Sunday, June 5, 2011

Britney Spears incompetent To Appear in Court

Britney Spears incompetent
Britney Spears’s mental heath has once again come under scrutiny as she faces another legal battle.After the 29-year-old’s parents deemed her ‘mentally incapable’ to testify in a court case earlier this month, now her lawyers say she is also unfit to do the same in a perfume lawsuit.Britney is being sued for $10million by brand management and consultant company Brand Sense Partners, who say that the singer cut them out of a deal.They claim that while she was working with the company, she failed to tell them about a project that she was also working on with Elizabeth Arden.The company are now trying to take Britney to deposition, and have asked a judge to order her to attend and take part, meaning that she would have to provide a sworn testimony.But it appears that the singer can avoid it.Britney remains under the conservatorship of her father, Jamie Spears, and her lawyer, Andrew Wallet, and so far her legal team have refused, saying that without their approval, she cannot legally be forced.The news comes as Britney’s mother Lynne is currently being sued for defamation by the singer’s ex-manager Sam Lufti over claims made about him in her tell-all memoir, Through The Storm.According to the Hollywood Reporter, Lufti has had an expert in psychiatry analyse a recent video interview with Britney in support of his argument.UCLA Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Joshua Pretsky, concluded that Britney was able to testify and had shown evidence of ‘coherent and logical thinking, responsiveness to questions, and mental competence.’In the Ryan Seacrest interview, which was recorded approximately two months ago, Britney Spears is interviewed at length, and she responds logically and coherently to questions, evidencing logical thinking and mental competency,’ he told the court.’In my opinion, there is good cause to conduct an Independent medical examination to investigate the Conservators’ claim that Ms Spears is not mentally capable of testifying, and the claim that she was not mentally competent to enter into a binding contract.’

No comments:

Post a Comment