This morning we attended another hearing for Britney’s conservatorship case.(Thread)

This was to be both an accounting hearing, and a hearing at which Jamie’s team would have moved to seal the accounting proceedings.

Ingham told the court that he intended to object to some of the items in the accounting report being sealed, but that he needed more time to review the specifics of the report, so both issues were continued to the November 10th hearing.

Most of the approx 75 minutes session was devoted to back and forth between Ingham and Jamie’s lawyers over a couple of issues that Jamie’s lawyer’s raised in their response to Ingam’s Opposition to Motion to Seal of Andrew Wallet’s appointment petition.

Basically, Jamie’s lawyers had argued that without a sworn statement from Britney, Ingham’s report of what Britney said should be considered hearsay.

The main reason Ingham gave for not having a sworn statement from Britney was that he believes that because she is conserved, she does not have the legal ability to make sworn statements.

Per Ingham “I suspect my client would be more than happy to file a declaration as to a lot of things that, probably, Mr. Spears wouldn’t want to see, but it is my view that she lacks the capacity to do that, and therefore it is my advice to her that she can’t file a declaration.”

Ingham felt that this was a larger issue that needed to be resolved by the court. He intends to file more motions down the road, in which he plans to cite Britney’s wishes and point of view.

He feels that having the issue of hearsay raised every time he speaks on Britney’s behalf will inhibit his ability to properly represent her. He asked for Jamie’s side to file a briefing that would clear this up for the Nov 10th hearing, as well as any subsequent ones.

Jamie’s lawyers argued that because they were all referencing a document that was filed in support of Wallet, who is no longer up for appointment, there was not actually any reason for them to file a brief.

Cohen repeatedly told the judge she was “confused and mystified” by Ingham’s request. She harped on what she saw as a legal loophole -- if the Wallet appointment was no longer moving forward, how could her side brief the court on this matter?

Judge Penny, who had to cut Cohen off a couple of times, appeared to agree with Ingham that the matter of whether Ingham can speak for Britney was an issue that would almost certainly arise again, and one that should be addressed.

She ordered a briefing from Jamie’s side in the coming weeks.

The other issue that was discussed was who maintained control of Britney’s privacy rights.

Though a consensus was reached that Britney maintained her own privacy rights, there seemed to still be some confusion on the subject.

At one point Jodi Montogmery’s lawyer said “Now wait a second, I thought we just agreed that my client did not control the conservatee’s right to privacy?”

Ingham also brought up some issues that were outstanding that required clarification from Britney’s business manager (Tri Star).

Jamie’s side said they’d asked Tri Star for this information, but hadn’t heard back, but that they would file an addition to the accounting report with whatever information they could by 10/19/20.

Ingham pushed back and said if Jamie’s team needed more time to get that info from Tri Star, that was fine, but he wanted the accounting questions that had been raised to be fully answered.

In short, the hearing on 11/10/20 just got even more packed with agenda items. We hope at that time, actual headway is made for Britney Spears, the person who paid most of the attorneys who were in attendance today. #FreeBritney