As we enter the fifth day of the TomKat divorce saga, the drama and intrigue is escalating to Bold and the Beautiful proportions.
It was only late last week that the news broke of former Dawson’s Creek actress, Katie Holmes decision to file for divorce from her movie star husband and the world’s best known Scientologist, Tom Cruise.
Sarcastically suggested by some as the first victim of Australia’s carbon tax, Tom and Katie’s marriage has been the source of intense scrutiny and crazy speculation since day one (you can read the best of the conspiracy theories here).
And the plot thickens in the style of Nigella’s chocolate mousse, when you throw Tom’s religious beliefs into the mix (you can get up to speed on Scientology here).
So what’s happening now? Lots. Here is all the latest on TomKat…
GLAMOUR reports that:
Katie Holmes has been seen for the first time since filing from divorce from Tom Cruise last week. The 33-year-old actress looked particularly stylish in a slicked back pony tail and a wrap-around blue dress as she was pictured heading in to film a guest spot on Project Runway: All Stars in New York yesterday. The star was smiling, and seemed to be in good spirits as she made her way into Parsons The New School Of Design, where the pre-arranged taping was being filmed. It was the first time she has been seen without her five-carat diamond and her wedding ring since she married the star five years ago. She seemed to reference the fact she was band-free, too, by holding her hand up for all to see.

Tom, Katie and Suri
THE SUN claims that Suri was bound for Scientology boot camp:
TOM Cruise’s little daughter Suri faced an inquisition of 99 sinister questions at a Scientology “boot camp”, it was revealed last night. The chilling prospect helped to convince Cruise’s wife Katie Holmes, 33, to divorce the movie superstar, who is 50 today.
Katie was spotted yesterday for the first time since her announcement. The glum-looking actress seemed keen to show she was NOT wearing a wedding ring.
She feared Cruise was about to send their six-year-old girl to the Sea Organisation — a hardcore group within the religious sect followed by the Top Gun star.
Kids chosen for induction into the cult are sent to secret military-style “boot camps”.
And clasping an “e-meter” that measures electrical currents in their bodies, like a lie detector, they are asked bizarre questions barked by a Scientology “ethics officer”.
The DAILY MAIL says that Katie is being stalked by Scientologists:
As her marriage dissolved, Katie Holmes’s every move has been tracked by a team of mystery men.
Unknown people in two cars have been seen tailing Ms Holmes, prompting speculation they are rogue members of the controversial Scientology doctrine.
However, lawyer for the Church Gary Soter told TMZ that the Scientology movement is ‘not following Katie or conducting surveillance on her in the wake of her divorce with Tom Cruise’.
And it has been claimed this tracking has been going on for weeks – even before Friday’s shock announcement the pair will divorce.

John Travolta is a celebrity Scientologist
THE TELEGRAPH have the low down on who will get what in the divorce:
WHEN Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes married to great fanfare and with much opulence in an Italian castle in November 2006, talk not only centred on the bride’s wedding dress but also on her prenuptial agreement with the groom.
The details? For each year the couple stay married, the Dawson’s Creek actress collects $3 million – to a maximum of $33 million after 11 years – as well as their palatial home in California.
Then, if their marriage had lasted more than 11 years, Holmes would have received half of Cruise’s reportedly $250 million fortune.
After filing for divorce less than six years later, according to the agreement, Holmes should only be entitled to $15 million as well as the couple’s $35 million Beverly Hills mansion.
But with an estate worth upwards of $275 million, Holmes is expected to seek more and there is already speculation as to how much she will collect when the papers are signed.
And US Magazine has some spine tingling news about a possible Dawson’s Creek reunion:
Audiences first fell in love with Katie Holmes as girl-next-door Joey Potter on Dawson’s Creek, a role she relished for six seasons. But when Holmes was approached about possibly reuniting with her former costars James Van Der Beek, 35, and Joshua Jackson, 34, the actress’ husband, Tom Cruise, 49, nixed the idea. “[Producers] were begging her to sign on for a reunion movie,” a source tells the new issue of US Weekly. “Tom said absolutely no way and thought going backward would be bad.” Holmes, on the other hand, “didn’t care how ‘low-brow’ he thinks Dawson’s Creek is,” the source adds. “She wanted to do the movie and reconnect with her fans. And have fun — something she rarely does anymore.”
What are your thoughts on the latest developments? Have we missed any? What do you think is next for Tom and Katie?







Comments
42 Comments so far
Hi MM,
I just thought I would write a positive post for you guys as a lot of posts below are quite negative.
I really appreciate the effort you put into this website. I read it once daily and it keeps me up to date on many issues. I have read MM for 3 years and will continue to do so.
I really like reading your articles Mia because you’re witty and have a lot of common sense.
I would like to suggest that we have more cheat sheets. I remember you use to do them for certain issues like the carbon tax etc. They were good.
Keep up the good work.
loading...
You are quoting The Sun? Come on!!
loading...
We needmuch more scientologology to make more sense of that club.
loading...
love mamamia. keep up the great work Mia & team
loading...
This is really interesting, bit old but Katie sure was sucked in to Scientology in the beginning. She seems that she was very young back then, has obviously grown up since
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgqKA3w6T2U&feature=related
loading...
I love a good celebrity divorce and am relying on MM to keep me informed. I don’t want to read TMZ or Gawker or any other gossip site as I’m not interested in any of the other shit they put in there. So MM keep it coming! Like I’ve said before don’t like it? DON’T READ IT!
loading...
I’ve always said that parents will do things that are best for their children.
Kate has made the best decision for Suri’s future. I find this most admirable.
It must have been hard to get to this stage, because of the enormous power Tom and his Church have. But the smile says it all. She looks rather relieved and relaxed whilst going through a divorce.
Best. Decision. Ever. Go Katie.
loading...
^This
loading...
If Tom and Katie’s split might mean a Dawson’s Creek reunion movie, I am ALL for it! Bring Back Pacey! (OMG, I am so “highschool”)
loading...
I love Dawson’s Creek but I really hope they don’t make a movie. It wouldn’t be right without Jen Lindley.
loading...
Ahhhh, comment deletion?
None of those comments were out of line!
Dinner party rules need to apply to abuse, not feedback which is vital to MM keeping an audience engaged.
loading...
People won’t bother to comment if their comments keep getting deleted.
loading...
Happymum, Wounded Bull’s comment was abusive towards those of us who work so hard on the site and so it was deleted. We welcome feedback but it can be done in a way that is constructive – and as you can see below, we have left the comments that were in reply to his original comment and not nasty in tone.
loading...
“Abusive”. Really? In my workplace that would pass for constructive criticism. I know Wounded Bull has had people be far, far more rude to him on this site, and those comments haven’t been deleted because they were ‘abusive’.
Can I ask why you have left the replying comments in this case, when in the past you have been very hard line about deleting replies even when they weren’t offensive?
As a commenter it’s frustrating that there doesn’t seem to be a clear moderation policy. Sometimes the articles you post contradict your dinner party rules, sometimes offensive comments are left up whilst perfectly reasonable ones are deleted, sometimes some of the mods themselves are rude and patronising, whilst calling out commenters for the same thing. Some deletions just make no sense (eg. on the recent Julian Assange article, comments simply pointing out a factual error, that is that he has not been and may never be charged, were deleted, despite the fact that they weren’t in any way rude. I have no idea how a one sentence statement “Julian Assange is not facing charges, he is facing questioning” breaks any dinner party rules, but at least half a dozen comments to that effect were deleted.) I don’t know what the commenting rules are on any given day, as it seems to change depending on the article and who’s moderating it at any given time. I frequent some sites with very strict posting rules, so it’s not the harshness of the moderation that bothers me, but the confused nature of it.
loading...
Hey Anonymous,
In the past we have always deleted replies because generally replies to the original comment will not make sense if the original comment was deleted. I made the decision to leave the replies in this case because I thought they made enough sense on their own and also to make it clear that feedback is welcome as long as it is not abusive.
I understand your confusion and know that we are currently looking at different ways of moderation and trying to find one that will make the majority of commenters happy. At the moment we are doing the best job we can do with only four of us on the team and such a mass amount of comments coming on board. We are human and we miss things sometimes when we are eating, or sleeping, or spending time with our families. But we do endeavour to deal with things as soon as they are brought to our attention.
As for the comment rules – they are outlined in our comment guidelines, but of course the definition of an abusive comment is going to vary from person to person. Sometimes a comment may be completely misread by one person and another person will think it’s fine – that’s the problem with reading tone on the internet. We don’t claim to be perfect and we’re certainly not always right. But as I said, we do our best and we are working on it.
And if you ever have any other problems, you are free to email me – nat@mamamia.com.au.
Thanks.
loading...
For what it’s worth I think you guys do a top job. It must be pretty tiring working so hard and getting constant criticism that nothing you do is good enough. I get tired just reading all the comments. Pat on the back for all of you
loading...
The real issue here with comments is the trolls. There are several. I’ve stopped posting with my account because one or two (or possibly just one pretending to be two people) were stalking my posts & writing nonsense. Kris2040 had some terrible stuff written about her recently on John James’ recent post. I reported it and it was deleted but it was still sitting there for a while.
I hope the Mamamia team IP ban these people. They’re ruining the comments section, which is of course what they want to do.
I didn’t see WB’s post, and whilst it’s fair to say that he pulls no punches maybe a policy of editing & not deleting the whole thing in some instances might work?
This site has grown exponentially & the comments section has grown with it. I think you should not allow comments without an account. If posters want to comment without one, their post should be held for moderation. That should encourage them to join up. If someone with an account posts offensive comments or trolls then they should be warned and/or IP banned for a certain period or permanently.
You can’t just let people post on here indiscriminately. I’m aware that I’m doing that right now, however I’ll come back under my user name when I stop seeing the same posts from the same anonymous posters.
loading...
Doing an AWESOME job Nat and team! Keep up the great work!!
loading...
Thank you Phoodie and Mif x
loading...
Hi Anon,
What another commenter chooses to do with comments on his or her own blog is totally up to them. And has no bearing on what we do on Mamamia.
We choose the comments we delete and no, that doesn’t mean we delete comments we disagree with or those that are critical or negative.
Some commenters are asking us to delete more comments while a small handful are asking us to delete less.
Ultimately, it’s our call.
loading...
“What another commenter chooses to do with comments on his or her own blog is totally up to them. And has no bearing on what we do on Mamamia.”
I have no idea how that relates to my comment. I didn’t suggest you be more like such and such website, simply that you might want to think about streamlining your moderation process and getting everyone on the same page, because at the moment it’s confusing and off-putting for many people.
“We choose the comments we delete and no, that doesn’t mean we delete comments we disagree with or those that are critical or negative.”
Come on, sometimes it does mean exactly that. There’s no other explanation for why certain critical comments get deleted whilst supportive but rude and cruel comments often remain. Or why you delete a comment criticising an article because it’s off-topic but leave supportive but also totally off-topic comments. And I’d still like to know why those comments on the Julian Assange article were deleted, because that one makes no sense to me.
“Ultimately, it’s our call.”
Obviously. But since the dinner party rules seem to have become more like loose guidelines, it might be a good idea to simply say “We’ll delete any comments we want to”. Lot’s of websites do this, and it saves a lot of confusion as to why a commenter’s comment has been deleted when it didn’t break any rules. If you aren’t going to stick 100% to your rules, just tell people that and they won’t get so annoyed when their comment is deleted.
loading...
I don’t think anyone has a problem with abuse being deleted but sometime non offensive comments are removed and to this day I cannot figure out why. These comments were not even contraversial or critical.
In fact sometimes a response can be simple and so natural that even when the original comment is removed, there are subsequent commentators saying the same thing and these comments remain.
I know that you say your policy is spelt out and is obvious, but your application is not.
loading...
OMG! Scientologist must be moderating this page!!!!
loading...
what kind of comments were deleted????
loading...
Someone likened MM to a trashy womens mag because Mia has moved over to News LTD. A load of codswallop. Mamamia is commenting on the story of the day, as are a heap of other news outlets. It is fascinating because it brings into light the whole Scientology debate.
loading...
Thanks Girly, what nonsense. I agree, the scientology issue is massive, I was doing some research earlier and it’s a serious current affair issue.
it’s so easy to criticise but where else can people go on to a site and get feedback, support, advice and just talk about their lives?????? I can’t think of any besides MM
loading...
Personally MM isn’t a place I’d even think of going to for that kind of thing. The one time I did reach out on a Best & Worst post I ended up inadvertently starting some sort of “shittiest problem” contest. Not very helpful.
There are literally hundreds of websites out there that are more suited to that kind of thing, not to mention all the niche forums and communities different people frequent, and personal blogs.
loading...
Fair enough anon. You mention lots of other websites – so I suggest you head on over and leave the rest of alone to enjoy MM.
loading...
That’s a shame as I’ve had so much help and support on the forums. And I like to read about other peoples lives, problems and successes.
i honestly don’t know any other sites you can do this – and I am not saying that MM is perfect either. But if you have then that’s great. But I hope you give MM another go.
loading...
Really, Michelle? Did you need to be that rude?
loading...
Maybe this is the first step in bringing the whole evil Scientology empire crashing down …
loading...
I think the focus of the site has changed considerably over the last year or so. It is only longterm readers that would notice. Oh well nothing lasts forever!
loading...
Hi MaryV,
Indeed, the site is always changing and evolving. It has done this constantly over the past 5 years. It’s important to understand, though, none of these changes happen in a vacuum. We don’t just wake up one morning and go “I know! Let’s do more blah or less blah!”
Every decision we take is based on what our readers tell us – explicitly in comments but also implicitly in page views and social media shares and engagement.
Our aim is to grow the site for sure. But not at any cost. So it’s always a balance, day to day sometimes post to post. In the past year, the site has grown significantly due to these changes and our aim is to maintain that growth because ultimately, we want to be spending all our waking hours (and some of our sleeping ones) creating content that lots of people read, enjoy and share.
I don’t think the focus has necessarily changed. The same person (me) is driving the site now as was driving it a year ago. But with all growth comes some growing pains and there will always be readers who have preferred ‘the way it was before’.
Hope you’ll stick around though.
M x
loading...
I don’t like most of the other celebrity stuff, but I don’t think the Tom/Katie story is solely ‘women’s magazine’ property. It’s also an insight into Scientology, which I think is so bizarre and creepy sounding. I think it’s interesting.
loading...
I find it interesting too. But one article is enough. I know there’s been at least 3 about the split (this one, the one announcing it and the one about the conspiracy theories), plus the one on scientology. Since MM is not a “breaking news” site they could’ve scrapped the announcement, moved onto the fun article about conspiracy theories, did the scientology one as people were interested and then left it at that.
And what’s with all the Lara Bingle stories?
loading...
Thanks for your feedback, goose. We know that there are some people who have a continuing interest in the development of this story and that’s why we have done another article on it. But over the last 24 or so hours we’ve also had posts on smacking, infertility, religion, foundation, Q&A, adulthood, Scientology, Brad Pitt’s brother, the list goes on… so hopefully there is something out there for everyone. As for Lara Bingle – personally I would read about golf if Em wrote about it (AND I HATE GOLF).
loading...
I’ve been enjoying them and I don’t normally follow celebrity news.
loading...
5 lara bingle stories in one week? enough already! Guessing a publicist for lara is greasing MM`s hands to keep Lara`s name on this site? What else would anyone think?
Suri going to boot camp? Pure speculation, not factual. Anyone can write these articles and make it up as you go. Gossip mag quality publications.
loading...
Easy just don’t read them. There’s heaps of others to read on many diverse subjects.
loading...
She looks quietly pleased with herself and beautiful in the top picture.
loading...
… and about fifteen!
loading...
I think she looks very stylish
loading...