Christie Brinkley & Peter Cook: The Public Trial She Demanded
She refused to seal the trial — because she wanted the world to see what he did
Key Facts
What Happened
Christie Brinkley was one of the most famous supermodels in the world — three consecutive Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue covers, a decade-long contract with CoverGirl, and an American icon. She married architect Peter Cook in 1996 in a lavish Hamptons ceremony. They were fixtures of the elite East End social scene. By all appearances, they were the golden couple of the Hamptons.
In 2006, Brinkley discovered that Cook had been having an affair with his 18-year-old office assistant, Diana Bianchi. Cook had also spent thousands on internet pornography and had been paying Bianchi $300,000 to keep the affair quiet. Brinkley filed for divorce. What made the case extraordinary was Brinkley's insistence that the trial be open to the public. Cook's attorneys fought for sealed proceedings, arguing that publicity would harm their two young children. The judge agreed with Brinkley.
The 2008 trial became a Hamptons sensation. Cook was forced to testify publicly about his affair with the teenager, his pornography habits, and his secret payments. The humiliation was devastating and clearly intentional. Brinkley's legal strategy was not just about winning custody and assets — it was about accountability. She wanted the public to see the truth behind the polished Hamptons facade. Her attorneys argued that secrecy would only protect the wrongdoer.
Brinkley won primary custody of their two children, the Bridgehampton estate, and favorable financial terms. Cook received $2.1 million. But the lasting lesson was about the strategic use of public proceedings. Brinkley's decision to keep the trial open was legally risky — judges can view it as prioritizing revenge over children's welfare. But it was also effective: the public record made Cook's behavior undeniable. The case became a textbook example of how controlling the narrative in divorce can be as important as the legal arguments themselves.
Legal Breakdown: Public vs. Sealed Proceedings
Open vs. Sealed Divorce Proceedings
Most divorce proceedings are public by default, but either party can request the court to seal records, especially when children are involved. Cook argued for sealed proceedings; Brinkley wanted transparency. The judge ruled in Brinkley's favor, finding that the public interest in open proceedings outweighed Cook's privacy claims. This decision is not automatic — judges weigh factors including the impact on children, the nature of the allegations, and whether sealing would serve or undermine justice.
Humiliation as Legal Strategy
Brinkley's demand for a public trial was a deliberate strategy to expose Cook's behavior and gain leverage. Public proceedings can pressure the other party to settle more favorably to avoid further exposure. However, this strategy carries risks: judges may view it as vindictive, it exposes both parties' private lives, and it can traumatize children who are old enough to read coverage. Courts increasingly discourage this approach when children's welfare is at stake.
Financial Misconduct and Hidden Payments
Cook's $300,000 payment to Bianchi was significant not just as evidence of the affair, but as potential dissipation of marital assets — spending community funds on extramarital purposes. Courts can consider such dissipation when dividing property, potentially awarding the innocent spouse a larger share to compensate for wasted assets.
What This Means for Your Divorce
- →You have the right to request open or sealed proceedings — understand the strategic implications of each choice before deciding.
- →Public trials create permanent records. Consider whether the short-term satisfaction of exposing a spouse is worth the long-term consequences for your children.
- →Secret payments to affair partners can constitute dissipation of marital assets, giving the other spouse grounds for a larger property share.
- →Controlling the narrative in a divorce — through public proceedings, media strategy, or testimony — is a real legal tactic, but it must be balanced against your children's wellbeing.
Going Through a Divorce?
Get confidential guidance tailored to your situation — free, private, and available 24/7.
Related Cases
Cardi B (Belcalis Almanzar) & Offset (Kiari Cephus)
United States · 2024
Their entire marriage played out on Instagram — and so did the divorce
Public & CelebrityKevin Hart & Torrei Hart
United States · 2011
She supported him when he had nothing — then the money came after the divorce was final
Public & CelebrityDemi Moore & Ashton Kutcher
United States · 2013
Their relationship lived on Twitter — and so did its destruction
Public & CelebrityWas this helpful? Help us keep it free.
divorce911.ai is funded entirely by donations. Every dollar keeps the AI assistant and 1,700+ guides free for people in crisis.
Know someone going through a divorce? This could help them.
This article is based on publicly available court records, news reports, and legal analysis. It is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is created by reading this content.
Divorce laws vary by jurisdiction. Always consult a licensed attorney in your area before making legal decisions.