Jump to content

Once Britney's father is eventually removed, DON'T FALL FOR IT...


feo

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, feo said:

I agree that some of those statements 'likely' align with what Britney would want, but in that same document you mentioned Ingham also pretty much justified the conservatorship by essentially saying it helped Britney get back on track.  That implies it was a good thing and was necessary.  I very much doubt that Britney would agree with that now, and even back in 2008 (as 'For the Record' revealed). 

You have to remember that Britney right now is even under the full control of Sam Ingham as he is the only lawyer that can represent her.  Don't take what Ingham says as equivalent to what Britney would want.  Sometimes it will be, but NOT always and we have to remain skeptical if we want to protect her.  I know, it sucks to have your guard up constantly but that is litigation for ya.

Didn't he also hire a full-on litigation squad for Britney plus they have Lynne's ligitation team?

Also the first paragraph is fluff. It's not that deep. "High functioning conservatee" and "voluntary cship", these are so contradictory that made me think of Bryan's interview, dancing around words and the fact Britney wants out. It's such a typical lawyer jargon.

Link to comment
  • Replies 29
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 minute ago, Applejack said:

They can't really avoid jail time/lawsuits (IF a wrong was done). The keyword again is Britney's wishes, once Jamie is out and a full audit is done.

Really, anticipating that it's gonna take a lot of time to do away with the cship (not really anticipating, because it is so), with the possibility of the estate cship being on, is not an inside job or something. It's just pondering reality.

I can think of someone who could be trying to escape liability, and that is Ingham.  If Britney seems to confirm that she 'wanted' the conservatorship when it first started then the whole fraud aspect of it might be less strong since they will paint the picture that it was 'voluntary'.  Then the court and everybody would be less inclined to look into how the conservatorship was started since everybody will be satisfied that Britney wanted it so it doesn't matter.  We know from the facts that that was NOT the case.

And something that would further support that notion is if Britney tells us she 'wants' to continue in a conservatorship of the estate.  That shows that she doesn't completely hate the idea of a conservatorship and makes us feel even more comfortable with the false idea that she also wanted the initial conservatorship. 

We should NOT give 100% of our trust to Ingham or anyone that had a hand in this conservatorship.  There is an instrinsic conflict of interest there.  As advocates we have to remain vigilant and skeptical.  Question everything and everyone

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Applejack said:

Didn't he also hire a full-on litigation squad for Britney plus they have Lynne's ligitation team?

Also the first paragraph is fluff. It's not that deep. "High functioning conservatee" and "voluntary cship", these are so contradictory that made me think of Bryan's interview, dancing around words and the fact Britney wants out. It's such a typical lawyer jargon.

Exactly right.  Ingham hired a full litigation team...but it is not for Britney.  They are there to support his representation.  It is an unfortunate distinction, but it does matter.  They have to take direction from Ingham, not Britney.  Ingham said they 'may' take directions from Britney, but remember she has no legal rights so she can't enforce that.

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, feo said:

I can think of someone who could be trying to escape liability, and that is Ingham.  If Britney seems to confirm that she 'wanted' the conservatorship when it first started then the whole fraud aspect of it might be less strong since they will paint the picture that it was 'voluntary'.  Then the court and everybody would be less inclined to look into how the conservatorship was started since everybody will be satisfied that Britney wanted it so it doesn't matter.  We know from the facts that that was NOT the case.

And something that would further support that notion is if Britney tells us she 'wants' to continue in a conservatorship of the estate.  That shows that she doesn't completely hate the idea of a conservatorship and makes us feel even more comfortable with the false idea that she also wanted the initial conservatorship. 

We should NOT give 100% of our trust to Ingham or anyone that had a hand in this conservatorship.  There is an instrinsic conflict of interest there.  As advocates we have to remain vigilant and skeptical.  Question everything and everyone

As an attorney, do you still think justice is possible through the court systems in America? 

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, feo said:

Exactly what @Catalin says is true.  I completely see where @Applejack and @steelmagnolia are coming from.

In a perfect world I would love to believe that everything we are told Britney 'wants' is what she actually wants.  And I would love to be able to see or hear her say it in a video and take it as fact.  Unfortunately that is not how things are or how simple life is. 

The fact of the matter is that while Britney is in a conservatorship we will NEVER be able to trust that the things she is saying (even in a video) are an expression of her true desires. 

Some examples off the top of my head:

-I think we all remember her 'all is well' video telling fans not to worry (when later we found out she was institutionalized against her will).  Britney reportedly later confirmed that to the judge in person.  As we all know, Ingham also later filed a document confirming Britney wanted her father out and invited public scrutiny.  Therefore the 'all is well' video where she seemed to tell fans that nothing was wrong and asked for privacy privacy was seemingly not at all what she really wanted.

-All the "In the Zone" debacle videos and posts.  In her instagram videos and posts Britney promoted the garbage "In the Zone" Lou Taylor cash grab, and if I remember correctly told us in a video that she was 'excited' about it .  In a later video she told us she could not attend because she had hurt her foot.  We later learned through court filings that she actually refused to attend or participate in that project at all in protest.

-All the social media posts/videos from 2008 to even the present.  All of us, myself included, were fed this lie that Britney had a pretty normal life.  We saw her with her kids, laughing, painting, travelling etc.  She looked happy.  Now we are learning how much control her conservators had over her.  Controlled who she spoke to, when she went out, what she ate.  HORRIBLE.

Bottom line, don't believe everything you see or hear.  We may even see a video of Britney saying she 'wants' to stay in a conservatorship, even just of the estate.  But the fact is that while she is in a conservatorship (even of the estate) someone has full control of her money.  Imagine somebody had full control of all of your properties, allowances, cars, bank accounts, credit cards etc.  They could make you do and say anything. 

While Britney remains in a conservatorship we will never really be sure of what she 'wants'.  Because of that, and as Britney clearly has far too much capacity to ever legally qualify for a conservatorship, we must never stop asking questions and should keep pushing for it to end.


For me, it's just the speed that I'm concerned with.

I want her to have time to think things through and make decisions she's comfortable with.

I believe it may be a bit scary for her to take big steps. She's been so over-controlled for so long that she's not likely to react to making big decisions in the same way that others who haven't been under those restrictions would. It may be quite anxiety-inducing for her.

I don't believe her curated social media posts whatsoever...But I do agree with what @Applejack is saying about her true wishes peaking through in the court documents.

And at a certain point, the paps are going to catch her off guard and ask her questions...One day we will see the truth pop out of her mouth when we least expect it.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, reVolution said:

 

I've always believed Diana and Britney had parallel lives, 2 pricess wronged. And I love what she says here in this small clip, where she talks about how strong women are seen as threat. "Why is she strong" "Where does she get that strength?" "Where is she taking it?" "Where is she going to use it?"

yes!!!! love lady di and been saying the same :) both beautiful kind and vulnerable souls in a arena full of lions...

Link to comment
2 hours ago, feo said:

We don't need resources to think ahead.  We just need to use our brains.  Think of all the people here trying to avoid liability: James Spears, Andrew Wallet, Lou Taylor, Sam Ingham, Reva Goetz, the doctors etc. You just need to put yourself in their shoes and think what plans or story would one or more of them will try to cook up to avoid jail time / lawsuits. 

One of those is the idea of Britney staying in a conservatorship (even just for the estate), which is something we already see some accounts and other people strangely bringing up.  We have to wonder why and anticipate these things so that we are prepared for them and not surprised.  That is how we can be best prepared for the battles ahead and avoid falling into traps.

Yup, and they even pushed the blame on Brit, that all this time she was the one who was not trying to challenge cship . While we know for a fact she's always tried to fight cship, but how to succeed in this fight if your court-appointed lawyer looks after NOT your interests, but the interests of the other team and his own.

 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, feo said:

I can think of someone who could be trying to escape liability, and that is Ingham.  If Britney seems to confirm that she 'wanted' the conservatorship when it first started then the whole fraud aspect of it might be less strong since they will paint the picture that it was 'voluntary'.  Then the court and everybody would be less inclined to look into how the conservatorship was started since everybody will be satisfied that Britney wanted it so it doesn't matter.  We know from the facts that that was NOT the case.

And something that would further support that notion is if Britney tells us she 'wants' to continue in a conservatorship of the estate.  That shows that she doesn't completely hate the idea of a conservatorship and makes us feel even more comfortable with the false idea that she also wanted the initial conservatorship. 

We should NOT give 100% of our trust to Ingham or anyone that had a hand in this conservatorship.  There is an instrinsic conflict of interest there.  As advocates we have to remain vigilant and skeptical.  Question everything and everyone

I want someone to ask this lawyer about this voicemail 

 

It proves that Ingham wasnt doing **** back then bc he wasnt working to help her. If he was listening to her and trying to help her, why would she feel the need to call to another lawyer? Another thing that would prove is since the beginning she tried to end it and wanted it to end. So who knows why she didnt file to end? Maybe bc they threatened with her kids, like she said on the voicemail? Maybe bc she knew Ingham wouldnt do it? Maybe she didnt even know she had this option? 

I dont ******* care even If she says she wants a cship over her estate while she under a cship, i wont support her brand either way. While shes still under a cship we cant know for sure what she wants, and has been this way for the past 13 years. It doesnt make sense that she would still have a cship over her estate bc no one young who can work and provide for others like she can, has that. its her ******* money, she should be able to do whatever she wants if theres a trust to protect her kids, or maybe Kevin could work for a change? 

We know she has been manipulated, threatned and forced to do things before. She could say this thinking she doesnt have other option or bc shes tired of fighting or bc shes happy bc at least Jamie is gone. Maybe they would make her fear shed lose everything, etc. She has been coerced to do many other things she didnt want to do in the past. Like u said, they also made her lie many times too. But we all know these people are all shady and she has been taken advantage all these years bc she doesnt have a voice, rights or control over anything. The way Ingham seems to be the one keeping her from attending the hearings just rubs me the wrong way, I dont trust him. I think hes just trying to save face. Does Britney really have anyone on her side that cares more about her than her estate and brand? Bc I always feel like sadly she doesnt have. 

Link to comment
On 2/15/2021 at 6:13 PM, jordeezy said:

As an attorney, do you still think justice is possible through the court systems in America? 

I'm a Canadian lawyer, not a lawyer in USA.  However, we share a lot of the same problems across the border. 

I do still believe in the justice system even though it is so SO flawed.  Some areas are more corrupt than others.  Unfortunately this is how errors in the system are often found, by people suffering needless abuse like Britney.  Once those things get enough public outrage or scrutiny then the legislative branches can fix them.  But a lot of people do find justice sooner, or later.

That being said I ALWAYS advise clients to try to reach agreements as much as possible for their legal disputes because going to court is always a gamble.  There is only so much we can do as lawyers.  The judge you get in court pretty much has 99% control as to what is going to happen, and it is pretty hard to change judges.  By negotiating an agreement you still maintain more control over your situation.

Link to comment
On 2/15/2021 at 6:14 PM, Steel Magnolia said:


For me, it's just the speed that I'm concerned with.

I want her to have time to think things through and make decisions she's comfortable with.

I believe it may be a bit scary for her to take big steps. She's been so over-controlled for so long that she's not likely to react to making big decisions in the same way that others who haven't been under those restrictions would. It may be quite anxiety-inducing for her.

I don't believe her curated social media posts whatsoever...But I do agree with what @Applejack is saying about her true wishes peaking through in the court documents.

And at a certain point, the paps are going to catch her off guard and ask her questions...One day we will see the truth pop out of her mouth when we least expect it.

I wish we could even trust what Britney would say, but we can't.  While she is in a conservatorship she has a figurative gun to her head...and the gun is held by her conservators and court appointed lawyer.  If somebody was holding on to ALL your money and assets, how likely is it that you would say something against them?  The degree of control and chances of coercion are too high

Link to comment

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...

We noticed you're using an ad blocker  :ehum_britney_um_unsure_confused_what:

Thanks for visiting Exhale! Your support is greatly appreciated 💜  

Exhale survives through advertising revenue. Please, disable your ad block extension to help us and continue browsing Exhale. 🙏

I've disabled ad block