Jump to content

What are the reasons for the cship being extended to other states


Recommended Posts

I didn’t realise this was a thing they could or needed to do. :omg:

does this mean if she moved to somewhere she wasn’t legally under it, she’d escape (temporarily, whilst she was there) via some sort of loop hole?

i get that other people who are under conservatorships aren’t likely the type to travel hence the request for Britney’s to extend, but how does this effect the implications of her situation

if someone could explain I’d really appreciate :plzney: 

Link to comment
  • Replies 25
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think it's basically like you're saying: by extending the conservatorship, to other states, they have more control over her and she has less possibilities of "escaping". I think it's done as a way to prevent her from going to another state without the extended c-ship and staying there for a long time or permanently, pretty much "freeing" herself.

Then again, though, I don't know jack s**t about law, so, please, take my comment with a grain of salt. :mhmnod:

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Shadow2003 said:

I think it's basically like you're saying: by extending the conservatorship, to other states, they have more control over her and she has less possibilities of "escaping". I think it's done as a way to prevent her from going to another state without the extended c-ship and staying there for a long time or permanently, pretty much "freeing" herself.

Then again, though, I don't know jack s**t about law, so, please, take my comment with a grain of salt. :mhmnod:

Britney fans probably know more about conservatorships now than the average law student :orangu: 

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, PokemonSpears said:

Not after the restraining order against Jamie.

I ignore if they'll change it now that Jodi is the conservator. It would be the natural thing to do, but I guess it'll now depend on how much money Kevin is able to get from them.

 

Everything I've found says that it's 70/30.

Link to comment

Given the fact that this came during the Free Britney movement, I honestly feel that its her father and her team trying to punish her for ''getting them into this situation'' (a very abusive position as it was their actions that lead to the current situation). The C-Ship is currently in LA, where she resides, and I cannot think of any other reason as to why they would want to extend it to Hawaii (where she spends a lot of her free) and Louisiana (her hometown where she'd have family other than Jamie and her sons) other than a form of punishment. 

As Free Britney has went gain speed and more has come to light, they're starting to panic and want to use other states as scapegoats, because it'd be up to each state to remove it (I'd believe).

Why not make this move in 2009 or any other time since it started rather than when she's forced into a mental institution?

Link to comment
48 minutes ago, BRSM_jl said:

Everything I've found says that it's 70/30.

Quote

The domestic violence restraining order was filed by Federline, on behalf of his children, following the incident of their grandfather allegedly abusing 13-year-old Sean.

We're told the documents were filed in the ongoing custody case between the two, with a slew of stipulations put forth by Federline and his attorneys, and Britney's team agreed to all of the demands and terms of protection for the kids.

 

The documents give Federline full legal custody of both boys. Britney will need all her visitation with the children to be monitored, and Jaime can no longer be the monitor.

We're told, it was agreed that another adult would be present, who has been approved by Federline and the court.

Britney will not have any overnight visits, and Federline will now have around 90% physical custody.

https://theblast.com/c/britney-spears-kevin-federline-restraining-order-jaime-child-abuse

They had come to the 70/30 agreement, when the incident with Jamie happened, and it was changed again.

 

Link to comment

Britney lives in California because her kids are there, but once her kids are older, they will have their own life. She can leave california and live as a free woman. Its long term thinking to make sure shes never free even after her children are adults and he can no longer use them to threaten her.

Link to comment

Oh God the fact that they want to extend it is insane it must feel like hell being in this situation. She is almost 38 years old she is very capable of recording and touring all the time but yes when it comes to financial issues she is not..ugh her father manipulating her like that just for money is so sad i mean he values pieces of paper cause that's waht money is more than her daughter instead of encouranging her and helping her be the best version of herself...let's hope that someday this tragedy will come to an end

Link to comment
41 minutes ago, BRSM_jl said:

Is that the only source? I'm never sure that 'the blast' is a reliable source but I'm always second guessing things 

they were the ones that reported the 70/30 agreement just hours before, or the day before, then they broke the news about Jamie battering Sean, and then they reported this.

Other sites reported that as well, based on the blast article. 

It really makes sense that Britney would agree on this after the Jamie incident. The point was to have the kids stay away from Jamie as much as possible. That's why I would expect that now that there's Jodi as the conservator, they can change back the agreement to something more favorable for Britney.  

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...