Nahla Aubry's Declaration in the Berry-Martinez Dispute: Scope and Limits of the Document

The legal dispute between Halle Berry and Olivier Martinez over custody of their son Maceo added a documentary piece: a declaration from Nahla Aubry, the actress’s eldest daughter, filed on October 3 before the Los Angeles Superior Court. People magazine reported that it accessed the document. La Nación reproduced fragments and contextualized the conflict. There is no direct primary source in the material: the document was not published in full nor cited outside of journalistic transcriptions.

What Nahla Aubry’s statement establishes

According to La Nación’s reconstruction based on People, Nahla Aubry, 18, stated she had not witnessed abusive behavior by her mother. She specifically denied having seen Berry hit, slap, strangle, grab, or physically mistreat Maceo. She also denied having seen her mother put her hands around the teenager’s neck or prevent him from breathing.

The text describes Berry as an affectionate mother and strict when necessary. It mentions that she attended games, took Maceo to practices and tournaments, and took care of his education, medical treatments, and therapy. Nahla also related that her mother never spoke negatively about Gabriel Aubry or Martinez in front of the children.

Regarding the episode reported by Martinez, which occurred on September 26, Nahla said she had spoken by phone with her mother and her brother on September 29. According to her account, Maceo did not seem upset during that conversation. She also acknowledged that there were situations in which Maceo was disrespectful, sometimes aggressive, and did not follow the house rules.

The statement also questions Martinez. Nahla recalled an episode from her childhood in which, according to her account, the French actor hit her father at the entrance of her house. She expressed anger at Martinez because she feels he does not take her into account and that he only seeks to harm her mother. She said she has not spoken with Maceo again since the start of the legal proceedings because she does not know what communication is permitted under the current restrictions.

Martinez’s version and Berry’s response

La Nación notes that Martinez maintained his position. In a statement sent to People, he said his main concern is Maceo’s health, well-being, and safety, and that his actions are motivated by the desire to protect him. He asked that Halle take responsibility for what happened that night.

Berry’s legal team, consulted by People, declined to comment. The actress, 60, categorically rejected the accusations in a statement filed with the court on October 5. According to La Nación, Berry asserted that she never mistreated Maceo physically or emotionally. She said she is not a perpetrator of violence and that she would never harm her son. She also recalled that she is a victim of domestic violence and helps other victims.

Berry explained that she had entered Maceo’s room to ask him to stop playing with his virtual reality glasses and that they then began to wrestle playfully, a practice that, she stated, was common between them. She denied having strangled him or prevented him from breathing and submitted a video to the court that, according to her account, shows contradictions in the accusation. The material does not detail the content of the video or whether it was admitted as evidence.

What the material does not establish and what questions remain open

Nahla Aubry’s document does not establish that Martinez’s accusations are false. Nor does it confirm Berry’s version about the playful wrestling. It is a party statement, filed within the framework of a custody dispute, and its content does not amount to a judicial resolution. There is no indication in the material that the court has evaluated the statement or that it has made a decision on custody.

The main source for both versions is People, an entertainment magazine. La Nación is a secondary source that reproduces and contextualizes that material. There is no direct access to the case file or the complete court filings. The filing dates (October 3 and 5) and the court (Los Angeles Superior) come from journalistic reconstruction, not from an official source cited verbatim.

It remains open whether the video submitted by Berry was entered as evidence, what scope the communication restrictions between those involved have, and whether the Los Angeles court will issue a resolution on custody. It also remains to be seen whether Nahla Aubry will be called to testify orally or whether her statement will carry weight in the final decision.

What data or decision should be followed

The next verifiable data point is the Los Angeles Superior Court’s response regarding Maceo’s custody and the possible admission of the video submitted by Berry. It is also worth following whether Martinez’s legal team presents new statements or evidence, and whether Nahla Aubry’s statement is formally entered into the case file. Without access to the original document, any conclusion about the veracity of the accusations exceeds what the material allows one to assert.

Value module: No currency conversions or percentage calculations are performed because the material does not include economic figures, exchange rates, or quantifiable units. Dates and ages are kept in the original unit (days and years) as published.