Alec Baldwin Goes to Court To Stop Voicemail Leaks

Alec Baldwin acted inappropriately when he left that irate message for his daughter Ireland, which as it turns out was the third message he left that evening. As it turns out, Kim Basinger, who is already facing multiple criminal contempt of court in her interference with Alec and daughter Ireland’s relationship, may have violated the court’s orders again when she released a copy of the voicemail, which embarrassed Ireland as well as Alec, and also puts Ireland in the middle of two feuding parents again. It may sound crazy, but maybe the court should award joint custody with no child support, with each parent required to go to counseling together, and parenting classes together. Just a thought, here’s more:

Alec Baldwin has just filed legal papers in Los Angeles County Superior Court to determine who gave TMZ the vile voice mail message Alec left for his daughter Ireland.

The document is an Order to Show Cause on why Basinger and her lawyers should not be held in contempt.

In a declaration filed by Baldwin’s lawyer, Vicki Greene, the attorney says "Petitioner [Basinger] is the only parent with custody, possession and control of the minor child’s telephone voice-mail message that was dissemination (sic) to Harvey Levin and TMZ."

Greene continues, "I do not know how Mr. Levin received any information about the court proceeding that was closed to the public, but again, it had to come from someone connected to the proceeding, and it was not me."

Greene adds, "If Mr. Levin had a tape recorded message between Respondent and the minor child, it had to have originated from Petitioner or her employees, agents or attorneys."

Greene ends with this: "Respondent [Baldwin] urges the Court to set a hearing to determine the source of the leak and whether and how its Orders have been violated. Information has been leaked to the press intentionally. The specific source is unknown, but it could only have come from Petitioner’s side of the case." Greene ends by alleging the leak "…goes against the Court’s stated desire to protect the child from unwarranted publicity."