Man Who Wanted To Settle Dispute With Ex-Wife By Sword Fight Ruled ‘Not Insane,’ Seeks Medical Exam For Spouse


  • Web Hosting
  • Instant Crypto Exchange
  • CryptoDonate Widget for your website

A Kansas man who sought legal permission to battle his ex-wife in a sword fight is now seeking a mental evaluation of his ex-wife.

David Ostrom submitted a court filing on Jan. 3 allowing him to legally fight his former wife, Bridgette Ostrom, and her attorney, Matthew Hudson, so they could “rend their souls from their bodies,” according to the Des Moines Register.

In response to the court filing, a judge temporarily suspended David Ostrom’s child visitation and ordered a mental evaluation,  That evaluation concluded Friday where examiners found that David is not trouble but has “adjustment disorder with mixed emotional features,” the Des Moines Register reports.  (RELATED: People Hike Distance Of Mount Everest On Apartment Stairs)

A man fighting with his ex-wife over money and custody of their children has made an unusual request: “Trial by Combat.” He’s asking for 12 weeks to get a Samurai sword “forged for use,” and says he was inspired by “Game of Thrones.”

— MikeGalanosHLN (@MikeGalanosHLN) January 16, 2020

“It essentially says I’m not crazy, I just don’t like being denied access to my children,” David Ostrom said to the Des Moines Register. David filed another court order last Friday asking that Bridgette Ostrom and her attorney Matthew Hudson also go under mental evaluations. David also filed a motion seeking $4,765 in legal fees and $2,200 for the psychological evaluation. The motion also seeks $255,000 for emotional damages. 


— angel mendoza (@angelmendoza___) January 15, 2020

“This is an egregious failure of the family court system and judge in this matter,” David Ostrom wrote in his filing. “This proceeding has devolved from a court of law into an arena where one attorney fuels discord and encourages parents to air their subjective, and often irrelevant, opinions about the other parent. Nothing could be further from the actual ‘best interests’ of the children.”

Leave a Reply