Britney Spears Wins: Judge Denies Dad’s Motion To Compel Her Deposition

On Wednesday, a court determined that Britney Spears would not have to appear for her father’s “revenge deposition.”At a hearing in the afternoon, the Los Angeles County judge refused to deviate from the court’s tentative ruling, protecting “Toxic” singer Britney Spears from the in-person questioning requested by her father, Jamie Spears. Mathew Rosengart, Britney’s attorney, said that doing so would “re-traumatize” his client.

Pop diva Miley Cyrus “likely lacks” any awareness about her father’s disputed behavior, according to Judge Brenda Penny’s order. This includes the singer’s father’s alleged espionage program, which was initially exposed by a whistleblower in The New York Times. Rather than putting an “unwarranted burden” on the celebrity, she claimed there are “other” means by which Jamie’s attorneys can collect the information they need.

Judge Penny explained that while “the topic of surveillance is fully within the scope of the pending petition objecting to payments linked to improper surveillance,” Mr. Spears is likely to obtain the same and maybe further responses via other forms of discovery.

Read More:

Jamie wanted to question his daughter in a deposition about the “unsubstantiated charges” she had made against him as he sought court approval for his handling of his daughter’s assets beginning in 2019 and authorization to bill his daughter’s estate for his ongoing legal bills.

Britney is challenging those authorizations on the grounds that her father mistreated her and mismanaged her estate while allegedly cooperating with a security outfit to monitor her private chats and bug her bedroom.

Two weeks ago, at a hearing in the ongoing court battle, Rosengart said that Jamie was essentially seeking a “revenge deposition.” He claimed his client was kept in the dark about her father’s alleged wrongdoings throughout the roughly 14 years of her conservatorship, which ended in November.

Whether or not Jamie Spears thinks it, his daughter feels traumatized by what she endured at his hands for over a decade, Rosengart claimed on Wednesday. He can think his own blood is lying to him if he wants to. She’s not, but he’s entitled to his own opinion. So, what would a moral person do? Where does a good father stand in this situation? This is what my daughter thinks,” he’d say. I adore my little girl.

Britney Spears Wins: Judge Denies Dad’s Motion To Compel Her Deposition
Britney Spears Wins: Judge Denies Dad’s Motion To Compel Her Deposition

He’s declared his undying devotion to his daughter. If that’s the case, he should not only accept the court’s decision but also drop his appeal. A good man would act in this way.

On Wednesday, Judge Penny issued a judgment denying Jamie’s request for data from Kroll Associates, the investigation agency that found that Jamie had taken more than $6,300,000 from his daughter’s inheritance between 2008 and 2020.

Jamie’s attorney, Alex Weingarten, filed an appeal to the court’s decisions, expressing “flabbergast” at the idea that Jamie is not entitled to discovery from his daughter or her investigative firm in his pursuit of “vindication.” Later, he justified Jamie’s track record by arguing Britney “is where she is now” because of the conservatorship.

Mr. Spears is and always will be proud of what he did for his daughter, keeping her safe from the clutches of svengalis, Rasputins, and other would-be exploiters of her celebrity. Weingarten testified that “he safeguarded her beautifully for 13 years.” Nothing he did was incorrect.

Jamie had hired managers, Robin Greenhill and Lou Taylor, to monitor Britney’s professional pursuits while she was under conservatorship, and Judge Penny listened quietly, stayed firm on her rulings, and moved on to Rosengart’s upcoming applications to depose Tri Star executives.

The judge ruled that Rosengart was allowed to serve subpoenas to Tri-Star for papers relating to Jamie’s alleged snooping, but the hearing was cut short in the middle of a rebuttal argument by one of Tri Star’s attorneys. The court scheduled a further hearing for August 24 to continue the discussion of this issue.

The preliminary order by Judge Penny was unambiguous: discovery will be limited to matters and costs directly related to the 12th Accounting, as requested by Tri Star. In sum, regardless of what Ms. Spears’ attorney may have said on the steps of the courthouse, today was a fantastic day for Tri-Star. After the hearing, Tri Star’s attorney Scott Edelman told Rolling Stone, “We look forward to being deposed, furthering this process, and ensuring that the complete truth is finally shared.”

Nearly a year has passed since Greenhill and Taylor first challenged the subpoenas. Rosengart claims that in 2008, while Britney’s contentious conservatorship was getting off the ground, Taylor was working  hand in glove with Jamie. The attorney says that Tri Star received more than $18 million in a “sweetheart agreement” that unfairly benefitted the company at the expense of Britney’s estate. And he claims there’s proof Greenhill participated in a surveillance operation on Britney’s phone records.

Rosengart focused on Greenhill because she was singled out by former Spears security guard Alex Vlasov in the explosive remarks made in the New York Times documentary Controlling Britney Spears.

Vlasov claims that Greenhill suggested they “mirror” Britney’s iCloud account in order to spy on her contacts, messages, and other data. He said his boss, Edan Yemini, the CEO of the security firm Black Box, was in on the plot with Jamie Spears and Greenhill to spy on Britney’s private life via a group chat.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Scroll to Top