Judge Found Kevin Costner’s Ex ‘Credible’ but Felt Larger Child Support Would Be ‘Disguised Spousal Support’
The judge said he didn’t detect any “acting” during Kevin Costner’s testimony and said he felt Christine’s testimony was “credible”
The judge that sided with Kevin Costner in his child support case with estranged wife Christine is outlining how he reached his decision.
During a two-day hearing in Santa Barbara last week, both Kevin, 68, and Christine, 49, testified, getting emotional at times, as they spoke about raising their children and next steps as they go their separate ways.
On Friday, the ruling on child support was revealed: Kevin will pay $63,209 per month to Christine, not the $161,592 she was seeking. Kevin and Christine, who married in 2004, share three teenagers: Cayden, 16, Hayes, 14, and Grace, 13.
Judge Thomas P. Anderle, in a Tuesday court filing obtained by PEOPLE, recapped the proceedings and explained that he found Christine “credible” in her Thursday testimony, with “good courtroom demeanor.”
However, while the judge “did not perceive there was any intention by [Christine] to mislead the Court,” her testimony “was not much help on the issue before the bench today; will weigh her testimony with all the evidence in this case.”
About Kevin, Anderle wrote that he “recognizes he is professional actor” and “weighed that in the decision-making process when judging his credibility.”
The judge “did not find he embellished any of his testimony by relying on his profession; his testimony was straightforward; there was ‘no acting’; found his testimony to be credible and consistent.”
Anderle added that “both sides made strong closing arguments.”
In regards to the ruling, Anderle said the “reasonable needs of the children are fully met by this child support order” and anything “greater than $63,209 per month” would be “disguised spousal support.”
He added: “Christine will have her opportunity to convince the Court that she is entitled to spousal support. That is not the issue at hand for this hearing.”
While Christine was on the stand Thursday prior to the ruling, she said a decrease in financial status would affect their kids. After moving out of their family home to comply with a court order, Christine said she is now in a $40,000-per-month rental since she’s “being conservative … because I have been very unsure what I will get and what the outcome of this case will be.”
About the child support amount she was requesting, Christine said she wanted to provide a comparable lifestyle for the kids when they are with her. That cost “is our lifestyle, it’s how we lived,” she said.
Christine added that she “will look into the steps I need to take and any schooling I need to do, and I will enter the workforce” in order to support herself, mentioning education as a potential career path of interest.
Meanwhile, Kevin said in his testimony Friday, “My biggest concern is that the court orders me to pay child support that is above the needs of my children and for the needs of Christine.”
In a court filing last week just before the in-person court appearances, Kevin’s lawyers said Christine “argues that Kevin ‘steadfastly refuses’ to pay child support sufficient to meet the children’s reasonable needs. That is demonstrably false and purposely inflammatory. The parties simply differ on what ‘reasonable needs’ means in the context of child support.”
The exes will appear in court again later this fall to hash out the validity of their premarital agreement.
During a request for order hearing this week on Wednesday, Christine’s attorney John Rydell said the outcome of that separate ruling could still go in a different direction that the child support decision.
“The other side seems to think that this case is over,” said Rydell, adding to the judge, “I have 24 years of experience with you as a colleague. … You never decide stuff without the evidence.”
For more People news, make sure to sign up for our newsletter!
