Court Transcript of Meet & Confer, Mathew Rosengart vs Alex Weingarten

[s&m]

1 hour ago, rennen2.0 said:

Neither of them came off very well. They kept interrupting each other, and Rosengart was particularly bad for it. Although towards the end it seemed like Rosengart had the upper hand when Weingarten hurried off the call.  

Interrupting is usual 

But did you notice that Alex refused to answer Rosengart question? “The question”? 

[s&m]

18 minutes ago, ICouldntThinkOfOne said:

Not necessarily. They have the recordings, which break laws. They have the loan, which is a conflict of interest. They have the lack of a declaration, which is proof in itself that there was fault, and they have enough witness testimony to verify the abuse.

Exactly. Rosengart may have even more proof but he keeps quiet! He wants the deposition to catch something 

[ICouldntThinkOfOne]

That was some read. 

To summarise, it appears to be the first of two calls in a two day period, with a focus on Jamie's filed deposition of Britney. Rosengart is basically arguing that Britney isn't the one to be deposed because the allegations did not come from her; they came from the New York Times, and a Whistle-blower, Britney was in a conservatorship; how could she have known this to make these allegations?

Weingarten basically counter argues that because they have been filed by Britney's side, then therefore, they are her allegations against Jamie, and she should be deposed, even if her response "I don't know"...

This appears to have happened before Rosengart petitioned the courts to make Jamie handover evidence, which appears to be a key talking point if my understanding of the word compel is correct.

Weingarten tried to make it that Rosengart is attacking the him, and is refusing to hand over documents (relating to information that Rosengart has made clear Jamie has no right to see, in a precious filing) and tries to place the onus of proving misconduct on Britney.

Rosengart then reiterates that the prove exists and it is the correspondence between Jamie, Tristar and Blackbox and wants it on the record whether or not Jamie has been asked about this series correspondences, as it would directly relate to the allegations...

Weingarten dips and dives away from answering the question before shutting down the call, if my reading is correct.

[ICouldntThinkOfOne]

21 minutes ago, MikeHunt said:

I completely understand what you’re saying but I mean he keeps getting away with evading the process. I guess as a Britney fan, I just get tired of seeing these people walk away from the situation with their hands clean, when I’m reality, they should be sued and placed in jail. 

Well it's important to look at the timing of this. This was Rosengart, once again, asking Team Jamie to just hand over the information of their own accord. After this, Rosengart petitioned the court to compel him to hand over information.

They basically used up their chances, and now, it's up to the judge. A judge wouldn't want her court to look this bad, particularly if its relating to the most recognised celebrity in history. If she approves it, Jamie has no option. If he fights against it or refuses, he gets penalised.

[easy]

i believe rosengart is not going to ask this lawyer a question he doesn't already know the answer to. ie, the texts/communications between jamie, tri star, and black box. like another user said, i believe he already has them and jamie's side has NOT handed those over yet in the mountains of evidence they've handed over already. that's why he keeps asking, because rosengart knows they exist and knows jamie has NOT handed them over yet. he's catching jamie's side in lies that he will use against them.

[RebellionSparkles]

1 hour ago, ivosoares said:

Weingarten kept saying ‘If my client has done corruption prove it!’ And Rosengart like ‘Yeah I would like to, but you have the evidence’ 

they probably destroyed the communications for sure, isn’t that illegal? To destroy documents and communications as a fiduciary? 

they've done so many illegal things, but they only get in a huff about a few of the illegal things, which is so confusing for me...thats why i want a lawyer to explain the legal strategy that is happening.

From reading the transcript, it sounds like (IMO) that Rosengart has the evidence he needs...but for some reason he needs Jamie to hand it over.

^^for instance we know he has footage of the Blackbox's recordings.

[RebellionSparkles]

3 minutes ago, easy said:

i believe rosengart is not going to ask this lawyer a question he doesn't already know the answer to. ie, the texts/communications between jamie, tri star, and black box. like another user said, i believe he already has them and jamie's side has NOT handed those over yet in the mountains of evidence they've handed over already. that's why he keeps asking, because rosengart knows they exist and knows jamie has NOT handed them over yet. he's catching jamie's side in lies that he will use against them.

the part I wish i understood better is: they have been caught in a zillion lies. Why is this lie the important one to prove? Just because the probate court is so effed up, and I have to just realize its something I'm not going to understand?

[easy]

Just now, RebellionSparkles said:

the part I wish i understood better is: they have been caught in a zillion lies. Why is this lie the important one to prove? Just because the probate court is so effed up, and I have to just realize its something I'm not going to understand?

i think it's more due to the fact that it's bigger than jamie just lying. he's withholding evidence that he has no right to withhold and/or, more likely, destroyed it. which will set jamie up for even MORE criminal charges.

[Spicechinodiva]

I hate to say it. But Jamie will throw people under the bus for a plea deal. House arrest for all the names.

 

You know that's how I feel, like plea deal or nothing 

[Ghoulia]

4 hours ago, rennen2.0 said:

Neither of them came off very well. They kept interrupting each other, and Rosengart was particularly bad for it. Although towards the end it seemed like Rosengart had the upper hand when Weingarten hurried off the call.  

Yeah, that was a painful read. 

[Forever222]

Everybody wants to blame Jamie anyway. Rosengart brought up good case law in his recent fillings, showing that they CAN go back over previously accepted Accountings if it’s proved Jamie is hiding information from the court.

Jamie continuing to avoid deposition is proving this. 
 

[G-unit]

Alex said he made a copy of the audio.  Why isn’t he providing that to Rosengart?  Surely he didn’t throw it away.

[Bboy1988]

I hate Jaime so much. Evil troll. 

[Onyx1Boss]

It says it all, for a fiduciary to refuse to hand over communications and records.  This fact alone should be enough for a judge to rule against him and compel compliance 

[Forever222]

5 hours ago, G-unit said:

Alex said he made a copy of the audio.  Why isn’t he providing that to Rosengart?  Surely he didn’t throw it away.

I think Rosengart has a lot of info already.  But he needs to push Jamie into a corner to prove clear guilt. Prosecutors won’t make this a criminal case otherwise. 

[RedBloodedWoman]

6 hours ago, G-unit said:

Alex said he made a copy of the audio.  Why isn’t he providing that to Rosengart?  Surely he didn’t throw it away.

He has it