FILE - In this Thursday, Oct. 18, 2018, file photo, singer Britney Spears makes an appearance in front of the Park MGM hotel-casino in Las Vegas. Spears wants to be freed from her father. In a recent series of court maneuvers, Spears has sought greater say over her life and affairs, which for years have been under the control of a court conservatorship run mostly by her father, James Spears. (Steve Marcus/Las Vegas Sun via AP, File)
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Britney Spears fears her father and will not resume her career so long as he has power over it, her attorney said in court Tuesday.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Brenda Penny declined to suspend James Spears from his central role in the court conservatorship that has controlled his daughter’s life and career for 12 years as Britney Spears’ attorney Samuel D. Ingham III requested at the contentious hearing. But the judge said she would consider future petitions for his suspension or outright removal, which Ingham plans to file.
“My client has informed me that she is afraid of her father,” Ingham told the judge. “She will not perform again if her father is in charge of her career.”
The pop star has been on an indefinite work hiatus since early 2019.
James Spears’ attorney, Vivian Lee Thoreen, defended what she said was his perfect record in his run as her conservator, which has seen her net worth go from in debt to well over $60 million.
Thoreen argued that the disruption caused by his removal would do her the very harm the suspension is meant to prevent.
“I don’t believe there is a shred of evidence to support my client’s suspension,” she said.
Thoreen also objected to Ingham’s statements about the father-daughter relationship as inadmissible hearsay.
The judge did approve that a corporate fiduciary, the Bessemer Trust, will now serve as co-conservator over her estate along with her father, which Britney Spears had requested.
Most of the attorneys involved, along with Britney Spears’ parents, took part in the hearing via phone and videoconference. The pop star did not attend in any form.
The conservatorship, known in many states as a guardianship, began in 2008 when she was having serious mental struggles and an often public meltdown. The arrangements are normally limited to people with severely diminished ability to make decisions for themselves, and are meant to be temporary, but Britney Spears, 38, has remained under court control longer than anyone expected.
Ingham on Tuesday called her a “high-functioning conservatee” who deserves at least notice of the actions her father is taking, which he has declined to provide.
Ingham said Spears has not spoken to her father in a very long time.
Thoreen argued that the reason father and daughter have not communicated is because Ingham has prevented it.
Britney Spears has acknowledged that the conservatorship was necessary when it began, and probably saved her career, and she remained silent both in public and in court for nearly all of its existence, with her attorney acting mostly as a neutral observer.
But starting in August she began publicly seeking to choose who had power over her, asking for greater transparency in the court’s often secret moves, and even declaring that she was sympathetic to fans who have increasingly demanded in protests and online posts that those in control must #FreeBritney.
Dozens of those fans protested outside the downtown Los Angeles courthouse as they do for every Spears hearing, and a few, wearing #FreeBritney face masks, sat in the courtroom that was sparsely attended because of coronavirus spacing guidelines.
For most of the conservatorship James Spears also served as conservator over not just his daughter’s finances but her person, giving him great control over her life decisions. He stepped down temporarily from that role last year, citing health reasons, and Britney Spears has requested that his temporary replacement, Jodi Montgomery, be made permanent.
In documents requesting James Spears’ suspension, Britney Spears said he had no intention of working with the Bessemer Trust as co-conservator, and that he meant “to retain full functional control of her assets, books and records in the face of Britney’s objections.”
She also cited his recent failure to notify her that her business manager had resigned and he had appointed a new one.
James Spears’ attorneys argued that in appointing a new business manager he was only keeping the continuity of his daughter’s business flowing and doing his job as conservator, and had no legal requirement to inform her of his moves.
His attorneys said in court filings that his “sole motivation has been his unconditional love for his daughter and a fierce desire to protect her from those trying to take advantage of her.”
Most of the proceedings in the Spears conservatorship have been closed to the public, making Tuesday’s hearing a rare glimpse into the family drama happening behind the scenes.
Britney Spears’ mother and James Spears’ ex-wife Lynne Spears, who has been allowed to take part as an interested party, said through her attorney that her daughter should not be forced to obey her father’s unreasonable demands, calling their relationship “toxic.”
“It has broken Lynne’s heart that things have come to this point,” the attorney, Gladstone N. Jones, said.
Jones said Lynne Spears has no ill will toward her ex-husband, but she thinks it’s “time to start fresh” and remove him.
“Contentiousness is not uncommon in families,” Jones said, “but this is not a usual family.”
Follow AP Entertainment Reporter Andrew Dalton on Twitter: https://twitter.com/andyjamesdalton
ZookeepergameMost100 on November 10th, 2020 at 20:03 UTC »
Whats terrifying is realizing that Britney Spears is by no means an anomaly, and most people don't get the press involved to help free them.
A few months ago I briefly talked to someone in a conservatorship. Like a lot of mentally ill people, it hit them when they were young adults. But they wanted to move away, as they said they recognized that the chilhood abuse and family dynamics were contributing to their poor mental health. Yet they couldn't, because their abusers were also their legal guardians.
Im of the personal opinion that no family member should be able to override an adult no matter what. If a parent is elected to be able to make decisions or sign documents on their behalf, sure. But if a person says "I want X" and their guardian/conservator says "no they should have Y", then I think it should automatically bounce to the courts.
I deal with a small amount of adults who gave authorized family to take over some level of control of their lives. Usually it's about the legality of needing the person to sign off on stuff and submit paperwork when theyre not in a state of mind do it -- like when someone needs to renew their medicaid but they're in a mental institution, you need someone who can complete those forms on their behalf. But no single adult should be able to make unilateral decisions for an adult. There should be a 3rd party source to look at the situation. 9 times out of 10 they'll side with the guardian anyway, but caretaker abuse is extremely common and very hard to catch and this seems like the only way to even attempt to protect the well-being of the vulnerable.
BrentHatley on November 10th, 2020 at 19:57 UTC »
Sounds like a reasonable request. All she is asking is for a change to a corporate conservator instead of having her dad control her life.
In the history of child stars who rise to fame, parents controlling the finances usually ends in disaster.
morecomplete on November 10th, 2020 at 19:18 UTC »
So not healthy enough to control everything in her life, just her money. Got it.