Divorce proceedings between Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes are expected to cast light on the Church of Scientology, writes NIAMH SWEENEY
HE MAY be the highest-paid actor in Hollywood, but Tom Cruise could still be facing an embarrassing legal battle with his wife, Katie Holmes, after she filed for divorce last week.
According to one prominent ex-Scientologist, the Church of Scientology has much to fear from a messy or prolonged court battle between Cruise – a noted devotee – and his now estranged wife.
There has been much focus on Holmes’s decision to file divorce papers in New York, where she is understood to be seeking sole legal custody of the couple’s daughter Suri (6).
Manhattan-based matrimonial lawyer Robert Moses said the state in which the case is heard will prove to be significant.
“In California the presumption is of joint custody – ie joint decision-making – which means that both parties would have equal rights to make decisions about the child’s education, religion etc,” he said.
“In New York it is not a presumptive doctrine. It’s up to the court, in the best interests of the children, how custody outcomes are determined.”
Speculation has been rife that Cruise and Holmes have clashed over how to raise their only daughter together, particularly in relation to Scientology.
Marty Rathbun, a former senior member of the Church of Scientology, helped Cruise handle his 2001 divorce from Australian actress Nicole Kidman but later defected in 2004. He now writes a widely read blog which is critical of the tactics used by the church against its own members.
“Katie could blow Scientology wide open,” Rathbun told the Hollywood Reporter. “If Tom’s smart, he won’t fight her on anything, even custody. He should just try to settle his way out of it.”
Rathbun added: “She could press this sole-custody issue and litigate it, and that would be the biggest nightmare in the Church of Scientology’s history. It would be a circus they couldn’t survive.”
In 2001, Kidman agreed to joint custody of the couple’s two adopted children in what was a deftly handled, private affair.
Randall Balmer, a professor of American religious history at Columbia University in New York, believes it is unlikely the church will take it lying down, however, if Holmes does make an issue of her husband’s religion during custody hearings. “Given the history of this organisation and the way it treats individuals they regard as apostate, this is not going to be a pretty sight,” said Balmer. “They don’t play softball.”
Balmer also said he is reluctant to describe any group as a cult, but that Scientology “probably qualifies”. “What I use primarily as the criterion for qualification as a cult is the level of control that an organisation seeks to exert over its members. That’s clearly the case with Scientology. Generally, it’s the relentless moderating of individuals’ lives and having them account for how they spend their time and money. But also in the case of Scientology there’s clearly surveillance that’s part of the whole approach as well,” he said.
“This is a group that engages in all sorts of clandestine and scurrilous tactics to defame and, in some cases, ruin individuals who are critical of the organisation. Whenever I’ve lectured on Scientology I’ve subsequently heard from the organisation,” Balmer said. “I have to say that they’re a bit scary.”
Earlier this week, rumours were rife among entertainment news media that Holmes had filed a so-called “emergency application” in New York – essentially asking for an emergency court hearing. Such hearings are often associated with custody battles in which one parent alleges immediate or irreparable harm to a child.
Holmes’s lawyer, Jonathan Wolfe, has since denied that such an application had been filed, or that she was seeking to make the divorce proceedings public.
“Other than her action for divorce, the only pending application filed by Ms Holmes remains her quest for an anonymous caption,” Wolfe said, referring to the fact that Holmes filed her papers anonymously.
According to attorney Robert Moses, such proceedings are usually confidential, and any details made public are usually leaked by one side or the other.
“It’s usually prohibited for attorneys to speak on confidential matters,” he said. “It seems to me like Cruise is getting his legal approach and ideas together, and, from what I understand, he’s going to try and move it to California because undoubtedly the custody laws will favour him better there than they do here.”
Bert Fields, Cruise’s long-time lawyer, has said the Top Gun star will file a rival divorce case. In an interview this week, Fields told BBC Radio 1 that he was allowing Holmes’s legal team to “play the media” before Cruise would tell his side of the story.
However, Moses said it is unclear if Holmes and her daughter meet a six-month residency requirement for the custody case to be heard in New York. “Basically there is no jurisdiction over children in custody issues unless the children have resided in the state for six months or more prior to the filing of the action,” he said.
“If they’ve been living in California there’s a very good chance this case will be heard in California,” he added.
Holmes has been photographed several times this week out-and-about in New York with daughter Suri, buying groceries, eating ice-cream and meeting friends for lunch.
A spokesperson for Cruise had earlier released a statement on the actor’s behalf reacting to the news of the divorce proceedings.
“Kate has filed for divorce and Tom is deeply saddened and is concentrating on his three children,” Amanda Lundberg told the Associated Press. “Please allow them their privacy to work this out.”
Cruise has two adopted children with his second wife, Nicole Kidman. He was married to actress Mimi Rogers in the 1980s.