Jubilee Post News & Views
Special Desk
IN a new development in the controversial conservatorship legal suit between pop star Britney Spears and her father, a Los Angeles judge has said the singer can choose her own lawyer in the legal fight to end her controversial conservatorship.
The ruling came as Spears addressed a court for the second time in less than a month. Spears demanded once again that her father, Jamie Spears, be removed from the legal agreement that has controlled her affairs for years.
In court last month, she made a dramatic plea to end the agreement. During a hearing at a Los Angeles court in June Britney spoke against her father who was granted conservatorship (control over his daughter’s personal and business affairs) by a court in 2008.
This was for the first time that in an open court Britney spoke for the first time in the case. The pop star said her father “controlled her 100,000%” and she wanted this to end. “I am traumatised,” she remarked, speaking remotely.
It is learnt that the singer has urged changes to the arrangement that controls her life. The order was originally granted after the star was put in hospital amid concerns over her mental health.
There has been speculation for years about how Spears, 39, felt about the arrangement, with fans eagerly combing her social media output for clues. Her father and others involved in the conservatorship maintained that it was a smooth-running that had rescued her from a low point and benefited and that else she could move to end it whenever she wanted. All the while, Britney stayed largely silent on the subject in public.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Brenda Penny thanked Spears for her courageous words but made no ruling. “I want to end this conservatorship without being evaluated,” Spears told the court decisively in an emotional 20-minute address, calling the arrangement an abusive one.
I deserve to have a life, I’ve worked my whole life. I deserve to have a two to three-year break, she said. Sharing personal notes the pop star also told the court she wanted to marry and have baby, but the conservatorship would not allow her to. She accused her conservator of stopping her from having a contraceptive intrauterine device (IUD) removed so she could get pregnant.
Last month a judge denied the pop star’s request to remove her father from his role overseeing her conservatorship. Judge Brenda Penny said she could not make a ruling until the singer files a formal petition to terminate the arrangement.
Now the recent court ruling paves the way for Spears’ lawyer of choice, former federal prosecutor Mathew Rosengart, to take charge of the complex legal battle. He will replace Samuel Ingham, the court-appointed lawyer who had been representing Spears since 2008 before stepping down last week. During the hearing, Mr Ingham interrupted the court to say Spears was texting him. The singer wanted to address the court again, he said.
The judge officially accepted Mr Ingham’s resignation before inviting Spears to speak. Rosengart, the high-powered Hollywood lawyer who has previously represented Steven Spielberg and Sean Penn, was also in court.
A tearful Spears told the court that under the conservatorship, her hair vitamins and coffee had been confiscated. “Ma’am, that’s not abuse, that’s just cruelty,” she told Judge Penny. “Excuse my language, but it’s the truth.”
The singer said her top priority was removing her father from his role in the legal arrangement that governs her personal and financial affairs. She said she did not wish to submit to a stupid medical assessment and would be happy for co-conservator Jodi Montgomery to remain.
The singer also told the court she was extremely scared of her dad, who is a recovering alcoholic. Jamie Spears is currently the sole person in charge of his daughter’ $60m (£43m) estate.
Also Read : Sunny Leone on pharm run for husband!
Also Read : Poonam Pandey and a baby shark
But his lawyers have previously denied he was responsible for the restrictions apparently placed on his daughter’s private life. The singer, a mother of two, said at last month’s hearing that she wanted to marry her boyfriend and have another baby, but the conservatorship would not allow her to do so.
She claimed she was prevented from having a contraceptive intrauterine device (IUD) removed, to make sure that she didn’t get pregnant.
