Why Vee Mampeezy is divorcing Kagiso
Sharon Mathala | Friday October 7, 2022 12:29
In the Sento vs Sento dissolution of marriage case, the Kwaito Kwasa sensation tells the Maun High Court that he has been staying in hotels and friends' homes for some time.
Before the disintegration of their marriage, the two had been in wedlock since 2014 under the ‘in-community of property’ marital regime. However, in March 2022, the duo filed to vary their marital regime from that of in-community to that of out-of-community of property.
In the court documents, Vee Mampeezy tells the court he believes his wife has been cheating on him.
"The plaintiff has solid suspicion of the defendant's infidelity. The above behaviour has killed all the love and trust that the plaintiff has for the defendant and it accordingly has killed the parties' marriage,” reads Vee Mampeezy’s affidavit.
The ‘Taku Taku’ hitmaker further accuses Kagiso of indulging in too much alcohol, as well as physically abusing him.
“The defendant has a habit of excessively consuming intoxicating substances, thereby affecting the lives of the parties, which usually ends with disagreements and assaults by the defendant and police officers are called to de-escalate the situation.”
“For the past years, the plaintiff (Vee Mampeezy) would flee the matrimonial home seeking residence from friends' homes and hotels, and then return to the parties' matrimonial home when the parties had reconciled,” reads Vee Mampeezy's declaration in part.
The celebrity couple has two minor children, whom Vee Mampeezy pleads with the court that their guardianship be given to his parents.
“It would be in the best interest of the minor children that custody be awarded to the plaintiff’s parents.
“The plaintiff’s parents have been the minor children’s primary caretakers: of the firstborn since 2008 and the secondborn since 2020.”
Vee Mampeezy reveals in court papers that the children have not been living with the couple due to the toxicity of their marriage.
“The marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant has broken down irretrievably on account of the defendant's unreasonable behaviour.
This unreasonable behaviour has made it unbearable for the plaintiff to continue living with the defendant. Moreover, the plaintiff cannot be reasonably expected to continue living with the defendant.”