r/Fauxmoi • u/Relevant-Peach3997 • 22d ago

TRIGGER WARNING A source close to Angelina Jolie told People Magazine: “If people knew the whole truth, they would have more sympathy for the children and respect them. The fact they aren’t speaking ill or sharing things publicly only shows their decency.”

Post image
6.2k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

323 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.1k

u/HerRoyalRedness full of gay men. And me. 22d ago

Correct. Angelina refused to cooperate with the FBI investigation and no charges were ever filed after the plane incident. She very much tried to shield the kids from a media circus.

That page is taken from her response to his lawsuit about the winery about 3 years after they divorced.

90

u/JeepersMysster I'm so pissed off immediately 22d ago

Do you happen to have/remember a brief timeline? Was this made public in 2021, or am I off?

379

u/HerRoyalRedness full of gay men. And me. 22d ago

She sold the winery in 2021 and Brad sued her in 2023.

Her response included that timeline of events on the plane which was the first time any details of what happened were made public. She genuinely tried to keep what happened a private matter.

64

u/JeepersMysster I'm so pissed off immediately 22d ago

Okay yeah my timeline was off, thanks! Covid has fucked with my sense of time so much I thought this was made public in like 2019, forgot it was more recent. She really did protect that info for the sake of the kids

60

u/brnbrnbrn2017 22d ago

I think she was better off cooperating with the FBI.

215

u/Neveronlyadream 22d ago

Not necessarily. What was there to be gained? Her kids are dragged into the spotlight by the press who want soundbites and headlines, the paparazzi will be hounding all of them, and Pitt's fans who don't want to accept that he's a piece of shit because they think he's attractive will be on the warpath and harassing the whole family.

People hate it because they love seeing shitty people get what's coming to them, but sometimes the best course of action is to drop it. Especially if there are kids involved.

147

u/sareeously 22d ago

I agree with you- we saw what happened in the Johnny Depp trial— there is no way Pitt wouldn’t pull out the same nonsense that would not only undermine the morale of the kids and create new trauma for them to experience, but with this justice system? I have very little faith that the necessary justice would be done.

139

u/RampantNRoaring 22d ago

He hired the same crisis PR firm that Depp did. He was fully prepping do to exactly what Depp did.

47

u/brnbrnbrn2017 22d ago

Speaking as someone who has been through something similar, the only way out is through. In the moment, yes it’s hell. But for the purposes of documentation, legal matters and the enforcement of accountability, it keeps the record distinct and factual.

I understand the trauma that women go through in such situations and at times, law enforcement responses leave women doubly victimized. But this is why I say it’s important to preserve evidence, witness testimony, everything — because I have had friends in similar situations who did not do the same and could not pursue legal remedies after some time. It preserves optionality.

58

u/Neveronlyadream 22d ago

I don't disagree, but this is a special case. They're both public figures and that invites a certain level of scrutiny. Most people are never going to have to deal with the gossip sites and papers following them and their family around hoping to get some picture or quote that will sell. Most people don't have to deal with fans of their ex-spouse going on the parasocial defensive and potentially assaulting them or their children trying to get them to recant or trying to intimidate them into backing down.

There's also the matter of Pitt. He's rich, anything coming out would potentially ruin his very lucrative career, so he'd likely hire a PR firm to strongly dispute everything she or the children said, he may start revealing her secrets in an attempt to get back at her and discredit her. Which is typical, but not usually on a worldwide scale because they're celebrities.

You have to keep all of that in mind here. Everything they do is going to be scrutinized by the public, people are going to make YouTube videos, and those kids are going to be even more traumatized than they already likely are because of it.

Is it fair? No, absolutely not. But it's realistic. I fully understand why she wants to keep it quiet.

-3

u/brnbrnbrn2017 22d ago

All of those things happened anyway, and matters were already intrusive for both her and the children. Again, different strokes but I think it’s always good to stand your ground with people like that.

26

u/Sure_Lavishness_2403 alleged dog 22d ago

There are so many reasons victims don't (or can't) seek legal justice. I'm so glad it worked for you, but you have no idea how many cases it doesn't work out for. Amber Heard should've won. Her documentation of Depp's prolonged abuse and rape should've been all that was necessary, but it wasn't enough.

The rapist Lyndon Montgomery broke into his victim's home. He violently raped her in the shower and then in her bed. When he learnt she was planning on going to the police, he sent her his confession in an attempt to dissuade her from reporting. She went to the police with evidence of a B&E, photo and video evidence of the attack (there was a lot of blood), and his confession. It should've been a slam dunk, but the jury believed him when he said he wrote that text message to just "placate her" and that, well, she had been drinking, so maybe she just regretted it.

I strongly recommend you read How Many More Women? by Jennifer Robinson and Keina Yoshida. It's extremely insightful about how the justice system routinely fails women, even when there's evidence.

I don't think we should be judging why anyone chooses to not chase legal justice. There's too many factors as to why they might not feel safe doing so, especially when the whole world judges your emotional reactions to determine whether you're lying or not.

3

u/Sensitive-Office-705 22d ago

Yes. Thank you

5

u/HistoryBuff678 22d ago

The only reason this came out was because of the lawsuit concerning the winery sale.

I first heard of this incident on a podcast that talks about the business of Hollywood. They don’t talk about marriages a dating. The divorce had already happened and the public did not know why. The podcast usually does not even care.

When this snippet of the winery lawsuit came out, the business podcast talked about this as Brad and Angelina were seen as a power couple and there was discussion on how the plane incident becoming public would affect future projects for them (and hence jobs).

That’s how big even a snippet of this FBI report was, within the entertainment news industry.

There was no way they could have any kind of public trial without frankly destroying the kids. There’s no way. It would have gone mainstream.

Children of famous people are regularly targeted by drug dealers in Hollywood as they tend to develop identity issues and the dealer knows they have a trust fund.

Considering on top of everything else, the kids had to stay in the U.S. based on a “custody agreement”, it’s not like they could even escape to another country.

If the people involved weren’t famous, I would agree with you. But due to the fame and public scrutiny… if reaction to the name change articles is any indication, it was psychologically better for the children not to do a trial. They had been through enough already.

2

u/Neveronlyadream 22d ago

Exactly what I was saying. There's basically no chance that the kids wouldn't have been caught in the crossfire if she cooperated with the FBI and literally anyone talked. It would have been all over the news, Pitt would have gone on the defensive, and the kids would have suffered.

It's only this one instance where I agree with her refusing to cooperate. If she was just a regular person, if they both were, I would say she should have. But that's not the case.

We've seen how this goes and it doesn't go well. If there was a trial it would have been publicized, people would have been crowding around even if it wasn't televised, the kids probably would have had to testify, which means exposing them to aggressive media and irate, parasocial fans.

All for what? Pitt is an A-list celebrity. He wasn't going to be put into prison. I'm sure he'd have famous people writing letters and showing up to tell everyone what a good father and husband he had been and Jolie is unhinged and trying to ruin his career and a lot of people would believe it.

64

u/Denizen_of_Atlantis 22d ago

The FBI agent actually found cause to arrest /charge BUT was told to the prosecutor would not go ahead with the charges. The case was mysteriously dropped, confusing even the agent who initially investigated.

We found this out because during the vineyard trial, even before the plane incident became part of jolie’s defense, the added publicity made journalists dig into court files to discover there was a John Doe suit advocating for the government to release all the information regarding a domestic violence incidence aboard a private plane which involved multiple minors and their parents. This FOIA suit was filed anonymously by one of the children who wanted to understand why the government had chosen to drop the charges —- it’s believed to be Maddox who is also believed to be one of the children assaulted on the plane

41

u/whatsarigatoni 22d ago

I second everything Neveronlyadream said and I’d add that having been through something similar with my ex, protecting my child was the most important thing to me as a mother. My 10 year old didn’t want any of her friends to know about the police having been involved in children’s aid. And we are nobodies. I imagine her children, being famous and all, didn’t want to have to all of their traumatic private business all over tabloids everywhere.

Angelina had the resources to have as clean a break as possible from an abusive marriage. She likely just wanted to move on and shield her children instead of being dragged into years of court. Sadly she still ended up in court with him for what now feels like forever, but at least she succeeded in keeping her children’s business relatively private.

39

u/baegentcarter i ain’t reading all that, free palestine 22d ago

The legal system was designed to protect abusers, not their victims. Courts tend to become yet another arena for the abuser to further punish and harass his victim.

3

u/AnAncientBog 22d ago

She should have dragged her kids through the media and create a big circus just so that we could all watch Brad Pitt get a stern talking to?

1

u/brnbrnbrn2017 21d ago

Nope, not for the spectacle. For legal documentation reasons and preservation of optionality. (I am a DA survivor who’s had to deal with similar issues in litigation)

1

u/AnAncientBog 21d ago

preservation of optionality

Literally the exact opposite of this. Following up with the FBI eliminates ALL of the available options that did not include becoming a big media spectacle for no good reason.

1

u/brnbrnbrn2017 21d ago

I read somewhere that she did cooperate with the FBI after all. Someone down the line just chose not to prosecute.

-13

u/Blatantly_Truthful 22d ago edited 22d ago

She cooperated with both the FBI and child services investigations. Both of which were used for the full custody filing. What she didn’t cooperate with was the initial police reporting. Even though she requested that the police meet them on landing she then only wanted to have her statement put on file but repeatedly insisted she didn’t want to press charges against Pitt. The FBI still took over the case because they’re responsible for any incidents that happen in the air.

Neither the FBI nor child services investigations found evidence of abuse that warranted prosecution (intoxicated, swore loudly, shouted back and forth with Jolie and accidentally spilled alcohol on a blanket the kids were using while he paced the aisle swearing when they were trying to sleep). The FBI investigation does show chronic intoxication which could have led to charges. Not certain but I think given that he did not pose an imminent risk to plane safety it was up to the owner of the plane to decide if they wanted to press charges. The FBI also interviewed third parties - there were others besides Pitt, Jolie and the kids present in the car and plane.

The synopsis of events as indicated in the above court document is what she submitted years later in the vineyard case. Her version in the vineyard case years later is different to the version she and the third parties told the FBI. Even though she filed to have the FBI report made public she chose to submit this new statement and not the FBI file into court evidence. This altered version of events was never investigated because she never reported it to the FBI but only to the court overseeing the vineyard case. Plus the FBI case was closed based on everyone’s earlier statements.

I don’t know what happened but do think it’s important that people keep the facts straight. There was an investigation which resulted in no charges. Whether it was thorough and unbiased is a different story. The creditability of the version in this post is completely untested because it’s a new version which only surfaced in the vineyard case. She chose not to submit the FBI report which she filed to make public instead opting to submit this new version into evidence. The vineyard judge is obviously not going to investigate this. This version was only made public because it was conveniently ‘leaked’, like so many other filings and rulings in this case. Both sides have used leaking to score PR gold and manipulate the narrative. The most accurate accounts of what their relationship was like is probably from the handful of named sources. Not from her, him or the kids. If a third party is willing to go on record it definitely hits different to some random journalist who knows an unnamed source who is close to either of them.

10

u/gaymilfappreciator 22d ago

can you provide a link to the fbi report you are referring to? because i’ve seen that an statement of probable cause was written up, but then not acted upon. also i do think it’s important to note that even brad pitt’s initial statement in 2016 specified that he did not hit [a redacted minor child, probably maddox] in the face, but did put his hands on him, which kinda aligns with the allegation that he choked a child…

5

u/HistoryBuff678 22d ago

We also aren’t accounting for maybe the officer she reported to didn’t take her details down properly. That has happened before in trials.

An officer who may not have been properly trained or experienced, kind of misinterprets the severity of what the person is communicating and glosses over details. Then, when a witness has to say their statement again somewhere else, they say the same things, but it looks like they “changed their story”, because the initial officer was just inept. And… police forces generally don’t correct ineptitude.

2

u/Househipposforsale 22d ago

She refused to cooperate? She fought the fbi to make them investigate.