Anthony Edwards Accuses Baby Mama of “Trapping” Him with Pregnancy Plan Using Ovulation Tracker

In a paternity and child support case that grows more contentious by the week, Minnesota Timberwolves phenom Anthony Edwards is going full legal blast on his ex-girlfriend Ayesha Howard. In court documents filed recently, Edwards accuses Howard of manipulative behavior and attempting to deceive the court by employing an ovulation tracker as a tool to secure financial assistance.

The 22-year-old basketball phenom is now requesting a judge to sanction Howard for what he describes as blatant and troubling abuse of the judicial system. The controversy surrounding Howard is his attempt to reopen a child support case in California despite a previous ruling that the state has no jurisdiction over the case.

Edwards Claims California Has No Jurisdiction and Accuses Howard of Forum Shopping to Improve Financial Result

Edwards and his lawyers are responding to Howard’s motion to rehear a case already decided, which directed California to have no standing in their child support case. Edwards says Howard’s attempt to transfer the case to another state is merely strategic forum shopping, a maneuver intended to obtain a more favorable monetary ruling.

His attorneys allege there is neither factual nor legal basis for California to be a part of the case. Edwards asserts that he and Howard did not have a sexual relationship within California and also claims she failed to present credible evidence of domicile there.

Edwards’ attorney stated that she has no signed lease, no utility bills, and no reliable evidence that she lives or works in California. Her only contacts with the state are part of a bad-faith scheme to manipulate the system and deceive the court into getting a California child support order.

The judge has already rejected Howard’s claim of jurisdiction, but her latest motion appears to be an ambitious attempt to reverse the decision and transfer the case under California law, which allows for far more generous child support determinations.

NBA Star Blasts Howard for Testifying with Ovulation Tracker as Evidence, Calling It Part of a “Planned Financial Decision”

The most inflammatory part of Edwards’ recent lawsuit filing is perhaps his reply to Howard’s filing of an ovulation calendar. The file, which was filed in the hope of substantiating her allegations regarding the timing of conception, has instead become the centerpiece of Edwards’ assertion that Howard’s pregnancy was always money-motivated

His attorneys blame her for having a premeditated plan to become pregnant with the soon-to-be basketball sensation. The filing deems her actions a premeditated money maneuver and states that using the tracker paints a very ominous picture of her motives.

This is not some woman who was caught off her guard with an unexpected pregnancy, Edwards’ attorney contended. This is a woman who planned out her fertility cycle meticulously and chose her partner for his fame and money-making potential. It raises the unsettling questions about Ayesha’s motives and her believability

According to Edwards, Howard’s use of the ovulation tracker as evidence is manipulative and reflective of a broader trend of unethical and dishonest practices.

Edwards Accuses Howard of Abusing the Legal System with Recycled Claims and Misleading Evidence

In his brief, Edwards doesn’t play nice. He states Howard is simply re-asserting issues that have already been resolved and attempting to receive a different outcome by making the same arguments in different wording.

The parties presented their case, and the court ruled, according to the brief. Ayesha was unhappy with the outcome and now attempts to get a second bite at the apple.

Edwards’ lawyers argue that this isn’t just a case of one paternity ruling or one motion for child support. It is a case of setting a precedent as to what the court system will tolerate regarding conduct. They argue that Howard is abusing the court process, wasting judicial time, and promoting a tale based on misinformation.

Frustrated with what he sees as ongoing legal posturing and deliberate deceit, Edwards is now seeking the court to sanction Howard officially. Her conduct is a blatant and sustained misuse of the judicial process, his lawyers claim, that has every intention of raking in further money from the situation.

If awarded, the sanction request would be extremely costly and legally damaging for Howard. Sanctions are made by the court only when the court finds one of the litigants in bad faith, providing false or irrelevant information, or willfully misleading the court. Edwards has now laid all such charges at Howard’s feet.

Tune in, for if this petition is anything to judge by, the next episode of this soap opera will be full of theatrics.