Britney Spears - General Discussion | Page 4462 | The Popjustice Forum

Britney Spears - General Discussion

Discussion in 'Comeback corner' started by Toxicated, Jun 24, 2006.

  1. There's a lot of money involved and in the beginning, this was put together in order to stop other people taking advantage of Britney. But now it is apparent everyone is wanting their slice. By now, Britney has definitely made daddy enough money to buy a boat, for sure.

    I wouldn't be surprised if Vivian went back because she saw how long this could go on for and the amount she is going to make.
     
  2. Also probably that when Britney is free, she'll have enough public support, money and evidence to sue everyone who was involved from the beginning.
     
    davidbesan and johnoclock like this.
  3. That interview was gross. Sharing personal videos and useless anecdotes to try to ignore Britney telling the court that she's scared of her dad tells me that there's a concerted effort behind-the-scenes to fight any changes, which Britney is clearly asking for. There is zero reason for Jamie to be involved aside from him and his lawyers clearly wanting to continue making money off of the situation. If they cared about what Britney wanted and believed she still needed a conservatorship, they could let a professional handle it. "Britney knows her daddy loves her." What the fuck?! The whole thing made me feel icky even just watching it.
     
    GimmeWork, 4Roses, Womanizer and 13 others like this.
  4. While that would be fun to watch, I can imagine she'd want to do that behind closed doors...
     
  5. Probably. I'm just saying that besides the money they could make, Jamie, the lawyers and even the judge possibly have more stake/an additional reason to keep her in this thing because she could possibly go after them when she finally can.
     
  6. I'm kinda gagged the lawyer switched sides like that? I wasn't really paying attention at the end of the doc and figured she went on to represent Britney.

    In general though, I hate how this is turning into 2007 the redux. Fortunately Britney seems to be doing pretty well.
     
  7. In what way? She's arguably had more public support now more than ever in her entire career and no amount of useless GMA interviews could change that. With the exception of Jamie and his lawyers, everyone has the same questions.

    She was always a representative of Jamie, btw.
     
  8. Oops that should say "the media attention is turning into 2006-2008." I must have reloaded the page and lost the edit or something.

    I guess the attention is more in her favor this time around, but I still find it sensationalist and objectifying. We've just reached a new part of the tragedy narrative for media to cash in on.
     
    Someboy likes this.
  9. Then again, I don't think Jamie has ever spoken publicly in regards to the situation so they must be feeling the heat. I don't know if it can result in meaningful changes in the courts but at least they will not be forever taking advantage of her in the dark.
     
  10. That interview (if you can even call it that) was.. straight up weird and uncomfortable. If they thought that was going to help then someone lied several times to them. Awful attempt at damage control.
     
    theelusivechanteuse and He like this.
  11. Mr.Arroz

    Mr.Arroz Staff Member

    I think at some point that there's been a mass conflict-of-interest with having family tied to this whole ordeal. In the early stages of the conservatorship, it made sense (I'd say) for there to be family involved in temporarily ameliorating the situation, but as time has gone on, there really needed to have been a shift to a neutral party to better manage things. In social work it's always the rule that the client/patient/individual is the center of the case and makes appropriate decisions and appointments for these conflicts to not arise, for privacy to be maintained, and for security to be upheld. This massive reliance on her family to be involved at the core and to financially benefit from being so is ridiculously unethical to me and just plain...bizarre.
     
    GimmeWork, Crisp X, Steve003 and 20 others like this.
  12. He said this last time, which went equally well as it was later referenced and rebuffed by Britney in court.

    https://pagesix.com/2020/08/01/britney-spears-dad-calls-freebritney-a-conspiracy-theory/
     
    johnoclock likes this.
  13. She was apparently only worth $2.8m in 2008?... Where did all the money go then?! I'm sure her house costed more than that... that doesn't sound right at all
     
  14. Can't even begin to unpack how gross it is to discredit Britney's statement of being scared of her father just because she didn't say it to him directly.
     
  15. Someboy

    Someboy Staff Member

    I’m torn on this. On the one hand, I think you’re absolutely right and I see the road ahead and it’s worrying. On the other, a big difference this go-around is that attention could really make a difference in terms of public awareness and public favor. Jamie Spears sending his lawyer out to a morning show seems to signal he’s feeling a certain pressure he hasn’t before.
     
  16. The thing that most lawyers I've seen highlighting was it was absolutely unethical and unconstitutional that she was denied the right to pick her own counsel in the first place. There will be people in similar situations and I hope they hear that over and over again so they don't get taken advantage of.

    [​IMG]
     
    GimmeWork, Steve003, Rem and 6 others like this.
  17. Honestly, if they are on such good terms, why doesn't he respect her wishes? She's 40 years old. At some point she must be trusted with decisions in regards to her own life. They're not even claiming she's incapacitated, just that "her daddy loves her"? As if that's reason enough for him to take over her life for 13 years against her wishes.

    As you said, this is gross.
     
    GimmeWork and Overdose like this.
  18. For me, it was more of a victim blaming kind of "Well, you didn't say anything to your alleged abuser so it can't be true!" The fucking worms, I've just gotten angrier at that implication. I suppose it may have been an attempt to imply that Ingham is manipulating Britney, but I really hope that's not something lawyers are using as a defense in this day and age, much more to say on national television.
     
    GimmeWork, Rem, Lioncourt and 8 others like this.
  19. Mr.Arroz

    Mr.Arroz Staff Member

    OK, I'm not done

    [​IMG]

    The more I think about it, the more it aggravates me. The sheer evidence that there has been discord between Britney and her father, as well as her partner and her children, plus a restraining order being pursued and granted by her ex-husband for their children that spend considerable time in her/his presence? There is no way for a conservatorship to not be easily guided into inappropriate/unethical circumstances when a family member isn't an independent decision-making entity - Jamie's proximity as a parent means he can utilize multiple tools to intimidate, persuade, coerce, and goad elements in basically all proceedings to benefit him directly. Especially with the stigma of how public Britney's narrative is, and how it's tied to mental health, a topic which most legal professionals are not only outdated but undereducated on - this leaves such a large chasm by which gross injustices can almost be justified if not outright approved swiftly. He has everything to gain from remaining in his position, when, if this were about her well-being, that would be the focus, and not how much he can financially attain from remaining installed as he is. He shouldn't have been in this position for as long as he's been, because as any improvement is made, it's in his best interest to not allow structural change to occur within the conservatorship as a device. The simple fact that there has been evidence of strife between the parties involved means that the current method of oversight isn't benefiting the individual that needs it the most - Britney - whom the conservatorship was meant to center and protect, not the other way around, by providing for Jamie to exploit for himself.
     
  20. Also it’s weird that they’re acting like Britney can’t have love for her father and also want him off the conservatorship. I wish they brought up that maybe she’s scared of him because he tried to attack one of her sons. There’s evidence that they’ve been leveraging her children from the start.
     
    GimmeWork, Rem, 4Roses and 20 others like this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.