I’m not quite sold on the allegations of the Jersey guy who is naming Springsteen in his divorce papers as the individual his wife had an affair with. I would need to know more facts in order to fully buy that tale. Did this guy hire a private investigator? What makes this guy believe Bruce Springsteen would want anything to do with his wife? Or that his wife would want anything to do with Springsteen? It kind of reminds me of the scene in the movie “Honeymoon in Vegas” when the guy goes to Jack Singer proclaiming “My wife is having an affair with Mike Tyson”.
There has to be more to the story than his wife “committed adultery…with Springsteen…at various times and places too numerous to mention…” If there were too many times and places to mention, why bring it up at all?
Let’s assume for a moment that it is true. That makes the wife of this guy just as guilty as Bruce.
I know in Bruce’s retaliating statement he does not deny having an affair. But maybe that’s because there is no affair to deny.
As a person who has witnessed first hand the clandestine qualities of a rock star, on one hand I say “it wouldn’t surprise me if this affair allegation were true”. That’s solely based on my past experiences with one rock star (whom I can prove and have proved cheated on his wife MANY times and still does to this day).
However, unlike the rock star I know, I have never met Springsteen, nor have I witnessed him hitting on women or traipsing off with a friend of mine for a ”rendezvous” (which had very serious consequences), as I have seen with the rock star that I know. Therefore, I have to give Bruce the benefit of the doubt and leave it at that.
In essence, he is innocent until proven guilty. A statement in some guy’s divorce papers doesn’t make it true.