If you people really believe this, then you are sheeples, and you clearly are willing to surrender control of your life to the courts. Sure, for guys, what the judge is doing to Britney is in many ways sweet revenge, but what they do to Britney today, they will be doing to all of you, and your children, and your grandchildren tomorrow. All your ex has to do in the future is find someone willing to claim you were intoxicated or acting lewdly in front of your children, and you lose custody of your children, and large sums of money for custody. Never mind that the person testifying against you might be getting all kinds of rewards from your ex for their testimony, your life will now be controlled by a judge. There is no requirement for a trial by a jury, no requirement of evidence, nada. The courts are now able to dictate the morals of the individual.
Wake up people!!!!
2007-10-06 05:51:07 · 10 answers · asked by poet1b 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
And to think,there are other children out there being abused,not fed or imprisoned in a closet or all 3 among other things but since there is no media spotlight on the mom and dad,we may never hear about them.
2007-10-06 06:14:14 · answer #1 · answered by ? 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
WOW are you ever off base......First if Britney wanted a Jury all she had to do is request a trial by Jury She declined that because all of the defense in the world would not help.
She had no defense at all based off her track record of multiple run ins with the police mostly drug related not to mention dui most with her children in the car.
WOW and many many other violations of the law. Your so in love with her that you can't see the bad in what she has done and fame will not erase what these things are she got less than what a common joe on the street would because of her fame and fortune. why should we feel sorry for her. Crap if anyone of use had the back ground she has we would be in prison she got off easy let it die. Maybe you should hire on as her defense lawyer or go marry her or something this is not a place to get sympathy for her.
2007-10-06 06:15:49 · answer #2 · answered by ASmiles1 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This is not a criminal matter. It is therefore not necessary to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt. Evidence is required however and the evidense is currently against Britney. Things could swing the other way just as easily. Those poor kids didn't get the two best examples of parents.
2007-10-06 05:58:58 · answer #3 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Welcome to the wonderful world of Family Law. Britney's case is no different than the hundreds of cases that go through family law courts every month. We have parents coaching the kids to say the other spouse molested them, we have parents who are drug addicts fighting to keep their kids because in this society a child has become the top fashion acquisition like a designer bag.
Pity the judges in Family Court to have to hear EACH side anoint themselves to saintdom and accuse the other side of being in league with the devil.
2007-10-06 08:05:40 · answer #4 · answered by CatLaw 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Doing drugs while your children are in in the house, leaving them unattended so you can go party, not giving them the nutrition their tiny growing bodies need, and driving around with them illegally & high, and then not even bothering to show up for court are the reason she lost her children. It's not just Kevin, her own friends, family, & staff have also attested these things. I'm going to assume you are either not fully aware of the entire Britney saga or you do not have children. If you do, god help them.
2007-10-06 06:03:25 · answer #5 · answered by saigenaiden 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Britney has shown repeatedly that she is not in a fit state to care for her children. She drove with an infant on her lap for goodness sake. There is a big difference in occasionally parties and constant partying. Britney needs to get control of herself in order to be a better parent.
2007-10-06 06:01:05 · answer #6 · answered by billie b 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No but if you refuse to take a drug test and are driving around with your children in the car while not being a licensed driver a judge can.
Why should celebrities be held to a lesser standard than the rest of us.
2007-10-06 06:01:50 · answer #7 · answered by smedrik 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why oh why does he have extra Human Rights than the 11 women he assaulted, the undesirable human beings he robbed & burgled? & that’s to not even stating the arson! For heaven sake whilst will those molly-coddled & infrequently residing interior the actual international judges, awaken to the reality in elementary terms CRAP human beings HAVE BENEFITED from Human Rights ACT?
2016-11-07 10:41:29 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you believe what you are saying, I hope you do not have children. Being a parent comes with responsibilities. She does not accept them. Someone has to protect the kids.
2007-10-06 06:06:32 · answer #9 · answered by sensible_man 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
She is not a good parent, if you think that is being a parent at all then don't have kids
2007-10-06 05:57:49 · answer #10 · answered by battle-ax 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋