The legendary Lisa MacCarley speaks out again and states the conservatorship is unlawful and unconstitutional

[britneyluv]

4 hours ago, DuranDuran said:

No, it is a misconception. Actually, it is a very dangerous misconception, I really hope that Brit's lawyers do not influence her in this regard. Cuz there are many alternatives to this that are less restrictive.

I don't necessarily disagree. I just meant that if treated properly and the way it's intended, a conservatorship over her ESTATE rather than her PERSON could be beneficial for her if she wants to be sure that her finances are being properly managed, and as long as the conservatorship is being handled by a reputable investment firm with periodic reviews by the Court and Britney and a lawyer of her choosing. However, we know that's not the case here and there are certainly less restrictive measures. 

At this point though, it's still such an uphill battle to get out of this thing that as long as she has a company like Bessemer overseeing her finances, rather than her croaking lizard of a father who seemingly bankrupted his family before Britney set them all up for life, she can focus more on proving that she doesn't need a conservatorship over her person, i.e., daily decisions such as driving, seeing whoever she wants without needing permission, etc. 

[Anti-Hero]

Once Britney gets her freedom, which I think she will eventually, everyone involved needs to be charged with conspiracy and fraud.

[Forever222]

Yes tell it Lisa! She is leading the change. 

[phareezy]

This was a really great read. The sheer injustices are just sickening. God I hope all of these people end up in prison once all is said and done.

[nthenwkiss]

she’s such a sweetheart; I messaged her on IG thanking her for her support and she replied with: “It is absolutely my honor. Britney deserves the best in life and clearly, she has the best fans ever!”

I love this woman, what a treasure.

[rennen]

1 hour ago, nthenwkiss said:

she’s such a sweetheart; I messaged her on IG thanking her for her support and she replied with: “It is absolutely my honor. Britney deserves the best in life and clearly, she has the best fans ever!”

I love this woman, what a treasure.

Aw she is honestly lovely. 

[toysoldier88]

7 hours ago, Onyxgirl17 said:

I wish this would make more noise. This is the real tragedy that Britney has had to suffer because of this. 

It was not that stressed on the doc, they focused so much on the misogynistic 90s but really who cares anymore? Why on earth didn't they include interviews of this woman in the doc?

[InZone]

Dear God, things that have happened to this angel are just unbelievable. It really hurts. I pray to God that she finds peace in her heart.
Everyone has to pay for their sins, I wouldn’t like to be in their skin when their bill comes. 

[zxcvb]

This new interview from attorney Lisa MacCarley seems to suggest so:

"In our legal system, there’s the basic premise of all of our laws regarding the loss or deprivation of liberty or property. This is called due process. Our California constitution and the United States Constitution provide very clearly that everyone is entitled to a fair process, an unbiased judge, and most importantly, your own attorney. I was shocked because I had never seen before that when James Spears’ attorneys filed the packet of paperwork to commence the conservatorship on February 1, 2008, they literally prepared an order for the judge to sign nominating Sam Ingham as Britney Spears’ attorney. I’ve never seen that before. It still shocks me that I’m even saying it. But what was worse was when I found out that Britney had picked for herself a very good attorney, Adam Streisand, and Adam Streisand shows up and says, “I’m representing Britney.” And Judge Reva Goetz, says, “No, we’ve decided that Britney Spears doesn’t have capacity to retain her counsel.”

There is no such thing. That’s absolutely false, absolutely wrong, absolutely a violation. Unethical. But it even gets worse than that. Apparently, Sam Ingham had written some kind of report, or he was one of the two who had written a report, basically saying that Britney Spears didn’t have the capacity to retain counsel. Which is, again, another ethical violation as well. But the problem is that the judges are untouchable. There’s nothing that you can do when a judge goes off the charts, and does what Reva Goetz did. What these attorneys all know is that in probate court, the judges control your fees, so they control your income, and they will retaliate. This court of appeals doesn’t help. There’s no place to go for recourse when a judge does things that Reva Goetz did.

You called the conservatorship abusive. Would you also call it illegal?

Yes, unlawful. It’s unconstitutional. They violated the very basic notion of her constitutional rights. They did everything wrong. It was almost like they looked for ways to do it wrong. She couldn’t have her own attorney. They appointed the judge’s favorite crony, Sam Ingham. This was all a setup. It was well known in the Los Angeles probate court at the time that Sam Ingham and his office cohort, Jackson Chen, were the judge’s favorite attorneys, and especially Judge Reva Goetz’s favorites. Judge Reva Goetz had a great fondness and bias towards Sam Ingham and Jackson Chen. Sam Ingham actually had the audacity at some point to say “I specialize in celebrity conservatorship.” It’s just cronyism.

Does Britney need a conservatorship? No, I don’t think she’s needed one forever. Does she need people to help her? Yes. Does she need mature women around her? Yes. I wouldn’t let a man near her, except for her boyfriend and her sons, obviously. But, yes. She needs help. Does she need a conservatorship? Didn’t seem that way to me, given the way she’s able to perform and everything else."

https://uproxx.com/pop/britney-spears-conservatorship-lisa-maccarley-interview-framing-britney-spears/

Thoughts?

[ivosoares]

1 hour ago, zxcvb said:

This new interview from attorney Lisa MacCarley seems to suggest so:

"In our legal system, there’s the basic premise of all of our laws regarding the loss or deprivation of liberty or property. This is called due process. Our California constitution and the United States Constitution provide very clearly that everyone is entitled to a fair process, an unbiased judge, and most importantly, your own attorney. I was shocked because I had never seen before that when James Spears’ attorneys filed the packet of paperwork to commence the conservatorship on February 1, 2008, they literally prepared an order for the judge to sign nominating Sam Ingham as Britney Spears’ attorney. I’ve never seen that before. It still shocks me that I’m even saying it. But what was worse was when I found out that Britney had picked for herself a very good attorney, Adam Streisand, and Adam Streisand shows up and says, “I’m representing Britney.” And Judge Reva Goetz, says, “No, we’ve decided that Britney Spears doesn’t have capacity to retain her counsel.”

There is no such thing. That’s absolutely false, absolutely wrong, absolutely a violation. Unethical. But it even gets worse than that. Apparently, Sam Ingham had written some kind of report, or he was one of the two who had written a report, basically saying that Britney Spears didn’t have the capacity to retain counsel. Which is, again, another ethical violation as well. But the problem is that the judges are untouchable. There’s nothing that you can do when a judge goes off the charts, and does what Reva Goetz did. What these attorneys all know is that in probate court, the judges control your fees, so they control your income, and they will retaliate. This court of appeals doesn’t help. There’s no place to go for recourse when a judge does things that Reva Goetz did.

You called the conservatorship abusive. Would you also call it illegal?

Yes, unlawful. It’s unconstitutional. They violated the very basic notion of her constitutional rights. They did everything wrong. It was almost like they looked for ways to do it wrong. She couldn’t have her own attorney. They appointed the judge’s favorite crony, Sam Ingham. This was all a setup. It was well known in the Los Angeles probate court at the time that Sam Ingham and his office cohort, Jackson Chen, were the judge’s favorite attorneys, and especially Judge Reva Goetz’s favorites. Judge Reva Goetz had a great fondness and bias towards Sam Ingham and Jackson Chen. Sam Ingham actually had the audacity at some point to say “I specialize in celebrity conservatorship.” It’s just cronyism.

Does Britney need a conservatorship? No, I don’t think she’s needed one forever. Does she need people to help her? Yes. Does she need mature women around her? Yes. I wouldn’t let a man near her, except for her boyfriend and her sons, obviously. But, yes. She needs help. Does she need a conservatorship? Didn’t seem that way to me, given the way she’s able to perform and everything else."

https://uproxx.com/pop/britney-spears-conservatorship-lisa-maccarley-interview-framing-britney-spears/

Thoughts?

You were here a few days ago saying that she needed the conservatorship at the time 😂

[Notorious I.G.G.Y.]

This was a great interview, deserves more attention.

 

[SloppyToppyGoddess]

Yes.

[Applejack]

Yeah, we've been talking about it since 2019

[MeAgainstTheMusic_]

It makes me so mad at how much corruption has taken place. They’ve literally ruined a woman’s life for over a decade. They’ve leached off of her, given her no control, isolated her from the world, forced her on stage as a show pony and taken her kids away from her all while sucking every last penny from her. 

How did this ever happen to a human being? I’m not even talking about Britney Spears the superstar but a human being’s rights have been blatantly violated here. Why aren’t the judges facing imprisonment? Why isn’t her dad being investigated thoroughly? It’s all wrong. So wrong. Britney is such a sweet person nobody deserves this.

[PokemonSpears]

AP, I'm merging

[BritneyWiki]

This is frightening. They must investigate this thoroughly and FREE BRITNEY.

[Lloyd88]

On 2/12/2021 at 4:31 PM, nthenwkiss said:

my god, how is this possible? wtf law system is this?

Bull**** American law system.... 😰

[zxcvb]

2 hours ago, ivobb said:

You were here a few days ago saying that she needed the conservatorship at the time 😂

That's not entirely accurate.  IF an objective third party such as a financial planning group was named her TEMPORARY conservator at the time, it could have helped stop her downward spiral.

I never argued that the conservatorship should have been permanent or her father be her conservator.  And of course I didn't know that the judge in this case was corrupt.

The ONLY thing I truly critique Britney with is late 2004-early 2005.  If, after all the success you brought to your label, you are battling your label for artistic autonomy for her career like Britney blatantly was during that time, then you simply cannot recoil.  You strongly re-negotiate your contract or leave to start your own label with your own rules, if you want to keep making music.  Staying in the spotlight due to contractual obligations to continue to be scrutinized damaged her mental health as much as anything.

[CoasterFreak18]

On 2/12/2021 at 5:42 PM, rennen said:

This is such a great interview and well worth the (long) read. 

 

Some key quotes from her regarding Britney's conservatorship are below, and the full interview can be found HERE

Can you stress why the discovery of Adam Streisand’s role was so important for your legal understanding of what happened to her?

In our legal system, there’s the basic premise of all of our laws regarding the loss or deprivation of liberty or property. This is called due process. Our California constitution and the United States Constitution provide very clearly that everyone is entitled to a fair process, an unbiased judge, and most importantly, your own attorney. I was shocked because I had never seen before that when James Spears’ attorneys filed the packet of paperwork to commence the conservatorship on February 1, 2008, they literally prepared an order for the judge to sign nominating Sam Ingham as Britney Spears’ attorney. I’ve never seen that before. It still shocks me that I’m even saying it. But what was worse was when I found out that Britney had picked for herself a very good attorney, Adam Streisand, and Adam Streisand shows up and says, “I’m representing Britney.” And Judge Reva Goetz, says, “No, we’ve decided that Britney Spears doesn’t have capacity to retain her counsel.”

There is no such thing. That’s absolutely false, absolutely wrong, absolutely a violation. Unethical. But it even gets worse than that. Apparently, Sam Ingham had written some kind of report, or he was one of the two who had written a report, basically saying that Britney Spears didn’t have the capacity to retain counsel. Which is, again, another ethical violation as well. But the problem is that the judges are untouchable. There’s nothing that you can do when a judge goes off the charts, and does what Reva Goetz did. What these attorneys all know is that in probate court, the judges control your fees, so they control your income, and they will retaliate. This court of appeals doesn’t help. There’s no place to go for recourse when a judge does things that Reva Goetz did.

You called the conservatorship abusive. Would you also call it illegal?

Yes, unlawful. It’s unconstitutional. They violated the very basic notion of her constitutional rights. They did everything wrong. It was almost like they looked for ways to do it wrong. She couldn’t have her own attorney. They appointed the judge’s favorite crony, Sam Ingham. This was all a setup. It was well known in the Los Angeles probate court at the time that Sam Ingham and his office cohort, Jackson Chen, were the judge’s favorite attorneys, and especially Judge Reva Goetz’s favorites. Judge Reva Goetz had a great fondness and bias towards Sam Ingham and Jackson Chen. Sam Ingham actually had the audacity at some point to say “I specialize in celebrity conservatorship.” It’s just cronyism.

Thanks for posting the link + highlights.  A wonderful interview with a remarkable woman.

[BUWYGF]

On 2/13/2021 at 12:07 AM, britneyluv said:

I'm so glad people are finally paying attention to the real legal issues surrounding Britney's situation. I think people just assume that because she has to be evaluated by a court or a judge that it must be "just". It's not. I don't practice probate work, but I've been a practicing attorney for almost 7 years and even though I'm not deluded enough to believe that every argument I present to a judge is a winning one, there are plenty of instances where judges are wrong, or have personal biases that result in an ethical obligation for them to recuse themselves.

You can present a well-researched position to a judge, supported by rules, statutes, and case law, and a judge can rule another way simply because they feel like it. I'll admit most of the judges I have cases in front of do care about the facts of the case, and make well-reasoned decisions, but it's the ones that don't who result in mistrust of the process and what basically seems like a human rights violation in Britney's case.

I worked for a firm in law school (similar to Bessemer) where I did trusts and estates so had a brief experience with probate law, but it primarily dealt with older individuals who were prone to being taken advantage of or wealthy individuals with numerous assets from various sources who needed help ensuring that their finances were kept in order and/or passed on to who they wanted without complications like unnecessary tax implications or other issues.

As a personal injury attorney, I've represented, and obtained, results for people who took whatever settlement they got and blew it on a trip to Vegas or something similar. Does that mean these people should be under a lifetime conservatorship because of unwise financial decisions? Probably not. 

I can see a conservator of the estate being beneficial for Britney because it's likely that she has so much income rolling in from so many avenues that she doesn't know what do with it or how to manage it. In this regard, she can earn as much money as she wants and can rest easy knowing that it's not being mishandled and is available for her to use in the way she wants. On the other hand, does Britney have the competency to find a reputable probate lawyer who can explain to her how to plan her estate? It seems like it, especially since she somehow found about Bessemer, but in this scenario, the money only goes to the people she wants and in a way that makes sense for her own financial situation - meaning vultures like Team Jamie are s*it out of luck.

The fact that it's harder to get out of a conservatorship than be placed in one goes against every legal principle on which this country is based. Presumption of innocence, the right to confront your accuser in court, right to due process and equal protection under the laws, basically ensure that an individual has an opportunity to be fully heard before their rights are taken away. A judge is meant to be a respected member of the bar who can hear arguments and make well-informed, unbiased decisions to protect these rights. This clearly has not happened in Britney's case, and the fact that probate is such a specialized area of law means that there are judges making what amount to life-and-death decisions without fully understanding the issues.

I could go on and on but don't want to write even more of an essay. Lisa MacCarley is absolutely correct, and the simpler these legal issues are made to the public, the better. I created a legal questions thread a little while back, but in light of the documentary, I just wanted to put it out there that I'm willing to answer any questions (obviously from an outsider perspective) that people have, since I genuinely enjoy being a lawyer and discussing these things, especially when it comes to Britney.

GO OFF KINGGGG  teach us the ******* law, educate everyone!!!