Britney's Spears' Father Remains Conservator

It's been far too long without a Britney Spears legal post.

The conservatorship that began in January has been extended until July.  "I can confirm that the order was issued this afternoon, but I don't know the attorneys' motives," Superior Court spokesman Allan Parachini told PEOPLE, on Wednesday.  A source close to Britney says she's okay with her dad being in control. 

Further hearings have been scheduled for March 10th and March 17th in regards to the Sam Lufti restraining order.  Sam Lufti plans on fighting the restraining order and calling Britney to the stand.  Sam will allege that he didn't drug Britney and that she had access to drugs from other visitors that came to the house.  Sam has contacted Britney through a third-party and asked her to help him fight the order. Sam reportedly said, "I am going to call Britney to the stand so she can tell the world how I was helping her. I am innocent. I am Britney's friend and would never hurt her." 

The Judge indicated he extended the Conservatorship out of concern that an attorney claiming to represent the pop star might again tie the case up in federal court.  Jon Eardley filed new papers under seal with the federal court.  The new papers include an amended petition "to include federal claims involving witness intimidation and victim intimidation."

Jamie Spears was also granted additional powers.  In addition to a $58,800 payment to the conservatorship for attorney fees and other costs, Jamie was given weekly payments of $2,500 and the authority to tap his daughter's funds to lease a car for her security team.  Britney cannot leave California before a scheduled April 7 hearing without permission from the court or from her father.

This still does not answer the question of why the conservatorship in the first place?  I still think Britney has a very serious mental health diagnoses that has not been leaked.

source, source, source

 

Comments

[chatty cricket]

Can Sam Lufti call Britney to the stand to testify on his behalf if she has a retraining order against him? I mean, couldn't her attorney argue that she's too intimidated by him to answer honestly? Or would she be a credible witness for him if he was allegedly brainwashing her into believing he was helping her? There are so many things wrong with this idea.

[jodifur]

Cricket-yes, he would have to subpoena her, but he could call her to testify. A good attorney would argue since the Conservatorship is in place she is not competent to testify.

A, as I understand it, the Conservatorship took out the restraining order, not her, so there would be no requirement for her to testify. Normally you do have to testify when you take out a restraining order.