The War of the Roses between Christie Brinkley and Peter Cook continues, as Cook's longtime lawyer James R. Winkler comes forward to point out what he claims are a number of inconsistencies, fallacies and half-truths in the Uptown Girl's recent profile in a cover spread on PEOPLE magazine.
Winkler scoffs at the magazine's suggestion that Brinkley, 60, won a “large settlement after revelation of Cook’s heavy hand on the three children," saying that if she is the parent she claims to be, she should shoot those untruths down "for her children’s sake."
Winkler charged that in nearly four decades of practicing family law, he's never "witnessed such little regard for the wellbeing of children" than some of Brinkley's past actions in making public each detail of her messy breakup with Cook.
He added that Brinkley's frequently "hurt their three children because it makes her feel so good to hurt Mr. Cook in every public forum and at every opportunity," without regards to their feelings.
Calling Cook a good father, Winkler said that the well-intentioned "is no match for the anger of this very wealthy and scorned woman determined to trash the father of her children at every opportunity."
Here is the letter in its' entirety:
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Press:
After several years of representing Peter Cook as his attorney on an array of legal issues created mostly by Christie Brinkley’s insatiable need for attention and self justification, I am compelled to write to set the record straight.
Ms. Brinkley latest attack on Mr. Cook, falling on the eve of her 60th birthday celebration, suggests that she won a “large settlement after revelation of Cook’s heavy hand on the three children”. And PEOPLE magazine celebrates her swimsuit wearing good looks on its cover with an article touting her need to be a “pillar” for her children after her nasty divorce from Mr. Cook.
If she is the “pillar” that she claims to be then she will publicly repudiate the false statements that there was a “large settlement” in her favor and that Mr. Cook ever used a “heavy hand on the three children.” She should do this for her children’s sake.
I have been representing men and women in divorce proceedings for more than 35 years and have never, I repeat never, witnessed such little regard for the wellbeing of children as evidenced by Ms. Brinkley, beginning when she and her lawyers asked the trial Judge to open the courtroom and permit her to testify about every detail of the parties marital discord in front of scores of reporters, all for the world to witness and her children to experience. Moreover, she insisted on putting in the most personal testimony about her children’s father which was wholly unnecessary because Mr. Cook had already acknowledged his mistakes and consented to the divorce.
But Ms. Brinkley required her pound of flesh even if her children had to be humiliated by the daily reporting of the most personal details of their family life. And the public trial was only the tip of the iceberg. Ms. Brinkley’s public relations people, who have made millions from Ms. Brinkley generous use of them, have relentlessly peppered the media with untrue statements about Mr. Cook from the beginning of the legal difficulties until this very day. Ms. Brinkley herself continues to state publicly, among of things, that Mr. Cook was a “diagnosed narcissist”, a statement that is completely false and no doubt actionable slander. Of course, Ms. Brinkley herself could be cited by most observers as a pretty good example of a narcissist.
She is willing to hurt her own children because it makes her feel so good to hurt Mr. Cook in every public forum and at every opportunity. To set the record straight, Mr. Cook is a great father. I have personally witnessed his anguish about what his children have gone through. He tries to shield them from the hurt of this personal family tragedy but he is no match for the anger of this very wealthy and scorned woman determined to trash the father of her children at every opportunity.
Ms. Brinkley’s need for revenge knows no bounds. Her subtle, and sometimes not so subtle, message to her children about their father is designed to cause them to question their own reality and the father they know, simply to exact revenge for herself. I have witnessed this behavior in my law practice over 35 years and the harm it has caused thousands of children.
It is shameful.
In the long run, Mr. Cook will be the “pillar” for his children because he is grounded and real. It is time for Christie Brinkley to stop trashing the father of her children and let them freely appreciate the gifts he has to offer them as a parent.
James R. Winkler, Attorney for Peter Cook
As Radar revealed, the turbulent war between Brinkley and Cook turned nuclear again last week, after her ex-husband sent a blistering letter to the model accusing her of “gross exaggerations, revisionist history and self-serving dishonesty.”
In New York architect Cook’s letter, he told his supermodel-actress ex that she had made “false and dishonest statements about the father of your children” and had made “every effort to alienate the children from their father.”
"The sad reality is, almost eight years later, Christie is still mired in our divorce and hatred of me which has been irreparably damaging to our children,” Cook added in an exclusive interview.
"She disposed of 10 good years of marriage because of my indiscretion and has had to vilify me ever since to excuse her own petty and self-indulgent behavior -- throwing our children under the bus, relentlessly vilifying their father and surrendering our lives to the media -- essentially capitalizing on my pain and by default our children's pain; all masked behind a fixed disingenuous smile.
"But the excuses for her behavior are dishonest, convenient and increasingly difficult to accept. She's simply using narcism to distract from the real conversation.”