Was Raquel Leviss‘ authorized drama with Scheana Shay only a PR stunt?
By now you already know the 28-year-old actuality star beforehand obtained a short lived restraining order towards her co-star, claiming the mother of 1 punched her when she came upon about her affair with Tom Sandoval. The 37-year-old denied attacking Raquel, claiming the “supposed darkish markings round [Leviss’] left eye have been there for months.” She even went as far as to accuse her of “sabotaging” the Season 10 reunion because the two weren’t allowed to work together or be inside 100 yards of one another on the time. And sure, Raquel did find yourself dropping it the day after the reunion was filmed — though their courtroom listening to wasn’t scheduled till a number of days afterward March 29. Or did she??
Associated: Ariana Refuses To Movie With Sandoval — What Does This Imply For VPR?!
Chances are you’ll recall, Raquel doubled down on Wednesday that the bodily altercation occurred, leading to a “everlasting scar” on her left eyebrow. Both approach, this authorized matter clearly made issues difficult when it got here to the reunion, forcing manufacturing to get inventive and make the castmates swap locations all through filming on Thursday.
However in a surprising twist, Raquel introduced her resolution to drop her request for a everlasting restraining order on Friday — and claimed it was all Scheana’s fault they weren’t in a position to movie the reunion collectively:
“My workforce tried to work with Scheana on a mutually helpful settlement hoping to get the TRO dropped earlier so we may movie [the reunion episode] collectively. The TRO was supposed to offer a cooling-off interval after I used to be punched however I didn’t wish to proceed with the everlasting RO nor did I wish to trigger Scheana additional agony and stress.”
Critically???
The day after the reunion, now you don’t have a everlasting scar anymore?? The timing of this newest replace of their authorized drama is just a little sus, in the event you ask us. And we’re not the one ones who assume so. A supply advised Web page Six on Friday that Raquel supposedly dropping her requisition for a everlasting restraining order is “simply one other PR stunt,” including:
“There isn’t a mechanism to terminate a civil momentary restraining order (TRO) early, in contrast to a home violence momentary restraining order.”
So her announcement doesn’t imply something? Wild!
The insider additional accused Raquel of trying to keep away from getting “in entrance of a decide,” saying:
“Raquel made false claims with a purpose to acquire the TRO towards Scheana and is conscious that having to account for these in entrance of a decide are usually not in her greatest curiosity.”
Contemplating the previous pageant queen (as a substitute of sending it to Darrell) had Andy Cohen serve Scheana with faux authorized docs in the midst of the reunion, it wouldn’t be surprising if this newest transfer was a PR stunt.
And innerestingly sufficient, Raquel claimed her lawyer eliminated the castmates’ listening to from the courtroom calendar and was submitting the suitable paperwork requested by the courtroom right this moment to dismiss the entire thing. Nevertheless, Web page Six famous that the SUR waitress by no means wanted Scheana’s permission to finish the restraining order petition — so she may have ended it even when they couldn’t come to an settlement and she or he really wished to finish her “agony and stress” over the scenario earlier than the reunion. That’s not an excellent search for Raquel.
It’s also unknown when the PRO case shall be dropped because the outlet reported that the Los Angeles Superior Courtroom calendar nonetheless has their listening to scheduled for March 29. Hmm. And as Scheana’s legal professional beforehand said:
“There isn’t a approach for Rachel to ‘drop’ the momentary restraining order earlier than subsequent week’s listening to. That is California regulation and even on the courtroom’s web site.”
Will she simply be capable to finish the entire thing? May she get in hassle, assuming the sources are proper? Reactions, Perezcious readers? Tell us within the feedback beneath.
[Image via MEGA/WENN]
