Judge Rules Halle Berry’s Son May Testify in Custody Battle Over Restraining Order

​A Los Angeles family court judge has cleared the way for Halle Berry and Olivier Martinez’s 13-year-old son, Maceo, to take the stand in an ongoing legal dispute involving a domestic violence restraining order request filed by Martinez.

​Under the court directive obtained via TMZ, the teenager’s testimony will be strictly confined to the allegations underpinning the restraining order application. To protect the minor, the judge ordered that the proceedings take place inside a closed courtroom, restricted strictly to the legal counsel, the parents, and essential court personnel.

​The contentious legal friction stems from accusations brought by Martinez, who alleges that Berry physically assaulted their son during a dispute over a virtual reality video game. The French actor claims Berry placed her hands around the boy’s neck and choked him, prompting a bid for sole custody and a stay-away order. Berry has vehemently denied inflicting any harm upon her son.

​Legal representation for Berry strongly opposed the child’s inclusion in the courtroom drama, arguing that Martinez had coached the teenager. Court filings from Berry’s side raised serious questions regarding the reliability of the boy’s potential statements, suggesting he possesses a vested interest in deflecting personal responsibility and casting blame elsewhere.

ADVERTISEMENT

​Furthermore, Berry’s legal team asserted that Martinez has historically enmeshed the child in adult conflicts. According to her statements, a stark contrast in parenting styles—where Berry enforced structural boundaries while Martinez allegedly offered unchecked autonomy—has warped the boy’s perspective, painting her as an adversary and Martinez as an ally. Berry cautioned the court that any testimony given by the teenager is likely to reflect long-term psychological conditioning rather than an objective reality of the specific incident in question.

​Judicial authorities emphasized that permitting the minor to testify does not constitute a ruling on the validity of the underlying claims, leaving the final assessment of credibility for the upcoming closed-door hearings.