Free Britney!

[Butter!]

She did hire her own lawyer, and the court ruled that since she's not allowed to under the terms of her conservatorship that she could not have hired her own lawyer. If she does, then it's literally legally deemed not to have happened.

But this is all normal and fine, and anyone who has a problem with it is akin to Qanon-people ranting about adrenochrome, apparently.

 

[Butter!]

I bet Johnny Depp wishes he had been under conservatorship, after blowing his entire wealth on a libel case against a p!sspoor hack in a populist tabloid SUN Dan Wootton, whom I promise you nobody ever read, let alone retained a memory of what he did write twenty nanoseconds later, for mentioning in passing Depp was a wife beater; known in the UK as 'banter'. Well Depp got the fan worship on the steps of the High Court but I bet he now wakes up in the morning thinking, 'OMG! WHAT WAS I THINKING?! Now the entire world knows I'm a wife beater...and I'll never work again...'

Maybe Depp is technically mentally ill but the effect of excess drug taking and alcohol can have the same serious impact on your behaviour...and consequent downfall. On the plus side, Britney has been protected from adverse publicity, blowing all of her money and will live confortably well into old age.

The way she has to live, that actually sounds like a punishment.

 

[Warp12]

One thing is for sure: If she leaves the conservatorship, loses all of her money, and dies of addiction...people will cry out in anguish that "The system failed her!".

 

[gnome]

One thing is for sure: If she leaves the conservatorship, loses all of her money, and dies of addiction...people will cry out in anguish that "The system failed her!".

It did fail her, if it works out that her only choices were neglect or exploitation.

 

[JoeMorgue]

One thing is for sure: If she leaves the conservatorship, loses all of her money, and dies of addiction...people will cry out in anguish that "The system failed her!".

"Don't put out the fire because I can imagine a scenario in which someone complains about the hose water..."

 

[Warp12]

"Don't put out the fire because I can imagine a scenario in which someone complains about the hose water..."

We'll see how it goes.

 

[Warp12]

It did fail her, if it works out that her only choices were neglect or exploitation.

Only if it is proven that she was exploited, and didn't rally for her own neglect.

 

[Belz...]

One thing is for sure: If she leaves the conservatorship, loses all of her money, and dies of addiction...people will cry out in anguish that "The system failed her!".

Well, yeah. It does seem like it did.

 

[Cain]

No, I think you don't know the nature of this relationship because you selectively discount some of the data we have, for no apparent reason, and then you presume that this ignorance extends to everyone.

Then explain it. How does permission to use her allowance work so that's it's not really her own money? I asked you before and you squirmed and dodged.

No it doesn't. Now you're playing word games.

Woosh. If sarcasm counts as word games, yes.

 

[Cain]

Excuse me for finding your forgiveness of such a brazen robbery of their fundamental rights sickening. People all over have a free to screw up their lives royally. The hearing for the conservativetorship [sic] back in 2008 was less than 10 minutes...... that only is incredibly fishy.

While there are many unusual aspects to Spears' case, this talking point, which you've parroted twice, raises a red flag. Assuming it's true, it certainly sounds ominous to these lay ears. But is an initial hearing so unusual? Is this like the Woody Allen case where "child molester!" accusers whisper, "And then investigators destroyed ALL of their notes regarding this RICH and POWERFUL Hollywood director." Except that's standard operating procedure.

On the other end, people are attacking the system, claiming standard court procedures in conservatorship cases is profoundly problematic.

Bipolarism doesnt justify court mandated slavery.

Yeah, slavery. And robbery. Again, when it comes to Spears people suddenly sound like right-wing anti-tax activists. Anyway, Britney did say, "I'm a slave 4 u" She's been secretly communicating this way for years.

 

[Cain]

Yes, as an adult she should have the same freedom other adults have to make bad decisions. Johnny Depp was never put into conservatorship, despite far more serious misconduct, including crimes. "Sustain her bloodline?" What kind of drivel is that? The fact is that she has been permanently deprived of her rights through a legal process that was never intended for this purpose. It should be up to authorities to prove that her conservatorship is required for her own safety, not up to her to prove that it's not. And the state has no interest in "sustaining her bloodline."

Homegirl had an epic public meltdown. She was placed on psychiatric hold. More than once. All of this originally stems from concern for her safety. Johnny Debt and others can commit serious crimes, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're a danger to themselves. Again, you don't know the extent of her disability.

 

[gnome]

On the other end, people are attacking the system, claiming standard court procedures in conservatorship cases is profoundly problematic.

Yes, that is exactly what people are claiming, and it may well be justified.

An opinion shared with, for example, the American Bar Association and the ACLU:

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/...enges-in-guardianship-and-guardianship-abuse/

https://www.aclu.org/blog/disability-no-excuse-deprive-one-civil-liberties

As well as many, many articles discussing the outright atrocities that have occurred within the system.

 

[xjx388]

Homegirl had an epic public meltdown. She was placed on psychiatric hold. More than once. All of this originally stems from concern for her safety. Johnny Debt and others can commit serious crimes, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're a danger to themselves. Again, you don't know the extent of her disability.

If homegirl can have a successful career touring the world and having a hit residency in Las Vegas, by all appearances her disability can't be that bad, can it?

She has well documented substance abuse issues. She once went into a salon and shaved her head. She has lost joint custody of her kids. She picked bad management and boyfriends. OK, but isn't this America? The land where plenty of pop-stars and other rich and famous people have had complete meltdowns and lost everything without having to be in a conservatorship?

Fundamentally, you are right -we don't know the extent of her disability. I mean maybe there is some fundamental condition that makes her unable to care for herself. I'm no doctor so I won't speculate on what that might be, but again -plenty of rich and famous people have done weird stuff in public, given their lives to drugs and drink and pissed away their fortunes and they don't get put into conservatorships.

 

[Bob001]

Homegirl had an epic public meltdown. She was placed on psychiatric hold. More than once. All of this originally stems from concern for her safety. Johnny Debt and others can commit serious crimes, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're a danger to themselves. Again, you don't know the extent of her disability.

A psychiatric hold is a short-term emergency, often limited to 72 hours. Patients are almost always released after their crisis and receive outpatient treatment, if they want it. She has been deprived of her rights as an adult for more than 13 years. Whether or not that was a legitimate decision when it was made, it should have been revisited regularly, and the burden should be on her conservators to prove that it is still necessary, not for her to prove that it is not. Even people accused of murder get a public trial with their own defense attorney, and they can appeal a bad verdict. Spears was basically locked down forever because her daddy -- who gets a percentage of her concert revenue -- demanded it.

And again, the fact that she can fulfill grueling concert tours in a demanding industry -- even being forced to perform when she was sick, she says -- is a strong argument against any claim that she is totally and permanently disabled. Most people with mental illness are treated without being forced into a conservatorship.

 

[dirtywick]

If homegirl can have a successful career touring the world and having a hit residency in Las Vegas, by all appearances her disability can't be that bad, can it?

She has well documented substance abuse issues. She once went into a salon and shaved her head. She has lost joint custody of her kids. She picked bad management and boyfriends. OK, but isn't this America? The land where plenty of pop-stars and other rich and famous people have had complete meltdowns and lost everything without having to be in a conservatorship?

Fundamentally, you are right -we don't know the extent of her disability. I mean maybe there is some fundamental condition that makes her unable to care for herself. I'm no doctor so I won't speculate on what that might be, but again -plenty of rich and famous people have done weird stuff in public, given their lives to drugs and drink and pissed away their fortunes and they don't get put into conservatorships.

I agree with everything you wrote here, but I want to add that conservatorship really should be for people with severe disabilities who literally cannot care for themselves and they should end when they can, and I think it's patently obvious that Britney Spears is at least basically capable of caring for herself, if not much more.

Personally I think she looks like a person who made some poor decisions in her past, maybe has a medicated mental illness, but is an otherwise intelligent, functional adult. And I don't even think it's worth entertaining the idea that she has some unknown but crippling cognitive problem that she manages to hide in all of her live shows, tours, public appearances, and social media.

 

[Cain]

A psychiatric hold is a short-term emergency, often limited to 72 hours. Patients are almost always released after their crisis and receive outpatient treatment, if they want it. She has been deprived of her rights as an adult for more than 13 years. Whether or not that was a legitimate decision when it was made, it should have been revisited regularly, and the burden should be on her conservators to prove that it is still necessary, not for her to prove that it is not. Even people accused of murder get a public trial with their own defense attorney, and they can appeal a bad verdict. Spears was basically locked down forever because her daddy...

Well, this is more reasonable than "prisoner" (or "slave," or person without any money), but it still papers over important processes like how she agreed to the conservatorship long ago (inasmuch as she could), and in court recently said, "I didn't know I could petition the conservatorship to be ended. I'm sorry for my ignorance, but I honestly didn't know that." Well, ****, now she can demonstrate personal responsibility by taking responsibility. That sounds like part of the process, so it's a tad much to say that for the intervening 13 years she's been deprived of rights that she failed to assert. Granted, being locked down in Lousiana, Vegas, Malibu, and Hawaii can be disorienting.

If Spears ends the conservatorship, I'll support anything she chooses to do -- have more babies, get married, secure new business deals, choose to perform again, get divorced, lose custody of her new children, watch business partners drain her accounts, have creditors force her to perform in order to make ends meet. Whatever she wants, except using a mountain of cash to finance a life-threatening drug habit.

 

[Ernie M]

WBUR (Boston's NPR news station) On Point, had a July 1, 2021 interview to talk about (quote) How conservatorships are supposed to work, and what happens when they go wrong.

The discussion had three guests:

Lisa MacCarley, probate and conservatorship attorney practicing in LA county. She has been working with the #FreeBritney movement since 2020.

Dr. Sam Sugar, founder of South Florida Americans Against Abusive Probate Guardianships, a non-profit. Author of "Guardianships and the Elderly."

Patricia Keane Martin, partner and probate and elder law attorney at the law firm Seegel Lipshutz Lo & Martin.

"...Nothing about this conservatorship is lawful from the very beginning," Lisa MacCarley said.

really frightening part after evaluating the paperwork is this conservatorship was unconstitutional and ran afoul of probate law from the very beginning.​

MacCarley said that she (Britney Spears) has been lied to, gaslit, and misled.

And the fact that she has a court-appointed attorney that is allowing this to happen, to me is even more egregious. The whole point of an attorney for the conservatee is to protect against these abuses. And if turns out to be true, and I have no reason to doubt Britney at this point, so I’m going to say it sounds like it’s truthful, this was abusive, this is predatory, um, this is horrifying, and is not consistent with the law of the state of California.​

MacCarley pointed out Britney needs to get her own attorney– independent of the court– and competent enough to file a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to the Court of Appeals.

MacCarley said was that Britney:

...does not need to be evaluated, she does not need to file a petition, she has been denied due process and those are the circumstances that the court of appeals in California can immediately rectify. But she has to get away from Sam Ingham. I cannot emphasize that enough.​

Lisa MacCarley was concerned that Britney,

"may have been gaslit, because the way that this conservatorship was established, she actually did hire an attorney. She might have even hired two or three attorneys and each and every time Sam Ingham went to the Superior Court where he was known to be a favorite of the judges and he told the judges unlawfully, and I believe unethically, that Miss Spears could not, lacked capacity to retain an attorney even though she had in fact retained an attorney named Adam Streisand."​

Attorney Samuel D. Ingham, "a veteran of the California probate system," who has represented Ms. Spears since 2008, has since stepped down. (I got that quote from The New York Times article "Britney Spears's Lawyer Asks to Step Down from Court-Appointed Role").

I've read online articles that Britney Spears is trying to hire celeb attorney Matthew Rosengart, a federal prosecutor.

Free Britney

I paraphrased and quoted from source:

Kotsonis, Stefano and Meghna Chakrabarti. “What Britney Spears Teaches Us About Conservatorships In America” WBUR (Boston’s NPR news station) On Point. 01 July 2021. https[colon]//www[dot]wbur.org/onpoint/2021/07/01/the-freebritney-movement-and-how-conservatorships-work

 

[Bob001]

.......
Free Britney

I paraphrased and quoted from source:

Kotsonis, Stefano and Meghna Chakrabarti. “What Britney Spears Teaches Us About Conservatorships In America” WBUR (Boston’s NPR news station) On Point. 01 July 2021. https[colon]//www[dot]wbur.org/onpoint/2021/07/01/the-freebritney-movement-and-how-conservatorships-work

Is a transcript available somewhere?

 

[Ernie M]

Is a transcript available somewhere?

I'll look. What I typed in post above is my own.

The interview is really good and informative.

Also good information from Dr. Sam Sugar.

I haven't listened to the portion with guest Patricia Keane Martin yet. It takes me a while to transcribe...

Dr. Sam Sugar brings up the fact that corruption is accepted, there's an absence of supervision or oversight, abusive guardianships have been going on for over 65 years, and they -court insiders and Supreme Court– has no incentive to change.

I wonder if cruelty, sadism, and profiteering towards fellow human beings (as it relates to taking full control over someone, such as in Power of Attorney abuse, guardian/conservator abuse), is a psychological phenomenon?

A lot of people take part in abusive, exploitive, and fraudulent situations, keep it from becoming public knowledge, and maintain their abusive positions of power.

 

[Warp12]

Well, I've changed my mind on this, in one respect. I say, free this crazy wench...immediately.

Then she can sue whoever she wants, excommunicate whatever family members she chooses, and bask in her new-found freedom.