Legal

Kevin Costner and Christine Baumgartner have settled their super bitter divorce and finalized the judgment ... TMZ has learned.

According to legal docs, obtained by TMZ, Kevin and Christine signed a Marital Settlement Agreement, which they filed with the court. Since more than 6 months have passed since Christine filed for divorce -- the required waiting time in California -- the case is over.

Details of the settlement are not yet available, but we're told the judge validated the prenup that became a big bone of contention during the divorce.

Both parties asked for joint custody of their 3 kids, and, as you know, Christine got $63,000 a month in child support. She was asking for an eye-popping $248,000 a month, but her justification was shaky, to say the least. One of the items she put in her expense declaration -- $100,000 for cosmetic surgery. BTW, before the child support ruling, Kevin offered her $75k a month.

Kevin and Christine personally signed the document signaling the settlement, along with their respective lawyers, disso queen Laura Wasser and Marisa Beuoy.

The document also says the parties waive the typical requirement of co-parenting classes.

Kevin Costner y Christine Baumgartner han resuelto su amargo divorcio, según ha averiguado TMZ.

Según documentos legales obtenidos por TMZ, Kevin y Christine firmaron un acuerdo marital, que fue presentado ante el tribunal. Dado que han pasado más de 6 meses desde que Christine pidió el divorcio, el tiempo de espera que se requiere en California, el caso ha terminado.

Los detalles del acuerdo aún no están disponibles, pero nos dicen que el juez validó el acuerdo prenupcial que se convirtió en un gran objeto de discordia durante el divorcio.

Ambas partes pedían la custodia compartida de sus tres hijos y, como ya saben, Christine recibía 63.000 dólares al mes en concepto de manutención. Ella pedía 248.000 dólares al mes, pero su justificación era, como mínimo, poco convincente. Una de las cosas que puso en su declaración de gastos fue que necesitaba $100.000 para cirugías estéticas. Por cierto, antes de la sentencia final, Kevin le había ofrecido $75k al mes.

Kevin y Christine firmaron personalmente el acuerdo estipulado en el documento, junto con sus respectivos abogados, la famosa abogada Laura Wasser y Marisa Beuoy.

El documento también dice que las partes renuncian al requisito de clases de co-paternidad.

McDonald's está siendo arrastrado a los tribunales por dos empleadas que dicen que la cadena de comida rápida está haciendo que sea difícil para ellas extraerse la leche materna en el trabajo, pues aseguran que no hay tiempo ni lugar para hacerlo.

De acuerdo con una nueva demanda colectiva obtenida por TMZ, dos mujeres llamadas Kathleen Faber y Lexis Mays dicen que volvieron a trabajar a McDonald's después de haber dado a luz y aparentemente están encontrando obstáculos para amamantar.

Las mujeres dicen que le dijeron a sus gerentes que necesitarían sacarse leche en el trabajo. Aunque ellos comentaron que eso no sería un problema, no ha resultado ser el caso.

Faber afirma que su McDonald's en Kansas no tiene un espacio seguro ni privado para ella para extraerse la leche materna y ha tenido que hacerlo en la esquina de una sala de existencias para evitar la visión de las cámaras de seguridad y los empleados.

Mays dice lo mismo de su McDonald's en Nueva York y afirma que ha tenido que hacerlo en la oficina trasera, que no tiene puerta y está abierta a otros miembros del personal, que vienen a la habitación cuando ella está bombeando.

En la demanda, ambas mujeres también dicen que no tienen suficiente tiempo de descanso para extraerse la leche materna durante sus turnos en el Golden Arches.

Faber y Mays dicen que la falta de adaptaciones para la lactancia materna en McDonald's les está causando ansiedad, incomodidad, humillación, vergüenza y angustia emocional.

Las mujeres dicen que la cadena no está cumpliendo con las leyes federales que requieren lugares seguros y privados para las madres lactantes en el lugar de trabajo y quieren que un tribunal intervenga por ellas y ayude a otras empleadas en una situación similar.

Priscilla Presley está siendo llevada a los tribunales por una mujer que dice que se asoció con ella para ayudarla a salir de dificultades financieras, las que ella afirma dejaron a la ex esposa de Elvis en bancarrota.

Según documentos legales presentados en septiembre de 2023 obtenidos por TMZ, Priscilla está siendo demandada por una mujer llamada Brigitte Kruse, quien afirma que se asoció con Priscilla en 2022 para formar una compañía llamada Priscilla Presley Partners.

La idea -dice Kruse- era administrar sus negocios y asuntos personales y "evitar la ruina financiera y la vergüenza pública de Priscilla", esto según la demanda.

Kruse afirma que en ese momento, Priscilla estaba al borde de la insolvencia frente a casi $700K en deudas tributarias no pagadas sin garantía de ingresos futuros. Alega que Priscilla estaba a unos 60 días del colapso financiero.

Kruse dice que ha gastado una cantidad significativa de dinero y tiempo en el desarrollo de proyectos para lanzar en conjunto con la película "Priscilla" de Sofia Coppola que se estrenó recientemente, pero afirma que Priscilla cortó abruptamente toda comunicación alrededor de agosto de 2023 y la dejó fuera en el frío de todo el dinero que podría haber llegado desde entonces.

Kruse está demandando por incumplimiento de contrato y la búsqueda de daños y perjuicios no especificados.

Priscilla ha presentado una moción para desestimar la demanda, alegando que trató de salir del acuerdo después de que se enteró de que "Kruse y su socio estaban tratando de apropiarse indebidamente de los activos de la Sra. Presley y estaban participando en otros actos de mala conducta".

Marty Singer, el abogado de Priscilla también le dice a TMZ que las afirmaciones hechas contra ella en la demanda carecen completamente de mérito.

Y añade: "Mi cliente hizo reclamaciones significativas contra PPP y sus directores Brigitte Kruse y Kevin Fialko por apropiación indebida de cientos de miles de dólares mucho antes de que se presentara esta demanda engañosa. Anticipamos plenamente que mi cliente será reivindicado y obtendrá una sentencia contra ellos".

McDonald's is being dragged to court by two employees who say the fast food chain is making it tough on them to pump breastmilk on the job ... they say there's no time or place.

According to a new class action lawsuit, obtained by TMZ, two women named Kathleen Faber and Lexis Mays say they returned to work at McDonald's after giving birth and are apparently running into obstacles when it comes to pumping breastmilk for their babies.

The women say they told their managers they would need to pump at work and claim they were told it wouldn't be an issue ... but they say that's turned out not to be the case.

Faber claims her McDonald's in Kansas has no secure, private space for her to pump breast milk, leaving her to pump milk from the corner of a stock room so she can avoid the sight lines of security cameras and male employees.

Mays says her McDonald's in New York doesn't have a secure, private space to pump either ... she claims she's been left to pump from a back office that doesn't have a door and is wide open to other crew members, who she says come in the room when she's pumping.

In the suit, both women also say they don't have enough break time to pump breast milk during their shifts at the Golden Arches.

Faber and Mays say the lack of breastfeeding accommodation at McDonald's is causing them anxiety, discomfort, humiliation, embarrassment and emotional distress.

The women say McDonald's is not complying with federal laws requiring secure and private places for breastfeeding mothers to pump in the workplace ... and they want a court to step in and help them and all similarly situated employees.

Priscilla Presley is being taken to court by a woman who says she partnered with her to help her get out of some financial difficulties ... ones she claims left Elvis's ex-wife broke.

According to legal docs filed back in September 2023, obtained by TMZ, Priscilla is being sued by a woman named Brigitte Kruse, who claims she partnered with Priscilla in 2022 to form a company called Priscilla Presley Partners.

The idea, Kruse says, was to manage her business and personal affairs and "prevent Priscilla's financial ruin and public embarrassment" -- this according to the lawsuit.

Kruse claims that, at the time, Priscilla was on the brink of insolvency ... facing nearly $700K in unpaid tax debt with no assurance of future income. She alleges Priscilla was about 60 days away from financial collapse.

Kruse says she's spent a significant amount of money and time developing projects to launch in conjunction with Sofia Coppola's "Priscilla" movie that came out recently ... but claims Priscilla abruptly cut off all communication around August 2023 and left her out in the cold on all the money that may have come in since then.

Kruse is suing for breach of contract and seeking unspecified damages.

Priscilla has filed a motion to dismiss the suit, claiming she tried to get out of the arrangement after she learned "Kruse and her associate were attempting to misappropriate Ms. Presley's assets and were engaging in other acts of wrongdoing."

Marty Singer, Priscilla's attorney also tells TMZ the claims made against her in the lawsuit are completely without merit.

He adds: "My client made significant claims against PPP and its principals Brigitte Kruse and Kevin Fialko for misappropriating hundreds of thousands of dollars long before this specious lawsuit was filed. We fully anticipate that my client will be vindicated and obtain a judgment against them."

Russell Brand está negando con vehemencia las acusaciones de que se emborrachó en un set de filmación y agredió sexualmente a una actriz. Dice que no hay manera de que sus afirmaciones sean ciertas, porque estaba sobrio.

En nuevos documentos legales obtenidos por TMZ, Russell se está defendiendo de una demanda que asegura que este expuso su pene frente a una mujer en el set de la película "Arthur" y luego la agredió sexualmente en un baño.

Russell afirma que no recuerda a la actriz que lo está demandando por el supuesto incidente de 2010, y que toda su demanda se basa en la falsa afirmación de que estaba intoxicado en el set.

Russell dice que solo estaba interpretando el papel de borracho en la película y que no había consumido drogas ni probado un sorbo de alcohol desde el 13 de diciembre de 2002, afirmando que llevaba 8 años sobrio en el momento de la supuesta agresión.

En los documentos presentados por su abogado Andrew Brettler, Russell dice que la mujer "es incapaz de distinguir la actuación de la realidad". Añade que su trabajo era "actuar como borracho y retratar a un borracho", pero que "no bebió ni un sorbo de alcohol ni consumió drogas en ningún momento durante la producción".

Como informamos, la denunciante, que está demandando como Jane Doe, afirma que antes de la supuesta agresión "parecía intoxicado, olía a alcohol y andaba con una botella de vodka en el set".

Russell dice que la botella de vodka era solo un accesorio para la película y que no contenía alcohol real.

La mujer afirma que Russell la siguió a un cuarto de baño donde la agredió sexualmente, aunque él dice que eso tampoco es cierto y alega que su memoria es "defectuosa".

Russell Brand is vehemently denying accusations he got drunk on a movie set and sexually assaulted an actress ... he says there's no way her claims are true, because he was sober.

In new legal docs, obtained by TMZ, Russell pushes back on a lawsuit alleging he exposed his penis to a woman on the set of the movie "Arthur," and then sexually assaulted her in a bathroom.

Russell claims he doesn't recall the actress who is suing him over the alleged 2010 incident, and he says her entire suit rests on the false claim he was intoxicated on set.

RB says he was just playing a drunk in the movie ... and he hasn't done drugs or had a sip of alcohol since Dec. 13, 2002 ... claiming he was 8 years sober at the time of the alleged assault.

In the docs, filed by his attorney Andrew Brettler, Russell says the woman "is unable to distinguish acting from reality." He says his job was to "act drunk and portray a drunk," but "he did not drink a sip of alcohol or consume any drugs at any time during production."

As we reported ... Russell's accuser, who is suing as a Jane Doe, claims prior to the alleged assault he "appeared intoxicated, smelled of alcohol, and was carrying a bottle of vodka on set."

Russell says the vodka bottle was just a prop for the film ... and contained no real booze.

The woman claims Russell followed her into a bathroom where he sexually assaulted her ... but he says that's not true either, claiming her memory is "faulty."

¡Un oficial de policía de Florida se parece más a un personaje de los dibujos animados de "Reno 911!" cuando confundió la caída de una bellota en su carro patrulla con una bala y se puso a disparar como loco en contra del vehículo!

El video filmado en noviembre, que acaba de ser publicado, muestra al ayudante del sheriff del condado de Okaloosa, Jesse Hernández, deteniendo a un individuo por supuestamente enviar mensajes de texto amenazadores. Hernández y su compañero esposaron al hombre y luego lo metieron en la parte trasera de su carro patrulla.

Todo parecía ir bien hasta que Hernández oyó lo que percibió como un disparo, lo que lo llevó a rodar mientras sacaba su arma y luego a disparar múltiples tiros hacia su carro.

Parece que Hernández descargó todas sus balas mientras Marquis Jackson, de 22 años, estaba indefenso al interior del vehículo policial, desarmado y completamente restringido. Sin embargo, Hernández claramente pensó que este había sido quien inició los disparos contra él desde el interior del coche.

En medio del pánico, su compañera, que no oyó nada parecido a un disparo, parecía confundido sobre su frenética reacción y también comenzó a dispararle al coche.

Milagrosamente, ambos fallaron, pero el video de cuerpo de Hernández muestra que su reacción fue completamente exagerada o al menos esa fue la conclusión de la investigación de la Oficina del Sheriff. Los funcionarios de Okaloosa determinaron que su uso de la fuerza no fue razonable. A su compañera se le dio un pase, pues solo siguió sus acciones.

En el curso de la investigación, Hernández se dio cuenta de que el sonido que había escuchado literalmente era solo una bellota cayendo sobre el capó. Hernández terminó renunciando a raíz de todo esto y no fue acusado penalmente.

Por lo que sabemos, Jackson no ha demandado todavía, pero ha dicho a los medios de comunicación locales que estaba "dañado" por lo que pasó.

Una vez que el polvo se asentó, la Oficina del Sheriff del Condado de Okaloosa dijo esto: "Estamos muy agradecidos de que el Sr. Jackson no resultara herido y no tenemos ninguna razón para pensar que el ex ayudante del sheriff Hernández actuara con malicia. Estamos limitados en nuestra respuesta debido a litigios pendientes. Pero que esto quede claro, entendemos que esta situación fue traumática para el Sr. Jackson y todos los involucrados y hemos incorporado el tiroteo de este oficial en nuestro entrenamiento para tratar de asegurarnos de que nada similar vuelva a suceder."

A Florida sheriff's deputy is looking more like a cartoonish cop from "Reno 911!" on body cam footage of him mistaking an acorn hitting his patrol car for bullets ... prompting him to open fire on the vehicle.

The video, which was just released, shows Okaloosa County deputy Jesse Hernandez on the job, detaining a guy back in November for allegedly sending threatening texts. Hernandez and his partner cuffed the man and put him in the back of their patrol car.

All seemed to be going well, until Hernandez appeared to hear what he perceived as a shot being fired -- which catapulted him into a frantic drop and roll as he drew his weapon and started firing multiple shots at his car.

Hernandez seems to unload his entire clip ... and, remember, 22-year-old Marquis Jackson was helplessly sitting inside the patrol car, unarmed and completely restrained -- yet, Hernandez clearly thought Jackson had shot at him from inside the car.

Amid the panic, his partner -- who didn't hear anything like a gunshot -- seemed confused as to why he was freaking out, and also started shooting at their car.

Miraculously, both of them missed Jackson, but Hernandez's body cam video shows he completely overreacted ... which was the finding of the Sheriff's Office investigation. Okaloosa officials determined his use of deadly force wasn't reasonable, and his partner got a pass ... since she only fired based on his actions.

Over the course of the investigation ... Hernandez was made aware that what he thought he heard was literally just an acorn falling on his car's hood. Hernandez ended up resigning in the aftermath of all this ... and was not criminally charged.

From what we can tell, Jackson hasn't sued, yet, but has told local media outlets he was "damaged" from what he went through.

Once the dust settled, the Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office said this ... "We are very thankful Mr. Jackson wasn’t injured and we have no reason to think former Deputy Hernandez acted with any malice. We are limited in further response due to pending litigation. But let this be clear, we understand this situation was traumatic for Mr. Jackson and all involved and have incorporated this officer-involved shooting into our training to try to ensure nothing similar happens again."

8:13 AM PT -- BOP tells TMZ that Todd and Julie actually could've communicated on Valentine's Day -- but they just had to get it approved and planned out beforehand. They also tell us inmates get their mail in a prompt timeframe, despite Todd's claims.

Todd and Julie Chrisley won't be sending their love to each other on Valentine's Day ... which their attorney says is coming as a huge drag.

The couple's attorney, Jay Surgent, tells TMZ the duo won't be able to communicate with one another on Valentine's Day 'cause inmates aren't permitted to get in touch while in different federal prisons.

You'll recall ... Todd was given a 12-year sentence at FPC Pensacola for a slew of fraud charges, while Julie was sent to FMC Lexington in Kentucky for 7 years -- so not only are they in separate prisons, but they're also in different states.

Their attorney tells us the Federal Bureau of Prisons has a no-crossover/contact policy... but Jay doesn't quite understand it, telling us it creates zero security problems or cause for concern.

Jay says the Chrisleys being unable to communicate during V-Day will be a real bummer ... especially cause their love for each other is unwavering and distance has only made the heart grow fonder.

Meanwhile, Jay says when he last spoke with Todd last week, TC said he wanted to pursue an investigation against FPC Pensacola prison administration for mail theft and general corruption ... among other things. He also claims he still hasn't received the mail he's been expecting, which raises further concerns with him.

As we all know by now, Todd's been vocal about the living conditions at his new digs ... ripping them apart for their disgusting food, possible mold, and bad plumbing.

But as it relates to the heart ... it seems like Todd and Julie's love is under lock and key for the time being.

Todd y Julie Chrisley no podrán amarse el Día de San Valentín, ya que su abogado tiene malas noticias.

El abogado de la pareja, Jay Surgent, le dice a TMZ que el dúo no será capaz de comunicarse entre el Día de San Valentín, porque a los reclusos no se les permite ponerse en contacto, además de están en diferentes prisiones federales.

Usted recordará que Todd fue condenado a 12 años en por una serie de cargos de fraude, mientras que Julie fue enviada a FMC Lexington en Kentucky durante 7 años, por lo que no solo están en prisiones separadas, sino que también están en diferentes estados.

Su abogado nos dice que la Oficina Federal de Prisiones tiene una política cero contacto... pero Jay no lo entiende muy bien y nos dice que no crea problemas de seguridad y no hay nada de que preocuparse.

Jay dice que los Chrisleys no podrán comunicarse durante este día tan especial y será realmente triste, ya que la distancia solo ha hecho que la relación se fortalezca.

Mientras tanto, Jay dice que la última vez que habló con Todd la semana pasada, dijo que quería seguir una investigación contra la administración de la prisión de Pensacola FPC para el robo de correo y la corrupción en general... entre otras cosas. También afirma que todavía no ha recibido el correo que ha estado esperando, lo que plantea más preocupaciones con él.

Como todos sabemos, Todd ha sido abierto sobre sus nuevas condiciones de vida, mostrándonos aparte por su comida repugnante y la mala plomería.

OnlyFans model Courtney Clenney's explosive tirades against her BF escalated significantly when she was under the influence of drugs -- though it was Christian Obumseli himself who'd provide her with an easy supply.

OF star Patrycia "Paty K" Kratiuk witnessed it firsthand ... telling us on "TMZ Investigates: Killer OnlyFans Model: Deadly Love Story," airing on FOX Monday night at 9/8 Central, how she saw Christian offer up drugs to CC on a platter, urging her to do a line of coke.

Though, it wasn't a shock to Patrycia -- her manager warned her of Courtney's wild ways ahead of their first meet-up in Palm Springs for an OF content shoot ... telling her she was heavily into drugs/alcohol, and advising her to leave as soon as they finished filming together.

Fellow OF model Kristina Santa backs Patrycia's claims ... saying Christian would appear to get a kick out of Courtney being a "little f***ed up" -- this info shedding chilling new light into their violent relationship, and indicating the toxicity between them may have been a two-way street.

Kristina adds, on the surface, they gave the illusion of being a perfect couple ... but things went from 0 to 100 real quick when drugs and alcohol were involved.

But, it was Courtney's drug-fueled rages that always reached boiling point ... with Christian solely being the target of her temper. As you know ... she stabbed him to death in the Miami condo they shared on April 3, 2022, after getting wind he was flirting with other girls during an OnlyFans content trip in Aspen.

OnlyFans model Courtney Clenney hurled a racial slur at her boyfriend mid-argument ... and her parents say she did it to get now-deceased boyfriend Christian Obumseli to leave.

We spoke to Courtney's parents, Deborah and Kim Clenney, for a new 'TMZ Investigates' airing Monday at 9 PM ET/8 Central on FOX ... when the question of a slur Courtney used during an argument with Christian came up.

As we previously reported ... Christian secretly recorded Courtney calling him the n-word repeatedly during a fight months before she killed him in the Miami condo where they lived together.

The audio's brutal to hear ... and also explainable according to CC's parents -- who are now facing criminal charges for allegedly illegally accessing Christian's computer after he was killed.

We spoke to them before the arrest -- they have never spoken publicly before -- and they told us Courtney said she needed to use such a horrible slur because she was trying to get Christian to leave, with her mom Deborah claiming Courtney said no "self-respecting Black man would stick around after being called that name."

Deborah went on to say Courtney liked Christian partly because he was Black ... and she doesn't think their daughter would have been prosecuted if she were Black or if Christian were white.

Clenney pled not guilty to second-degree murder after stabbing her boyfriend in the chest ... her parents tell us she will plead self-defense.

Ozzy Osbourne slammed Kanye West for using a Black Sabbath sample on his new album without permission -- but the rocker's wife is even more furious ... tearing him a new one.

Here's the deal ... OO hopped on X Friday and absolutely torched Ye for featuring a sample of an old BS song on one of his own tracks for 'Vultures.' Ozzy seemed to think it was 'War Pigs,' even though it really sounded like 'Iron Man.' Either way, he was fuming.

Ozzy wrote, "@kanyewest ASKED PERMISSION TO SAMPLE A SECTION OF A 1983 LIVE PERFORMANCE OF “WAR PIG” FROM THE US FESTIVAL WITHOUT VOCALS & WAS REFUSED PERMISSION BECAUSE HE IS AN ANTISEMITE AND HAS CAUSED UNTOLD HEARTACHE TO MANY."

He added, "HE WENT AHEAD AND USED THE SAMPLE ANYWAY AT HIS ALBUM LISTENING PARTY LAST NIGHT. I WANT NO ASSOCIATION WITH THIS MAN!"

Sharon herself echoed Ozzy's sentiment to TMZ -- telling us ... "Kanye f***ed with the wrong Jew this time" ... going on to say that she and Ozzy have fired off a cease and desist to Ye.

She goes on to say that somebody from Kanye's camp reached out to them 3 weeks ago for permission to use a Black Sabbath song -- something we're told SO and OO said "absolutely not" to. In fact, it sounds like their rebuffing of Ye is personal.

Sharon says Ozzy rarely refuses people who wanna do this ... but in this instance, he had a "special f***ing occasion to say no." We should note -- Sharon herself was raised Jewish.

Kanye's antisemitism is a nonstarter for Sharon and Ozzy -- and we're told they both feel the way he's conducted himself of late is unacceptable. Sharon, specifically, tells us Ye these days "represents hate," and that he's a "disrespectful antisemite."

She also calls Kanye dangerous ... and adds for good measure, "the motherf***er's a pig."

Sharon finishes by saying she and the Osbourne family want no association with Kanye -- and they don't even care if the Black Sabbath sample is just a second or two. They don't want him using Ozzy's music, period -- and if he keeps pushing it, he might have a legal battle on his hands.

One other thing ... you can tell Sharon and Ozzy have had disdain for Kanye for a while now -- just this past Halloween, the two of them dressed and Ye and Bianca ... and were on point.

Ozzy Osbourne criticó a Kanye West por usar un sample de Black Sabbath en su nuevo álbum sin permiso, pero la esposa del rockero está aún más furiosa ...

Este es el asunto: Ozzy corrió a X el viernes para atacar a Ye por incluir un sample de una vieja canción de Black Sabbath en uno de sus temas para "Vultures". Ozzy creía que era "War Pigs", pero sonaba más como "Iron Man". En cualquier caso, estaba que echaba humo.

Ozzy escribió: "@kanyewest PIDIÓ PERMISO PARA USAR UNA SECCIÓN DE UNA INTERPRETACIÓN EN VIVO DE 1983 DE "WAR PIG" DEL US FESTIVAL Y SE LE DENEGÓ EL PERMISO PORQUE ES UN ANTISEMITA Y HA CAUSADO UN DOLOR INMENSO A MUCHOS".

Y añadió: "ÉL SE ADELANTÓ Y USÓ EL SAMPLE DE TODAS MANERAS EN LA FIESTA DE ESCUCHA DE SU ÁLBUM ANOCHE. NO QUIERO RELACIONARME CON ESTE HOMBRE".

La propia Sharon hizo eco del sentimiento de Ozzy con TMZ. Nos dijo: "Kanye se metió con el judío equivocado esta vez", diciendo que ella y Ozzy han disparado una advertencia formal a Ye (su nombre en inglés es cease and desist).

Ella continúa diciendo que alguien del equipo de Kanye se puso en contacto con ellos hace 3 semanas para pedirles permiso para utilizar una canción de Black Sabbath, a lo que Sharon y Ozy dijeron "absolutamente no". De hecho, parece que su rechazo a Ye es personal.

Sharon dice que Ozzy rara vez le niega este tipo de peticiones, pero en esta vez tenía una "ocasión especial para decir que no". Hay que señalar que Sharon fue criada como judía.

Nos dicen que ambos sienten que la forma en que se ha comportado últimamente es inaceptable. Sharon, en concreto, nos dice que Ye por estos días "representa el odio", y que es un "antisemita irrespetuoso".

También lo llama peligroso y añade que por si fuera poco, "el hijo de puta es un cerdo".

Sharon termina diciendo que ella y la familia Osbourne no quieren ningún tipo de asociación con Kanye, y ni siquiera les importa si el sample de Black Sabbath es solo un segundo o dos. No quieren que utilice la música de Ozzy, y punto, y si sigue insistiendo, podría tener una batalla legal en sus manos.

Otra cosa ... Se nota que Sharon y Ozzy tienen desdén por Kanye desde hace un tiempo. Justo este pasado Halloween, los dos se disfrazaron de Ye y Bianca y dieron con el outfit.