Ingham argues he can speak on Britney's behalf and that she is NOT gravely disabled!

[heather]

Come through Ingham, nice to see him working FOR Britney!

 

 

[MonaLisa613]

I was wondering when this was gonna come, it needs to be settled so Jamie can’t call hearsay for everything Ingham says on Brit’s behalf, which we know he’ll do, he loves a stall tactic.

 

More snark too, love to see it.

 

 

[heather]

5 minutes ago, MonaLisa613 said:

I was wondering when this was gonna come, it needs to be settled so Jamie can’t call hearsay for everything Ingham says on Brit’s behalf, which we know he’ll do, he loves a stall tactic.

 

More snark too, love to see it.

 

 

Completely agree! Honestly I hope this lays the foundation for the purpose of the conservatorship, at least in the personal capacity, because Ingham stating in writing that Britney is NOT gravely disabled is really quite a blow to Jamie/team con. If she's not gravely disabled, WHY is she in a personal conservatorship? That's the question I would be pondering if I was the judge presiding over this.

[MonaLisa613]

30 minutes ago, heather said:

Completely agree! Honestly I hope this lays the foundation for the purpose of the conservatorship, at least in the personal capacity, because Ingham stating in writing that Britney is NOT gravely disabled is really quite a blow to Jamie/team con. If she's not gravely disabled, WHY is she in a personal conservatorship? That's the question I would be pondering if I was the judge presiding over this.

One thing I’ve noticed that’s always checked off on paperwork, is that she’s vulnerable to undue influence, like a Lutfi situation, I wonder if that’s enough to keep her in a personal cship?? But the not gravely disabled comment  is definitely a blow to the narrative Team CON tries to push.

 

I’d love to be in the judges mind right now to know what she’s thinking cuz nothing in this case makes sense.