Speaking of “Outrageous”, Britney made it clear on that track years ago. “I just wanna be happy In a place where love is free Can you take me there? Somebody, ooh”
1
We don't know the whole story. The judge does. So, give him the benefit of the doubt.
5
3
Ok. Now let’s get conservatorships for the clinically psychopathic billionaires who are hell bent on destroying the planet. Oh wait, most of them are men and men aren’t prone to “hysteria.”
What people refuse to understand is that they don't know the particulars of the case or the history of it, at all. They just listen to what the media spoon-feeds them, and to the testimony of someone with severe mental illness and think they understand. They don't.
6
1
if she is a danger to herself, but who defines what acceptable danger is !
1
A judge who is paid by her father through his lawyer paid by Brittney. I'm sure there wouldn't be a problem if Brittney says keep the money give me my freedom.
There's more to this story! This recent denial had nothing to do with the recent conference where we first heard Britney speak out publicly. There's still *some* hope that her voice will improve her situation. I'm still weary since she's not allowed her own legal team :(
3
6
Hollywood is involved in this. That’s why they’re getting away with it. The sickness and corruption runs deep.
3
Imagine this happening to any male celebrity. I’ve never heard anyone talk about Kanye West needing a conservatorship…
1