·       In September 2001, Judge Paul issued a judgment in the matter, which stated that she "failed to meet the burden of proof."

 

The court record shows:

1.     On Saturday May 19th, 2001, at some time in the late afternoon, Donya Fiorentino contacted the Hollywood Police Dapartment claiming she had suffered spousal abuse. During that same evening, LAPD officers were asked by Ms. Fiorentino to come to her home so she could give a formal statement that she had been abused.

2.     On Sunday May 20th, 2001, it was learned, Ms. Fiorentino repeatedly telephoned the station over the previous 24 hours with her claim.

3.     Despite Ms. Fiorentino’s repeated attempts to get her husband arrested, on Sunday May 20th, 2001, the LAPD verified that there were no criminal charges of any kind pending against Mr. Oldman, that no criminal warrant of any kind had ever been issued, and that Ms. Fiorentino’s claim had been referred to detectives for further investigation.

4.     Ms. Fiorentino through her attorneys lied to the Family Court by repeatedly representing that they had a) a felony arrest warrant issued for Gary Oldman, and/or b) Mr. Oldman had been charged with spousal abuse. As the Court learned, these representations were also false.

5.           In the days following Ms. Fiorentino’s claim the LAPD conducted an investigation into Ms. Fiorentino’s claim of abuse. Mr. Oldman fully cooperated with the police in all aspects of their investigation of Ms. Fiorentino’s claim. Ms. Fiorentino refused to fully cooperate with all police requests related to the investigation.

6.       It was shown that Ms. Fiorentino falsified evidence, including the creation of “battered wife” photos. Four witnesses (and there are more) signed sworn declarations that the “bruising” in the photos was actually make up she applied to her face prior to meeting police and in the courthouse ladies room prior to her first court appearance.

7.           Ms. Fiorentino petitioned the court for a restraining order against her husband on the grounds that he had engaged in domestic violence, and that he was violently dangerous. The court relied upon the LAPD and City Attorney and other experts who said none had occurred and they would not file charges against him, despite her dramatic claim. ON SPETEMBER 12, 2001, A COURT ORDER WAS ISSUED AND JUDGE PAUL DENIED HER PETITION STATING IN AN ON THE RECORD ORDER THAT SHE "FAILED TO MEET THE BURDEN OF PROOF." That is as good as an innocent verdict. Not one scintilla of evidence was ever provided to show that Mr. Oldman had this “violent side.”

8.           On September 12, 2001, Ms. Fiorentino, thru the signature of her lawyer, signed the Court Order, thereby accepting the findings as final. She “failed to meet the burden of proof.”

9.           On September 12, 2001, a Court Order was issued restraining Ms. Fiorentino from “ingesting alcohol and/or drugs at any time”. No such order was given for Mr. Oldman.

10.           On September 12, 2001, a Court Order was issued requiring that Ms. Fiorentino was to be subject to ongoing, random drug testing. No such order was given for Mr. Oldman.

11.         On October 25th, 2001, in a highly unusual move, Judge Paul, in public records, went to great lengths to issue a PERMANENT RESTRAINING ORDER against Ms. Fiorentino from ever being able to speak about Mr. Oldman publicly or to the media; Ms. Fiorentino was specifically and explicitly ordered to never “discuss or comment upon, or communicate with any third party about the ALLEGED events of May 19,2001.” His order is initialed by Ms. Fiorentino and signed by Judge Paul. What was it from his experience in this case that Judge Paul saw in his crystal ball that made him take this step? Why did the judge also specifically single out the date of May 19th, the date of the alleged "domestic violence"? He already knew the accusation was false. He knew her to be a liar with a relentless goal of smearing and publicly destroying her husband. Judge Paul was right again.

12.         On October 25th, 2001, Ms. Fiorentino acknowledged in the Court Order that she had been represented in the matter by an attorney. Her initials and signature appear on the document. Her attorneys were among the most expensive and well known celebrity divorce attorneys available in Los Angeles. This is contrary to her recent public claim that she represented herself.

13.         On October 25, 2001, Ms. Fiorentino accepted the findings of the court as final (she initialed and signed the Court Order) and waived her “right to appeal, and the right to move for a new trial or reconsideration”. If she thought her allegations were true as she now re-alleges, then why, on multiple occasions did she accept the finding of the court? Because she had been caught and she knew her allegations were false, and did not pursue the matter further at the time or with the judge of law enforcement. 

 

HIGHLIGHTS:

The alleged 2001 incident never occurred.

No charges were ever even filed. The entire story is a lie. If the story had been real, Mr. Oldman would have faced certain charges and trial.

Ms. Fiorentino knowingly filed a false police report.

 

This is not a matter of “he said/she said”—it is a matter of “she said/the police said”! The matter was thoroughly investigated by the LAPD, detectives, the District Attorney, the Judge, Family Services, and TWO State Appointed Evaluators, ALL of whom conclusively found the same thing: Ms. Fiorentino completely invented the story. She was at one point determined by the police, family court judge and state evaluator to be a “pathological liar.”

Charges would have been filed if the incedent had actually occurred. Charges were never filed precisely because law enforcement found the claim to be completely false. Charges would certainly have been filed against Mr. Oldman if such an incident had occurred. In other words, no domestic violence ever occurred. Period.

No less than FOUR witnesses (there are more) signed declarations that no such incident occurred.

“Evidence” she created to support her claim was quickly shown to be manufactured and false.

There WERE consequences and results: Mr. Oldman was awarded full legal and physical custody of his sons, while Ms. Fiorentino was never allowed to be alone with them again and could only have rare visits accompanied with a state appointed monitor. A central part of this result, the court said, was that she had “little or no relationship with the truth.”

Gary Oldman was found by the State Appointed Evaluators to be a gentle man and also an ideal parent. A father being awarded complete legal and physical custody of their children is an almost un heard of result.

Ms. Fiorentino, at the time of the marriage was a deeply psychologically troubled, heavily drug addicted woman who had overdosed and almost died a short time before making this false claim.

For Ms. Fiorentino, this result followed her pattern since it was the identical result from her previous marriage. In that marriage, also complete with wild and bizarre claims, that father was also awarded custody of their child with whom she also had virtually no contact. That is to say that she twice lost custody in two different marriages, with different judges, where her conduct, drug addiction, and pathological nature was a central focus to the Family Courts.

Gary Oldman, on the other hand, has had numerous adult relationships. While failed marriages are never a source of pride, there is not one woman he has ever had a relationship with who would describe Gary as anything other than kind, caring, gentle. There exists no pattern whatsoever showing otherwise.

After this matter, Gary lived for many years as a single dad with a single purpose, putting much of his career on hold to raise those boys to be fine young men.

I believe that Ms. Fiorentino, during those years, has continued to struggle with psychological problems, drug and substance abuse, and been in and out of various rehab or treatment centers.

Moreover, there has never been a pattern even suggested about Oldman–and any first year student of criminology will tell you that the first thing they look for is a pattern. The attempted smears don’t stick because anyone can see that it is just a smear campaign based upon things that never happened.

There is not one scintilla of proof to show this event occurred, while there is a mountain of proof to show that it did not.

That is the end of this old, deeply personal, painful matter."

 

A quick tutorial:

During a bitter custody battle, did Ms. Fiorentino claim that spousal abuse had occurred once?

Yes.

 

Did Ms. Fiorentino file a claim with the LAPD?

Yes.

 

Did Ms. Fiorentino attempt to have the police arrest Mr. Oldman?

Yes.

 

Was there an arrest warrant?

No. Almost immediately her claim fell apart and the police did not find it credible.

 

Was there ever an arrest warrant?

No.

 

Does the Los Angeles District Attorney take claims of domestic violence seriously?

You bet!

 

Was there an initial investigation and what did it show?

Yes, there was an initial investigation and it showed, almost immediately, that she had fabricated the claim.

 

Was there a lengthy, detailed and thorough investigation?

Yes, by the LAPD, the District Attorney, two judges, Family Services, and private detectives.

 

Were there witnesses?

Yes. At least 4 (and there were more) who signed sworn declarations that the alleged incident had not occurred.

 

Was there evidence?

Yes. Her evidence was shown, almost immediately, to have been fabricated and fake.

 

Did Ms. Fiorentino present photo evidence of “domestic violence”? 

Yes! The photos proved to be fabricated. FOUR witnesses (there are more) signed sworn declarations that she had no bruising and that they saw her apply "bruise-like" make up to give the appearance that she had been injured. She applied this make up before meeting with the police, and in the ladies room at the courthouse before her first court appearance. Moreover, evidence was presented from a “bruising expert” that these photos could not possibly represent real injuries. The photos were FAKE!

 

What did the Children think of the accusations?

Well, Gulliver Oldman recalls the day vividly, and his statement is HERE. Interestingly, Ms. Fiorentino attempted to use her parental position to prevent the police from speaking to Gulliver, while Mr. Oldman was delighted to have the detectives speak with him.

Were Ms. Fiorentino and Mr. Oldman interviewed by the police in the matter, and if so, what did the police find?

Yes, both were interviewed by the police as were others. The police asked to talk to the children, which Mr. Oldman agreed to, and which Ms. Fiorentino objected to. The police found there had been no domestic violence.

 

Has Ms. Fiorentino ever dropped her claim?

Not to my knowledge, although at one point almost a decade ago she claimed she wanted to make amends to Gary.

 

Has Ms. Fiorentino ever made other false claims against Mr. Oldman?

Yes! She made so many false claims that the judge eventually ordered her to stop it!! Some of the claims were bizarre, and all aimed to harm Mr. Oldman.

 

Has Ms. Fiorentino ever made false claims against others?

Yes, she made false claims against her previous husband, David Fincher, during that bitter custody battle.

 

Did the District Attorney eventually drop charges against Gary Oldman?

No.

 

Why were the charges never dropped?

The charges were never dropped because the charges were never even filed. The District Attorney’s investigation revealed that there had been no criminal activity, nothing had occurred, and therefore there were no need for “charges”; the allegation was false.

 

Why was there no trial and why is there no “innocent” verdict?

The District Attorney brings charges against criminals when there is evidence of wrongdoing. The District Attorney drops charges when the investigation shows that they were wrongly filled in the first place. The District Attorney does not bring charges as a frivolous matter based merely on any allegation. In this matter, the evidence showed the allegation to be false and no charges were ever filed.

 

Did Ms. Fiorentino want charges to be filed?

You bet. Before, during, and after the allegations and investigation.

 

Has there been other police reporting about the activities of Mr. Oldman?

No. Never.

 

Has there been other police reporting about the activities of Ms. Fiorentino?

Yes.

 

Since there was no trial, and no “innocent verdict”, how do we know for sure that the allegations are not true?

Well, when one has clearly done nothing wrong, charges are not brought, and time, energy and money of the legal system is not wasted on frivolous issues. If there is a good likelihood that there is a crime, the District Attorney files charges and a trial follows, and from that a verdict. In this matter, the alleged incident had been determined to not have occurred! Therefore, something better than an “innocent verdict”: no charges, no trial.

 

When you have done nothing wrong, and there is no crime, does someone send you a diploma or certificate saying “congrats, you have done nothing!”?

No. when you have done nothing wrong no one sends you a letter saying so! The LAPD, the Judges, the District Attorney speak in other ways: no charges are brought, and the person making the false allegation is punished.

 

If I considered having desert after dinner last night, but did not have desert, does that mean I went off my diet?

No.

 

If I consider firing an employee, but do not, can that person still claim unemployment?

No.

 

If I said that you were a horse, would that make is so?

No.

 

If Ms. Fiorentino claims these acts of violence, does that make it real?

No.

 

Has Mr. Oldman been exonerated in this matter?

Completely. The people investigating, and everyone concerned, apart from Ms. Fiorentino, knows the matter never happened.

 

Has Ms. Oldman ever been involved in any other accusation of violence from Ms. Fiorentino or anyone else?

No. Never.

 

Has Mr. Oldman ever been accused of mistreating any women ever, in any conceivable way, big or small?

No. Never.

 

Is Mr. Oldman on good terms with his ex wives and ex girlfriends?

Apart from Ms. Fiorentino, yes! Very much so!

 

Has anyone who has ever known Mr. Oldman suggested there was a dark, violent side?

No. Not one person, ever.

 

There are further allegations about drinking, herion, drugs, and prostitutes, what is the truth about that?

Mr. Oldman has talked publicly for years about his own alcoholism, and sadly has not been able to be private about it; he has not had an adult beverage in decades. About “herion, drugs, prostitutes”, this is another Fiorentino claim about a time prior to her ever knowing Mr. Oldman. The fact is that alcohol was his drug of choice, and he never ever did drugs beyond that; about prostitutes, to his personal knowledge he has never even known a prostitute.

 

Were others aware of Ms. Fiorentino’s drug usage and personality disorders?

Oh yes. Her previous husbands, the judges, and the Family Services professionals who are very familiar with these kinds of cases.

 

Were there other inappropriate activities of Ms. Fiorentino?

You bet! Many many. Including her caught by a State Appointed monitor of taking a child in the bathroom, turning on the fan to drown out noise in an attempt to “coach” her child against the father.

 

Were there ever other inappropriate activities of Mr. Oldman?

No. None. Ever.

 

After these claims, what happened, what was the result?

As sad as it is to report, it was conclusively shown that this incident had not occurred and that she was an accomplished liar and manipulator, in addition to being hopelessly drug addicted. It was also conclusively shown that Mr. Oldman was a gentle, kind and ideal parent and father. What happened as a result of all this? Mr. Oldman was awarded sole legal and physical custody and became a devoted, full time, single dad. As for Ms. Fiorentino, she was never allowed to see her children alone again and was only allowed occasional visits, closely monitored by a State Appointed monitor.

 

Anything else?

Yes, because of her false claims, her desire to harm Mr. Oldman—which persists to this day—she was considered by all concerned to be a danger to Mr. Oldman and her children. Because of her ability to make false allegations against Mr. Oldman and desire to harm him, even the rare child visitations had many witnesses for the exchange and visit.

 

But isn’t this a simple classic case of “he said/she said?”

Absolutely not!! It is more like a case of “she said/the LAPD said!” or “she said/the DA said”.

 

Why has this story suddenly reappeared, and why the sudden suggestion that it was all true?

Well, we are living is times where legitimate offenses against woman who have truly been abused are coming to shocking light every day. Because there are people who would like to cause Mr. Oldman harm, including Ms. Fiorentino and others, a few in the media have found it easy to jump on the “allegation” bandwagon, rather than the “truth” bandwagon.

 

Oldman comment: “When my wife in my third marriage overdosed, it began perhaps the most difficult, painful, personal period of my life and for my family. It was a stress filled divorce. Sadly, as she did with her previous marriage, she made accusations that were found to be false. As my boys were young at the time, I set most of my career on hold while I dedicated myself to the enormous task of being a single dad. While that was a painful, and personal time, these boys are now two fine young men and I could not be more proud of the outcome. Our family put the pain of these personal events behind us a long long time ago, and that is where they belong, in the past.”

Gulliver Oldman Statement

Court Documents