Accounting review - Twelfth Account Current

[BritneyIsFinallyFree]

6 minutes ago, Steel Magnolia said:

Eh...

That one I wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole.

Unlike attorneys Adam Streisand and John Anderson, who Britney also tried to hire in 2008, Eardley solicited. That's likely why he was disbarred. Soliciting clients is not allowed.

The mention of the conservatorship he would have gotten straight from Sam Lutfi. The two of them were working together.

Britney should thank her lucky stars she dodged that bullet, IMO.

Yeah I know of the solicitation, but I can’t imagine his bullet possibly being more fatal to her estate and career than the one she was allowed to take under full purview of the court. I mean, Jamie doesn’t even fit the criteria for being a conservator for the state of CA; you’re supposed to have a degree. 
 

But I suppose it’s like Lutfi; he was trying to warn her but simultaneously was shady as well. However, Eardley did offer his services pro bono, which is interesting.

On another note, here’s the petition for combining her SJB with the conservatorship assets as a “unified whole.” 
 

https://static.wixstatic.com/ugd/237b6d_5ea4b6591a1541838228c5aa491d2e0a.pdf

[Steel Magnolia]

4 minutes ago, BritneyIsFinallyFree said:

Yeah I know of the solicitation, but I can’t imagine his bullet possibly being more fatal to her estate and career than the one she was allowed to take under full purview of the court. I mean, Jamie doesn’t even fit the criteria for being a conservator for the state of CA; you’re supposed to have a degree. 
 

But I suppose it’s like Lutfi; he was trying to warn her but simultaneously was shady as well. However, Eardley did offer his services pro bono, which is interesting.

On another note, here’s the petition for combining her SJB with the conservatorship assets as a “unified whole.” 
 

https://static.wixstatic.com/ugd/237b6d_5ea4b6591a1541838228c5aa491d2e0a.pdf

 

Have you ever seen the transcripts of what Lutfi was suggesting to Lynne Spears when he contacted her in 2019?

He wasn't proposing that she terminate the conservatorship...He was proposing that she stage a coup and take over the reigns of the conservatorship herself.

I don't believe anything different would have happened back in 2008 had Eardley become her lawyer.

I believe Lutfi would have attempted to take over the reigns. He had already cornered Britney into agreeing to a multi-million dollar management contract (replacing Larry Rudolph). He continued to try to squeeze her for that money right up until he lost his lawsuit in 2016.

[ICouldntThinkOfOne]

1 hour ago, BritneyIsFinallyFree said:

According to Rolling Stone, Lynne freaked out circa 2004 when Britney made the trust, and was getting married to Kfed sans prenup (which they eventually talked her into). That’s purportedly when they became very “involved” in her life, and why she cut off all contact by 2006 or 2007 (hence why the paparazzi were the ones to tell her JL was pregnant; there was no communication at that point). 

Didn't JL say her family actively Didn't tell Britney in her book?

[BritneyIsFinallyFree]

9 minutes ago, Steel Magnolia said:

 

Have you ever seen the transcripts of what Lutfi was suggesting to Lynne Spears when he contacted her in 2019?

He wasn't proposing that she terminate the conservatorship...He was proposing that she stage a coup and take over the reigns of the conservatorship herself.

I don't believe anything different would have happened back in 2008 had Eardley become her lawyer.

I believe Lutfi would have attempted to take over the reigns. He had already cornered Britney into agreeing to a multi-million dollar management contract (replacing Larry Rudolph). He continued to try to squeeze her for that money right up until he lost his lawsuit in 2016.

I mean…

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CZ2KRzx6TvsCZmLpucUa05oqX1cQrv-8/view?usp=drivesdk
 

This is one of the only 2008 documents that truthfully explain what Jamie has already done.

[BritneyIsFinallyFree]

14 minutes ago, ICouldntThinkOfOne said:

Didn't JL say her family actively Didn't tell Britney in her book?

I don’t know, I would never read a book by JL, lol. Court documents don’t lie; the Spears do.

[Steel Magnolia]

6 minutes ago, BritneyIsFinallyFree said:

I mean…

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CZ2KRzx6TvsCZmLpucUa05oqX1cQrv-8/view?usp=drivesdk
 

This is one of the only 2008 documents that truthfully explain what Jamie has already done.

 

It's not Eardley himself that is the issue...He was likely an innocent bystander.

But I truly believe Lutfi began in 2007 as a member of "Team CON" ...The only reason he wasn't a part of the conservatorship himself between 2008 and 2021 is because Lou and Jamie unexpectedly cut him out at the time they issued the first RO.

[BritneyIsFinallyFree]

Just now, Steel Magnolia said:

 

It's not Eardley himself that is the issue...He was likely an innocent bystander.

But I truly believe Lutfi began in 2007 as a member of "Team CON" ...The only reason he wasn't a part of the conservatorship himself between 2008 and 2021 is because Lou and Jamie unexpectedly cut him out at the time they issued the first RO.

Right; I was talking specifically about Eardley, and his disbarment due to his attempt to save Britney from this; hence I only mentioned him in my OP, alongside the link, and not Lutfi at all. 

[Steel Magnolia]

6 minutes ago, BritneyIsFinallyFree said:

Right; I was talking specifically about Eardley, and his disbarment due to his attempt to save Britney from this; hence I only mentioned him in my OP, alongside the link, and not Lutfi at all. 

But the two cannot be separated.

You wrote that:

"...if anyone is curious as to why the attorney she tried to hire, Jon Eardley, was not just issued a RO against Britney but DISBARRED despite a 20 year law career sans any infractions, it’s because he explicity warned her what they were doing."

Legally speaking, what Eardley did was solicit a client...He did that because Lutfi approached him first. Eardley then solicited Britney's business.

Had Lutfi told Britney that information himself (that they were going to put her in a conservatorship) and Britney reached out to Eardley he would have been fine. But the opposite occurred.

Eardley, Lutfi, and Michael Sands were a team. A package deal.

https://www.mtv.com/news/1582277/britney-spears-has-been-robbed-her-self-proclaimed-lawyer-insists/

My argument is...Jamie's lawyers didn't go after Eardley because he warned her what they were doing. He went after Eardley because of his direct association with Lutfi.

[BritneyIsFinallyFree]

17 minutes ago, Steel Magnolia said:

But the two cannot be separated.

You wrote that:

"...if anyone is curious as to why the attorney she tried to hire, Jon Eardley, was not just issued a RO against Britney but DISBARRED despite a 20 year law career sans any infractions, it’s because he explicity warned her what they were doing."

Legally speaking, what Eardley did was solicit a client...He did that because Lutfi approached him first. Eardley then solicited Britney's business.

Had Lutfi told Britney that information himself (that they were going to put her in a conservatorship) and Britney reached out to Eardley he would have been fine. But the opposite occurred.

Eardley, Lutfi, and Michael Sands were a team. A package deal.

https://www.mtv.com/news/1582277/britney-spears-has-been-robbed-her-self-proclaimed-lawyer-insists/

My argument is...Jamie's lawyers didn't go after Eardley because he warned her what they were doing. He went after Eardley because of his direct association with Lutfi.

Fair enough! Honestly, my only argument, which I maintain, (although seemingly failed at making clear), was simply that anyone who told the public and/or Britney about the reality of the conservatorship was immediately silenced or disappeared somehow, losing all credibility in the public, and Eardly was in fact an innocent dude caught in the crossfire and just one of many casualties by Team Conservatorship, as you elucidated. 
 

Apologies if I wasn’t expressing myself properly; Finnish is my first language

[Steel Magnolia]

2 minutes ago, BritneyIsFinallyFree said:

Fair enough! Honestly, my only argument, which I maintain, (although seemingly failed at making clear), was simply that anyone who told the public and/or Britney about the reality of the conservatorship was immediately silenced or disappeared somehow, losing all credibility in the public, and Eardly was in fact an innocent dude caught in the crossfire and just one of many casualties by Team Conservatorship, as you elucidated. 
 

Apologies if I wasn’t expressing myself properly; Finnish is my first language

Agreed, they disappeared anyone who tried to help.

Britney tried to hire Adam Streisand and John Anderson to represent her as well...But because they didn't break the law, and weren't associated with Lutfi, then Jamie's lawyers had no reason to spend any time on them.

I suspect that if Adam Streisand had held his ground, and pursued the case with the same vigor that Eardley did, then he might have actually gotten somewhere...But he also might have also felt their wrath.

We've heard from David Lucado that he was followed. Adnan was also followed, and was reportedly stabbed.

Who knows what might have happened to Streisand or Anderson if they pursued the case?

[BritneyIsFinallyFree]

5 minutes ago, Steel Magnolia said:

Agreed, they disappeared anyone who tried to help.

Britney tried to hire Adam Streisand and John Anderson to represent her as well...But because they didn't break the law, and weren't associated with Lutfi, then Jamie's lawyers had no reason to spend any time on them.

I suspect that if Adam Streisand had held his ground, and pursued the case with the same vigor that Eardley did, then he might have actually gotten somewhere...But he also might have also felt their wrath.

We've heard from David Lucado that he was followed. Adnan was also followed, and was reportedly stabbed.

Who knows what might have happened to Streisand or Anderson if they pursued the case?

When Jamie actually admitted to having shown Britney a film of David making out with someone, so that “she wouldn’t be embarrassed in the media,” I was just aghast at the implications of the “security” apparatus and Truman Show-esque reality of “her” life. 

Also, Adnan was STABBED?! Do you happen to know when this occurred?!

[BritneyIsFinallyFree]

18 minutes ago, Steel Magnolia said:

Who knows what might have happened to Streisand or Anderson if they pursued the case?

Well, now I’m wondering if this isn’t why Streisand didn’t pursue the case: he ******* coauthored journals with DR SPAR regarding diminished capacity, undue influence and legal implications:

https://www.docdroid.net/HNxxxFw/streisand-actec-journal-winter-2008-pdf

Edit:

Heres another one they coauthored:

https://www.docdroid.net/QKaFhqQ/mental-disorders-that-erode-capacity-streisand-pdf#page=2
 

And then of course Spar was the one to reportedly state Britney lacked the capacity to hire his own coauthor and colleague, Streisand. 

[Steel Magnolia]

9 minutes ago, BritneyIsFinallyFree said:

When Jamie actually admitted to having shown Britney a film of David making out with someone, so that “she wouldn’t be embarrassed in the media,” I was just aghast at the implications of the “security” apparatus and Truman Show-esque reality of “her” life. 

Also, Adnan was STABBED?! Do you happen to know when this occurred?!

April 12, 2008.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1015183/Britneys-paparazzo-ex-Adnan-Ghalib-stabbed-claims-US-report.html

[RebellionSparkles]

1 hour ago, BritneyIsFinallyFree said:

And then of course Spar was the one to reportedly state Britney lacked the capacity to hire his own coauthor and colleague, Streisand. 

Dr. Spar never provided a capacity declaration. The original filings to create the CON said they intended to submit a declaration from Spar about B’s capacity. There was NEVER a capacity declaration submitted—it’s the saddest part of the case for me. 
Dr. Spar on the Netflix doc made clear that he never spoke with Britney, and he was completely confused when all these FreeBritney people were contacting him…he was unaware that Team Con had used his name in the case. 
Judge Brenda Penny confirmed this when she ended the CON’ship, saying that a capacity declaration was never provided. 
…it’s so sad to me. Britney (and the world) had been told a completely different story—that a doctor had determine she was unfit. When Britney spoke on June 23, she repeated several times that she did not want to be subjected to another evaluation—it sounds like the “evaluations” were extremely abusive.  And then on FreeDBritney day. Judge Brenda Penny said that an evaluation was not required to end the CONship because there was never an evaluation provided to get B into the CONship. 
 

there never was a capacity issue with Britney. But she was lied to a left to believe a false story.

[Tar_isa]

I've been taking a look at the 12th Account liked in this thread, and I remembered an episode of the Toxic podcast where they said (from what I remember) the accountings never showed any of the Intellectual Property income. Ever since I heard that I became convinced that the IP money is key to this whole thing, but I could be understanding it wrong so I have a couple questions...

In the 12th account current, the doc says: "Due to the difficulties in valuing the Conservatee’s Intellectual Property, including,without limitation, trademarks, royalties, copyrights, name and likeness, these assets are not valued at this time pursuant to Court Order filed 3/16/2010."

Does this mean there's IP money unaccounted for ASIDE from those 60mil, somewhere, so her real fortune would be bigger?

Or does it mean the IP money is INSIDE those 60mil but could be hypothetically moved around and decimated because no one is overlooking those actions (due to that clause by which they can just go ahead and present an accounting without valuing those assets), so it could be 'easy' to decimate that fortune and keep it under the 60mil?

Sorry if my questions are silly 

[Bambas]

59 minutes ago, Tar_isa said:

I've been taking a look at the 12th Account liked in this thread, and I remembered an episode of the Toxic podcast where they said (from what I remember) the accountings never showed any of the Intellectual Property income. Ever since I heard that I became convinced that the IP money is key to this whole thing, but I could be understanding it wrong so I have a couple questions...

In the 12th account current, the doc says: "Due to the difficulties in valuing the Conservatee’s Intellectual Property, including,without limitation, trademarks, royalties, copyrights, name and likeness, these assets are not valued at this time pursuant to Court Order filed 3/16/2010."

Does this mean there's IP money unaccounted for ASIDE from those 60mil, somewhere, so her real fortune would be bigger?

Or does it mean the IP money is INSIDE those 60mil but could be hypothetically moved around and decimated because no one is overlooking those actions (due to that clause by which they can just go ahead and present an accounting without valuing those assets), so it could be 'easy' to decimate that fortune and keep it under the 60mil?

Sorry if my questions are silly 

Not a silly question at all!

Maybe it's unaccounted because it's no longer in her name and the "difficulties" is just an excuse to not present any information about it. They thought the conservatorship would never end.

[Steel Magnolia]

3 hours ago, Tar_isa said:

I've been taking a look at the 12th Account liked in this thread, and I remembered an episode of the Toxic podcast where they said (from what I remember) the accountings never showed any of the Intellectual Property income. Ever since I heard that I became convinced that the IP money is key to this whole thing, but I could be understanding it wrong so I have a couple questions...

In the 12th account current, the doc says: "Due to the difficulties in valuing the Conservatee’s Intellectual Property, including,without limitation, trademarks, royalties, copyrights, name and likeness, these assets are not valued at this time pursuant to Court Order filed 3/16/2010."

Does this mean there's IP money unaccounted for ASIDE from those 60mil, somewhere, so her real fortune would be bigger?

Or does it mean the IP money is INSIDE those 60mil but could be hypothetically moved around and decimated because no one is overlooking those actions (due to that clause by which they can just go ahead and present an accounting without valuing those assets), so it could be 'easy' to decimate that fortune and keep it under the 60mil?

Sorry if my questions are silly 

You hit the nail on the head.

I believe this to be the key to the entire thing.

I'm not sure what the equivalent is in the USA, but in my country there's an organization that collects a fee every time a song is played on the radio. A portion of that fee eventually makes its way to the artist.

Which of the LLC's is collecting that fee right now?

There's also publishing rights...We've just seen other artists like Bob Dylan and Bruce Springsteen sell their catalogs for millions...Bruce is currently asking half a billion.

Sure, the money is in the songwriting credits...But who took the $$ when "Everytime" played in Spring Breakers? Which LLC did it go into?

It's easy to track the funds generated by ticket sales at Planet Hollywood...Not so easy to track money generated by publishing or from her image on the side of a hairdryer or curling iron box.

https://metro.co.uk/2014/12/19/omg-britney-spears-has-launched-a-range-of-haircare-products-for-lidl-4993956/

[Tar_isa]

3 hours ago, Bambas said:

Not a silly question at all!

Maybe it's unaccounted because it's no longer in her name and the "difficulties" is just an excuse to not present any information about it. They thought the conservatorship would never end.

By "not in her name" you mean that the I.P. money could be going to some account outside of the conservatorship estate? I assume if those earnings were going to one of the LLCs included in the estate it would have to be accounted for, no? After all, during the whole conservatorship nothing could really be in her name since she wasn't a legal person.

And that makes me wonder, all those LLCs Jamie&Andrew opened, did they open them in HER name, as conservators, or in their own name? Were Jamie's titles in those companies taken as a legal representative of Britney, so when he stops being conservator he loses his position to Britney, or do all those people still have power over those companies (and Britney's Brands). Is there even a way to know this?

 

[Tar_isa]

1 hour ago, Steel Magnolia said:

I'm not sure what the equivalent is in the USA, but in my country there's an organization that collects a fee every time a song is played on the radio. A portion of that fee eventually makes its way to the artist.

It's the same in my country as well

 

1 hour ago, Steel Magnolia said:

Sure, the money is in the songwriting credits...But who took the $$ when "Everytime" played in Spring Breakers? Which LLC did it go into?

It's easy to track the funds generated by ticket sales at Planet Hollywood...Not so easy to track money generated by publishing or from her image on the side of a hairdryer or curling iron box.

God, I can't wait for Rosengart to take a deep dive into this whole mess..

[Bambas]

55 minutes ago, Tar_isa said:

By "not in her name" you mean that the I.P. money could be going to some account outside of the conservatorship estate?

Yes, I believe there is a very strong chance that they diverted money outside the conservatorship by creating LLCs in the name of Jamie and, who knows, maybe JL. It also wouldn't surprise me that LT is involved in this and that Jamie, as illiterate as he is, is not aware of the whole scope.