• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Free Britney!

In California: My Mom's manic/depressiveness would get so bad from time to time that they would come and get her in the Cookie Truck. They would put her under conservatorship. Some lawyer I think. Perhaps when it got that bad they didn't trust my Dad, he was provably NOT maintaining her meds.
 
Warp12 said:
Do you think that matters, either way? Do you think the court made their decision based upon some comments from her dad, or more likely, from documentation provided by medical professionals?
Click to expand...

Of course it matters. We know that she doesn't suffer from any condition that would justify a conservatorship. Whatever else she does suffer from, and you're right that we are ignorant about that, doesn't change that fact.
 
Warp12 said:
What do we really know about her mental health condition?

We have nothing. No medical reports, no testimony, and no real court documentation. If you were a doctor, presented with only what you see in the media, would you be prepared to give a diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment plan? Of course not.

But yet, here we are, listening to the internet give its diagnosis.
Click to expand...
As I have pointed out previously, her medical records are under doctor-patient confidentiality. They may be entered into evidence under a court order, but they will still remain confidential. It's none of your business. You're not going to see them. We're not going to see them. And yet here you are berating us for not knowing details of her medical records.
 
arthwollipot said:
As I have pointed out previously, her medical records are under doctor-patient confidentiality. They may be entered into evidence under a court order, but they will still remain confidential. It's none of your business. You're not going to see them. We're not going to see them. And yet here you are berating us for not knowing details of her medical records.
Click to expand...

I'm not berating anyone for not knowing the details. I'm berating them for making a judgement without having access to the information that is critical in making a determination.
 
Warp12 said:
I'm not berating anyone for not knowing the details. I'm berating them for making a judgement without having access to the information that is critical in making a determination.
Click to expand...

This is a ridiculous bar.

The public is never privy to all the information about cases like this.

I'd go so far as to say almost no topic, here or anywhere, is a complete open book. If we waited for every detail of every case, we would never be able to discuss anything.

At least not without some troll coming in and shrilling "BUT YOU DON'T KNOW ALL THE DETAILS!" six times a day.

We don't have access to all the information about this case, but we certainly have some, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with making provisional judgments pending further information. That's usually how sensible investigation works, not "can't know anything at all! might as well not talk about it!"
 
Last edited:
And there's the "troll" part. Calling it a "diagnosis" as if anyone claimed it had the weight of one. Misrepresenting the statements you are arguing against is very frustrating.
 
Warp12 said:
:rolleyes:

Well, of course anyone can make an ill-informed medical diagnosis. Just don't be surprised if everyone doesn't have such a low standard of proof as you might.
Click to expand...

and around and around we go.....

I give you credit, it's we that keep chasing your mobile goalposts, kudos.
 
Warp12 said:
:rolleyes:

Well, of course anyone can make an ill-informed medical diagnosis. Just don't be surprised if everyone doesn't have such a low standard of proof as you might.
Click to expand...

Actually, a diagnosis is irrelevant. A conservatorship is a legal mechanism, not medical care, and it is intended for narrow, specific circumstances. There is substantial public evidence that such circumstances do not apply to Spears, and that her conservatorship was imposed and maintained improperly. Any psychiatric disorder that may afflict her can be treated without depriving her of all legal rights forever.
 
Bob001 said:
Actually, a diagnosis is irrelevant. A conservatorship is a legal mechanism, not medical care, and it is intended for narrow, specific circumstances. There is substantial public evidence that such circumstances do not apply to Spears, and that her conservatorship was imposed and maintained improperly. Any psychiatric disorder that may afflict her can be treated without depriving her of all legal rights forever.
Click to expand...
...as several people have pointed out several times already.
 
Warp12 said:
I like how in lieu of any actual evidence for this case, the Britney fans resort to telling stories and relaying anecdotes about other cases.
Click to expand...

Your dystopian views of mental health issues truly are telling. Just not in a good way.
 
Warp, I think you're unable to see the potential state corruption forest because you're focused on all the drunk Britney trees.
 
Warp12 said:
Tell that to the court.
Click to expand...

"The court" is not a medical professional. The judge in a case like this can only review the evidence presented. And the only evidence presented to her was from the side demanding a conservatorship. Spears could not hire her own lawyer or her own experts, or challenge the ones her father hired. The judge's decision could not be appealed. If Spears had been accused of shoplifting or even a traffic offense, she would have had more rights and legal protections than she had in a proceeding that reduced her to legal infancy forever. And you don't have any reservations about that?
 
August 26, 2021, Christopher C. Melcher, an attorney for USA Today, submitted a media request for access to the September 29, 2021, for case, In re the Conservatorship of Britney Jean Spears.

Hopefully this will get public access to Britney Spears' September 29, 2021, conservatorship case.

It's important to know what happens before Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Brenda J. Penny, regarding this specific conservatorship case.

Knowing what goes on can reveal problematic issues specific to Britney's abusive conservatorship, and potentially reveal problematic issues common to most, if not all, abusive conservatorship and guardianship cases.

For me, "abusive" conservator or guardian cases include: abuse, and/or exploitation, and/or fraud.

It's important to put into context, the...who, what, where, when, why, and how, of Britney's abusive conservatorship. Understanding the formation, implementation, execution, and continuation of Britney's abusive conservatorship will shed light on all abusive conservatorship, guardianship, power of attorney, cases.

Cruel people can control everything about a vulnerable person, up to and including hastened death.

Connect the dots: look for commonalities, broken systems, and follow the money.

View the 244-page Media Request filing
Submitted by: Attorney Christopher C. Melcher of law firm Walzer Melcher LLP, for media agency, USA Today.
Name of court, name of judicial district: Stanley Mosk Courthouse, Central District
Case Number: BP108870
Title of Case: In re the Conservatorship of Britney Jean Spears
Name of Judge: Hon. Brenda J. Penny, Department 4
https[colon]//walzermelcher.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2021.08.26-Media-Request.pdf

  • Free Britney
  • Expose the broken systems that perpetuate abusive/exploitative/fraudulent conservatorships, guardianships, and power of attorney
  • Name the abusers
  • Name their work places
  • Show the connections
  • Show the harm
  • Show the damage
 
Last edited:
Bob001 said:
"The court" is not a medical professional. The judge in a case like this can only review the evidence presented. And the only evidence presented to her was from the side demanding a conservatorship. Spears could not hire her own lawyer or her own experts, or challenge the ones her father hired. The judge's decision could not be appealed. If Spears had been accused of shoplifting or even a traffic offense, she would have had more rights and legal protections than she had in a proceeding that reduced her to legal infancy forever. And you don't have any reservations about that?
Click to expand...

He's made it clear he doesn't, which is pretty pathetic imo.
 
jollyroger85 said:
He's made it clear he doesn't, which is pretty pathetic imo.
Click to expand...

How wrong you are. I am just looking for real evidence, and not making assumptions. Like I have said before, no transcripts, no medical documentation, nothing...you have nothing. I trust that the truth, whatever it is, will be enough to make a determination.

I'm not inclined to rush to judgement to libel and/or slander everyone involved in the conservatorship. That's the "grand conspiracy" approach. There are some people in this thread who are in pretty deep, and outlandishly enraged. It is a bit amusing, imo.
 
Warp12 said:
How wrong you are. I am just looking for real evidence, and not making assumptions. Like I have said before, no transcripts, no medical documentation, nothing...you have nothing. I trust that the truth, whatever it is, will be enough to make a determination.

I'm not inclined to rush to judgement to libel and/or slander everyone involved in the conservatorship. That's the "grand conspiracy" approach. There are some people in this thread who are in pretty deep, and outlandishly enraged. It is a bit amusing, imo.
Click to expand...

As already stated, there is squat for evidence that the girl has dementia etc, and you have purposely ignored that, so your obtuseness to these things already laid bare proves otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom