After an HOUR long game of Uno Attack with the kids, I ordered a smoothie from an underage cabana boy, cranked up the Bob Marley and hopped on the Internet to indulge in a little celebrity gossip. I read this article about Christie Brinkley's ugly divorce proceedings.
In brief: two years ago Christie's husband, Peter Cook, was caught having an affair with a teenager. Now they both want sole custody of the kids. What caught my attention was the attorney's statement as to why Christie wants to keep her kids:
Norman Sheresky, Cook's lead attorney, repeated his assertion that the supermodel (apparently one never outgrows this label) pushed for the trial to punish her architect husband. "I think it's pretty clear she's doing this out of revenge," he told reporters.
Later he said, "during the custody case you're going to find out how angry she was. There's an independent doctor who was appointed in this case. He said she was boinkered by anger."
She was boinkered by anger? Boinkered? According to Miriam Webster, there is no such word as boinkered. There is, however, BOINKED. Which, as we know, Christie was not the one who was boinked. I'm not a psych major but that seems like a fairly large Freudian slip, Norman.
Anyway, horny Norman went on to say that ol' Pete wants full custody of the kids because "Brinkley has inappropriately criticized Peter in front of the kids."
Just out of curiosity, how do you appropriately criticize someone who has shacked up with a girl just four years older than his step son? Yikes.
All the more reason to be boinkered, mon.