Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'jamesspears'.

  • Search By Tags

    Separate tags with commas (example: Britney Spears, Lady Gaga, music video).
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Discussions
    • Britney Spears
    • Music News
    • Music Discussions
    • Entertainment
    • Fitness, Health & Lifestyle
    • General
  • Exhale
    • Announcements
    • Ask a question
    • Suggestions
    • Forum Support
  • Exhale Latino's Discusiones

Categories

  • Britney Spears
  • Camila Cabello
  • Creators
  • Hilary Duff
  • Justin Bieber
  • Katy Perry
  • Kesha
  • Lady Gaga
  • Madonna
  • Rihanna
  • Thirst Traps
  • Pussycat Dolls

Categories

  • Terminology
  • How To
  • Classifieds

Calendars

  • Pop anniversaries
  • Exhale Latino's Aniversarios

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Interests

Found 7 results

  1. Britney Spears’ Lawyer Demands Judge Order Pop Star’s Dad To Cease And Desist His ‘Intimidation Tactics’ Britney Spears and her team are demanding confidential medical information be sealed after her estranged father Jamie used them in court recently, Radar has learned. According to court documents obtained by RadarOnline.Com, Spears’ powerhouse attorney Mathew Rosengart has asked the court to keep his client’s records sealed in the conservatorship case. The judge ended up siding with Britney by ordering Jamie to be deposed and shutting down the request to grill Britney. In a newly filed motion, Rosengart said Jamie’s motion seeking a depo had attachments that contained private information regarding Britney. Jamie filed the materials “conditionally” under seal, but Rosenagart wants to make sure they stay that way. “In short, Mr. Spears’s July 22 filing was an improper effort to end-run the Rules, seeking to “unseal” private materials. That backdoor tactic should not be countenanced by the Court,” he said. Rosengart added, “In yet regrettable—and mean-spirited—attempt to bully, harass, and intimidate his own daughter, James Spears has, unfortunately, sunk to a new low. In his July 22 submission, he took portions of his daughter’s private, sensitive, and confidential information, which are already under seal, and filed them “conditionally” under seal, necessitating this motion to ensure the documents remain under seal.” Britney’s attorney said, “one would have hoped that since his September 29, 2021 suspension as conservator, Mr. Spears and his counsel would have shown a measure of grace and decency toward Britney Spears. Instead, they have done the opposite.” Rosegart pointed out that during the conservatorship Jamie and his prior counsel previously moved, on multiple occasions, “to seal confidential and private information.” This begs the question: Why does Mr. Spears no longer purport to recognize his daughter’s fundamental rights to privacy with regard to court filings? He is still a father. He is still a fiduciary. The only fact that has changed is that he was suspended as a conservator and removed from his daughter’s life as a toxic presence (although he continues to importune),” Rosengart writes. “Why else is Mr. Spears proceeding in this manner? Because his daughter dared to object to her father’s attempt to pay himself out one last time from her Estate, by refusing to write a blank check to him and his counsel. He wants revenge, “vindication” (as his counsel admitted during the July 27 hearing), and most tragically, to upset or harm his daughter." Rosengart wrote to the court, "we ask that it order Mr. Spears to cease and desist from these intimidation tactics." The judge has yet to rule.
  2. Britney Spears will not have to answer questions from her father’s lawyer in a deposition, a probate judge ruled on Wednesday. Spears’ father, Jamie Spears, sought the court’s permission to take Spears’ deposition as the two sides continue to war over attorneys’ fees and other costs connected to her 13-year conservatorship. But Judge Brenda Penny ruled that a deposition would not be likely to produce information relevant to the remaining issues in the case. He also said that Spears would not be a witness in any future trial or evidentiary proceeding in the case. “Whether he accepts it or not, his daughter feels traumatized by what she went through at his hands for more than a decade,” Rosengart said in court, adding that if Jamie Spears truly loved his daughter, he would have dropped his motion for a deposition. Jamie Spears’ attorney, Alex Weingarten, pushed back on the claims and said that ultimately his client will be vindicated. “Mr. Spears did right by his daughter,” Weingarten said. “The conservatorship was for her benefit… The truth will come out.” Weingarten expressed frustration that he would not be able to ask Britney Spears about the allegations, noting that the singer often comments about the case on her social media accounts. He also indicated he would appeal another decision, in which Penny blocked him from obtaining records from Kroll, a private investigations firm hired by Spears’ attorneys. Penny also indicated she was seeking to narrow the ongoing discovery in the case to just the issues surrounding the petition for fees. That would exclude allegations about how the conservatorship was established and claims that Spears was bullied by her father. But she indicated she would continue to allow inquiry into claims that she was secretly surveilled. 🔴Source:VARIETY
  3. There is zero legal authority to support depriving Jamie of his basic and well-established discovery and due process rights. The only petitions pending before the Court are Jamie’s routine conservatorship administration petitions which Britney chose to object to by making voluminous (and false) allegations of wrongdoing by Jamie. Britney could have filed simple, legal objections. Anything other than compelling Britney to be deposed would be an unprecedented departure from well-established law that allows a party to depose an opposing party. Indeed, Britney’s counsel insisted that Jamie needs to be deposed about Britney’s allegations while making the remarkable claim that Britney does not need to be deposed about her allegations. DOWNLOAD FULL FILE BELOW --- https://drive.google.com/file/d/10ECAHLMoHS8R8S6X3irY_yb0Up7AvG_K/view SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF ALEX M. WEINGARTEN IN SUPPORT OF JAMES P. SPEARS’S MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF BRITNEY JEAN SPEARS DOWNLOAD FULL FILE BELOW --- https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ePgF6Mtrw0DDSQ-8woWoEbbrPZcmRNKj/view 🟡Credit: @FreeBritneyLA
  4. In a newly signed declaration, Jamie Spears denies bugging Britney's bedroom. Under penalty of perjury, Jamie claims he “never conducted or authorized any surveillance of Britney’s bedroom at any time” and is “not aware of any such surveillance having occurred.” “I am informed of the allegation … that a listening device or ‘bug’ was placed [in] her bedroom as surveillance during the conservatorship. This allegation is false,” Jamie said. “I never conducted or authorized any surveillance of Britney’s bedroom at any time, including during the conservatorship. I am not aware of any such surveillance having occurred.” Per Page Six, Jamie also said that “if called and sworn as a witness,” he “could and would testify” that his declaration is “true and correct.” This directly contradicts the The New York Times' investigation last year. Former Black Box security agent, Alex Vlasov, of Britney's then security firm, previously gave the Times a USB drive with 180 hours of audio recordings from a listening device Black Box allegedly placed in Britney's bedroom with Jamie's approval. In the recordings, Britney can be heard having conversations with Sam Asghari, her kids and others. Vlasov said he didn't destroy the recordings, despite being asked to, because he didn't want to be complicit in whatever [the conservatorship team] was up to. The Times corroborated the recordings. Interestingly, last year neither Jamie nor Black Box denied the surveillance accusations, both saying they acted within legal bounds. Now, Jamie is denying any knowledge of it. As Liz Day from the Times points out, it’s possible Jamie is parsing words by saying it's false that a listening device was placed in her bedroom, or he may try to blame Black Box as going rogue. Jamie's declaration also does not address Vlasov's claims that Black Box mirrored Britney's phone to spy on her communications with her lawyer, mom and now husband (to which they reported the contents to Jamie and Robin Greenhill). It's unclear at this point how Jamie Spears will pay his legal fees to continue defending his alleged wrongdoing. He's asking the court for Britney to pay for his defense. Mythomania in its expression 🙄
×
×
  • Create New...