Jump to content

ICouldntThinkOfOne

Inferno
  • Posts

    2,259
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1
  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by ICouldntThinkOfOne

  1. Frankly, I find this arguement null and void tbh. Jamie Spears brought this issue to the court of public opinion by doing interviews calling it a conspiracy theory, and telling his lawyer to tell the world Britney can end it if she wants to, but when it comes to leaking information, he has leaked documents to tabloids before filing them. Additionally, in the June 23rd hearing, Penny spoke about leaks coming involved parties. Either everyone is reprimanded or no one is.
  2. We don't know for sure. The instagram account was posted a video of Britney teasing her support for Hulu Doc, but then posted a caption saying she didn't like them. This happened after Sam made his statement about Jamie. When the BBC doc released, the instagram was very quick to target it. What we do know is Britney wants a platform to be heard and wants the public to know her story and she made that very clear. After that, we got a unusual post that targeted the documentaries again. So, we have no audio or video of her saying she doesn't support them, and because the instagram is so controversial. The documentaries have painted Britney in a positive and honest light, while painting those around her honestly, and deservedly bad. She wants her story public so I feel like right now, she wants them out there but wants to tell her story.
  3. Aren't her socials managed by Crowdsurf and posts intended for her Instagram were uploaded to Britney's?
  4. They literally launched the movement and the account that accused them of that was Lawyers For Britney. They also practically everyone else who has been involved of the same thing, as well as trying to discredit the voicemail as fake.
  5. Possibly, I mean we are talking about a man and a legal team who did an interview to say it was all a conspiracy, tell the world Britney doesn't want the conservatorship to end, told Britney she just doesn't remember and then petitioned to end on the basis that they're all paid.... ...why wouldn't they muddy the waters if it got fans looking at Britneys boyfriend cynically?
  6. Or maybe the tabloid that regularly supports the conservatorship regardless of Jamie and his legal teams actions wants to muddy the waters by showing sam off in a positive light, knowing certain fans question him and any article that TMZ posts about him would make fans question him more... ...which ultimately benefits Team Conservatorship, as he was the only person Britney spoke about in a positive light.
  7. It's incredibly odd that "she" explains why her hair changed after two other posts that were rehashed as new, but isn't it interesting that this was never posted before because this is the fire we miss!
  8. Not a deposition, that's a seperate thing all together if I'm correct. It's usually more to do with questioning, like a trial or a defamation suit. Britney may attend, personally speaking I believe she will due to the content, but it would be a plea or a testimony, maybe even objections etc etc but until the day, we won't know.
  9. So the hearing on the 29th is to address Jamie's suspension or removal from the position of conservator of the estate based on previous filings supported by Britney, Lynne and Jodi on behalf of the medical team. His replacement will be suggested at this point. The appointment of Jodi as the permanent conservator of the person will be decided. Additionally, Jamie's petition to end the conservatorship will also be discussed and could affect the previous two topics. So no, no deposition.
  10. This is from February of this year. Part of me is expecting a filing to appear shortly. I mean why now? Side note, I don't understand why we have to pretend that it's a theory that she doesn't fully control the account. This isn't an outrageous statement given the circumstances and how we know the instagram has been weaponised. Frankly I think its actually counter productive to assume that it's 100% her, given the fact that her team used it to convince the world she was okay with her situation. This is not intended to derail the thread but even the timing of this feels off.
  11. Part of me wonders where these photos are from because while some of them look like photos from his job, like behind the scenes stuff, others look like they're from him hanging out with someone close, say a girlfriend because without proof, I can only theorise. Speaking of theories, isn't there a theory that Britney's photo has limited access to the Internet and all photos are uploaded to an online cloud drive first. Without accusing, part of me kinda feels like we're seeing private photos because someone shared them.
  12. Everything comes back to the medical declaration never being filed. Let's assume that Goetz was completely professional here, just for the sale of this moment, and gave Jamie the benefit of the doubt that Britney was in such a bad place, and notice would make things worse etc.... ...this all needed a report which was to be filed at a later date. Once Goetz agreed to that, the conservatorship was in place, and there was no real way to work around it, the judge had already approved the conservatorship without medical declarations and the ball was in Team Con's court as the powers were granted. If the judge challenged the lack of a declaration, the rebuttal is "...but you approved it without it so its on the courts!"... ..alternatively, if the judge demanded the document, Jamie had power of what doctors had access to Britney and we know how that has went.
  13. She didn't "allow it to be public" though, all court proceedings are public unless the involved parties state otherwise, and the judge is asked to seal it on reasonable grounds. Jodi's lawyer tried to seal the hearing on the grounds that Britney might have spoken about her health or her children, and as Jodi was involved, she had the right to privacy regarding Britney's health. If it wasn't for Britney there and then interrupting her and making it clear she wanted it open, Penny would have closed the court, and once the cat was out of the bag, the audio hearings were removed. Did she put any emergency measures in place? No. Has she since? No. Not even when Britney, Jodi and Lynne, and their respective lawyers are asking the court to do so. Ingham never worked in Britney's best interest but even he did the bare minimum, Penny still acted with indifference towards Britney's safety. The only reason things are changing is because her lawyer isn't an incompetent fool. Again, as much as ingham did nothing, the probate court and its judges are at fault here for allowing the conservatorship to happen without giving Britney notice, or valid health grounds or declarations. I believe you do not understand the timeline of events, or their context fully, and with all due respect, you should research more.
  14. Is she wrong though? I mean, he's not producing new work and overall, it's a matter of artistic integrity. He's reproducing work he already made. I get it, he probably has strict rates but equally, Taylor is entitled to rerecord her work, it's costing her to re-do her own work. A bit of give and take should be expected on his part. The released version sounds as good as the original, so maybe Max isn't needed. His loss tbh.
  15. Perez Hilton recently said something along the lines of "it's worse to be forgotten than hated". This whole rehabilitation is hogwash, if we're not allowed swear as he was deplatformed for harassing TikTok stars not six months ago.... Once again, young women and teens. Once again, slander and abuse. Let his career die by removing the oxygen of active hate.
  16. The audio was never supposed to be broadcast or recorded. It was supposed to be available live via the courts website but not to be recorded. It blew up so fast, there was nothing the courts could do and chose to remove the RAAP, claiming it was due to the removal of social distancing measures. Its what Christopher Melcher is filing; that the audio program should be reintroduced as the public have a right to hear and the delta variant is too dangerous to not have measures in place. Lynne isn't a Saint, make no doubts about it; she was involved in the Conservatorship's formation. However, it was on that date that Lynne filed to be an interested party, and her lawyer has sided with Britney time and time again. Ingham, at this point, was still not advocating for Britney's best interest. It wasn't until his payment was cut off months later that he started acting in Britney's interest but even at that, it was bare minimum effort or incompetence. Why are you defending Penny and Ingham while attacking Lynne for doing nothing when this is literally a thread that said Penny's decision to do nothing to protect a conservatee was overturned?
  17. Sweetie, you've got in completely wrong. Britney was forced into a hospital early 2019 and was there for the first three-foue months. The news broke around via BritneysGram on April 16th. Britney attended court on 10th May 2019, and had a sealed meeting with Penny, TMZ stated that she requested more freedoms and explained what happened to her, at her father's hand. Judge Penny ordered a medical investigation that was due later that year. Days before that report was due, on August 24th 2019, the incident took place and on August 25th, KFED's lawyer filed a report with the police. At that same time, Dr. Benson died and Jamie fled the state. Jamie "stepped down" as conservator of the person, which is not officially recognised, due to "health reasons", at the time when the restraining orders against him came into play. Penny was there for all of this and at no point, did she intervene or object until Britney spoke and the audio leaked. She didn't remind them they're supposed to work in Britney's interest. She didn't question spending. She didn't put the conservatee's needs about the conservator. The reason we even got to hear Britney's audio wasn't due to Penny wanting to the world to hear het story, it was due to the pandemic because its an open hearing. They shut it down once people realised that the courts, and Penny, did nothing to protect her. That is the timeline.
  18. While Penny has not done anything directly harmful, that we know of, to Britney, she has sided time and time again with Jamie Spears, giving him the benefit of the doubt time and time again, while refusing to act in Britney's best interest despite her pleas for change. Its her indifference to conservatees that is the issue. I mean frankly, if Jamie had been removed or suspended in 2019, Britney's children would not have been attacked. It took Britney having to make a testimony to the world for changes to come and the changes that came only came due to the phenomenal pressure of the Free Britney Movement and the response in support of Britney. Penny didn't just walk into the courts in 2016, she's been in that system for the longest time, and if I'm correct, had been involved in Britney's case in 2012. Impartiality is one thing, indifference is another. There were no bare minimum measures taken to protect Britney, and it seems that its across the board
  19. I find it weird that all her singing videos have audio that's credited to someone else when these videos were posted before Tiktok took off.
  20. I remember Lou was sharing stories against BLM protesting, saying something like "they don't have to destroy people's business! This is too much!". So.... Allegedly.
  21. Sweetie, George Michael literally released songs about cruising, videos about cruising, songs about being a '***ual Freeeak!" with bondage inspired videos. Elton John was writing songs about Marilyn Monroe, The Yellow Brick Road, and him being gay without even singing it was hugely controversial at the time. Referencing gay and queer artists from the 80's, 90's etc. without referencing the cultural context of their career, image and the socio-political landscapes is pointless. I mean, we're talking just ten years after Stonewall, and other monumental moments in Queer history and activism. In Ireland, being literally wasn't legal until the year I was born. Of course, they weren't going to be as risqué as acts today, but they're not the gold standard when people globally had no legal rights and were still shunned for being gay or queer. If you're so triggered by a gay man singing about gay expiriences that are far more relatable to gay people than anything any straight male artists has released, check yourself.
  22. My issue with acts like these supporting new streaming services is that they are only doing it to line their own pockets, rather than support artists. I'm sorry but Katy hasn't had a successful song in four years, and has never spoken out about artists rights or contracts or fair payment. Jason Derulo literally sampled a tik tok song for streams and named it after a different tik tok song. A celebrity endorsement is useless if its surface level.
  23. Part of me is wondering if Team Con and the Other Spears have gotten word that an investigation is about to start. I mean why else would they be scrubbing the socials of all potentially incriminating posts that the instagram with almost 40M followers was allegedly used to create a false narrative that Britney was all good, while she was being abused and exploited.
×
×
  • Create New...

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

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