If The Conservatorship Was As Bad As We Think… Why Did Britney Lose The Lawsuit ?

[Bingjmljr]

If the conservatorship was as bad as we are made to believe, why has there been no justice? I believe in two sides to every story and I think as Britney fans we hated the idea of her being forced to live a life she rejected. I just don’t understand legally, if things were being handled so poorly, how did Britney lose?

Edited Sunday at 05:04 AM by Bingjmljr

[humstarr]

Because it was an organized crime. Too many people pointing fingers at each other, too many criminals hiding behind their licences and degrees. The same reasons why p Diddy is walking free even after those videos were leaked. Bill cosby is walking free after admitting on a record to drugging and raping women. Criminals are running the system. 

[Emil87]

Just because there was no legal justice does not invalidate Britney’s “side of the story”.

Read her damn book if you’re hung up on whether the con was as bad as you were made to believe. And keep in mind, even that was watered down and there’s probably even more that we don’t know about.

[super.nova]

If you have to ask, then you don’t really understand what happened.

[Bingjmljr]

Just now, super.nova said:

If you have to ask, then you don’t really understand what happened.

Anyone on this site who thinks the understand what happened is delusional. As I said there are two sides to every story and unfortunately we’re getting our side from someone who is obviously struggling with mental health issues… so her side is not 100% reliable.

[Pinky98]

The fact is, what happened to Britney was legal in the US. When you’re under a conservatorship you have no rights and they can do whatever they like in your ‘best interests’.

There will never be justice, because in the eyes of the law it was fine 

[Unbroken]

Cuz cruelty wins in the movies (and in reality)

[theodoritasenorita]

Wow. I can't tell if this post is meant to stir people up or if you actually mean what you're saying. 

[Bingjmljr]

6 minutes ago, theodoritasenorita said:

Wow. I can't tell if this post is meant to stir people up or if you actually mean what you're saying. 

Always mean what I say… I think it’s very easy to believe the details when it comes from the person you admire. I just think there is so much we don’t know, and Britney hasn’t done anything since the conservatorship to show shes thriving.

Edited Sunday at 05:43 AM by Bingjmljr

[whenthedogscaneout]

Jordan, I guess it’s time…

[whenthedogscaneout]

6 minutes ago, theodoritasenorita said:

Wow. I can't tell if this post is meant to stir people up or if you actually mean what you're saying. 

Obvious trolling… and not even the entertaining kind. 

[theodoritasenorita]

3 minutes ago, Bingjmljr said:

Always mean what I say… I think it’s very easy to believe the details when it comes from the person you admire. I just think there is so much we don’t know, and Britney hasn’t done anything since the conservatorship to show shes thriving.

There is so much no one knows but victim blaming isn't exactly the way to go about getting justice for Britney, is it? 

[Bingjmljr]

3 minutes ago, whenthedogscaneout said:

Obvious trolling… and not even the entertaining kind. 

Not trolling 😎

[Dark Willow]

Britney c-ship was extreme and if she was able to work,  then she shouldn't be in a c-ship with people controlling her... and her money (what I think it was the real reason behind the c-ship deal)

However... Britney never had a chance of winning, I don't want to say everything I think because people close to her are lurking here... but yeah, the settlement was the sign Britney lost.

It's just funny some fans were so hopeful with her amazing lawyer... but they accepted real quick the fact the system was corrupt and he couldn't do anything. 

And the fact Britney abusers are still free and thriving.

[Bingjmljr]

I think the conservatorship was extreme. But I think we are all easily influenced if we are more connected to one side or the other. I think there is a lot about Britney we don’t know, and she has shown for almost 20 years now that something is up (whatever that may be). I think her family got greedy, but I also think they probably know more about her mental health then we do.

[theodoritasenorita]

5 minutes ago, Bingjmljr said:

I think the conservatorship was extreme. But I think we are all easily influenced if we are more connected to one side or the other. I think there is a lot about Britney we don’t know, and she has shown for almost 20 years now that something is up (whatever that may be). I think her family got greedy, but I also think they probably know more about her mental health then we do.

Do you know that people who commit violent crimes are afforded public defenders, but unless a less monied spouse has been beaten and there is documented proof of domestic violence, she/he/they are not afforded the same luxury of an attorney? Psychological/emotional abuse.. good luck. Just because you can't see the scars doesn't mean they are not there. You're right. None of us knows except Britney.

That said, here's a fact: K-Fed filed a restraining order against Jamie Spears. Why? Because he's such a sweet, caring person? No. The man is abusive and K-fed wouldn't stand for it. 

There's no doubt in my mind that the abuse committed by Britney's father started way before the c-ship. 

*Britney has problems. Her family. Hopefully she can move on from them. She's young and talented enough to rebuild and start over. Whatever that looks like for her. 

Edited Sunday at 06:04 AM by theodoritasenorita

[ItsSway]

1 hour ago, Bingjmljr said:

Anyone on this site who thinks the understand what happened is delusional. As I said there are two sides to every story and unfortunately we’re getting our side from someone who is obviously struggling with mental health issues… so her side is not 100% reliable.

Delusional? Wow. And yet you wanna talk about her mental health when it’s not for you to talk on…she’s struggling yes, anyone would when they were practically fed lithium and giving blood on the daily.

[PerfectLover.]

To be honest, what a stupid question! 

[PokemonSpears]

she didn't "lose" any lawsuit, there was no lawsuit

The process that extended for all these years after the conservatorship was terminated, was the actual conservatorship case that was open since 2008. Rosengart wanted Jamie to explain the expenses he did as conservator, particularly the accounting that involved the payment to TriStar the year Britney started her hiatus, which would've been the easier to confirm that there was corruption / conflict of interests to probably use it as a basis for an eventual lawsuit. On the other hand, Jamie wanted Britney to pay for his attorney's fees.

There was never a lawsuit, there was never a formal accusation of anything, or even a trial. All these years it was a back and forth of nothing, Jamie and his team just delaying things to infinity with objections or not complying with the requests. The hearings most of the time wouldn't lead to anything, and would be resumed months later, because that's how probate court works.

Britney just decided to stop the never ending legal process and move on.

 

Again, no one was accused or judged, so it doesn't mean the conservatorship was good or needed, it just means Britney didn't proceed legally, because she didn't want to extend this any longer.

 

Thing is, her case is so unusual and unprecedented that I really doubt there's a right way in which they should've handled it. What crimes could they pursue, when technically, everything Jamie did under the conservatorship was approved by the judge(s) at the time. Who is to blame then, Jamie, Ingham, the judge? How do you accuse a judge for not doing their job right? Do you sue the government? The hearings at the probate court were starting to get more difficult towards the end because some wanted Britney to be there in person but Britney obviously didn't. A formal lawsuit like this without Britney's testimony or presence would've been even harder.

She most likely asked Rosengart for how long this would continue or what would be the landscape in case she wanted to sue everyone involved, how long the trials would be, how many aspects of her life and career would be exposed, how much she would have to be there, idk, just how excruciating in general this would be, that probably she just decided to finish things here for the better, for her own peace.

 

 

A similar thing happened with Shakira, she came to an agreement to avoid years of attending trials, a never ending legal process that would require them to interview over 100 witnesses, go day by day to demonstrate whether she lived long enough in Spain to have to pay the taxes, etc. People think that coming to an agreement means they "lost" or they were guilty, when they're basically just paying to have their time and peace of mind back.

 

Edited Sunday at 07:46 AM by PokemonSpears

[Loosenupthosebuttons]

Britney lost the lawsuit bc she refused to testify.