Judge Yanks Britney's Visitation Rights

[007]

Judge Yanks Britney's Visitation Rights​

Thursday, October 18, 2007 2:00 PM EDT
The Associated Press
By JEREMIAH MARQUEZ Associated Press Writer

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Britney Spears can't even visit her children now.

The troubled pop star may not see 2-year-old Sean Preston and 1-year-old Jayden James — who are in the custody of Spears' ex-husband, Kevin Federline — until she complies with a court order, Superior Court Commissioner Scott Gordon ruled.

The order, dated Wednesday, does not spell out what directives Spears defied. A hearing in the matter was scheduled for Oct. 26.

A message left with Spears' attorney, Anne Kiley, was not immediately returned.

In the past, Gordon has reprimanded Spears for not complying with other court orders, repeatedly saying that she lost primary custody to Federline due to her own choices.

Among other things, Gordon has ordered her to undergo random weekly drug testing, citing evidence that Spears engaged in "habitual, frequent and continuous use of controlled substances and alcohol."

She could not visit with her children without a parenting coach present. The coach participated in the emergency hearing Wednesday. Both parents were ordered to remain sober around their children.

http://charter.net/news/read.php?ps=1016&id=14092652&_LT=HOME_LARSDCCLM_UNEWS

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Unbelievable. This is absolutely wrong. Last I checked drinking alcohol is in fact LEGAL. Unless the Judge has SPECFIC charges I do not see how he can order them to never drink.

Further, is the father required to undergo random drug tests? If not why not?

 

[Paulie]

Unbelievable. This is absolutely wrong. Last I checked drinking alcohol is in fact LEGAL. Unless the Judge has SPECFIC charges I do not see how he can order them to never drink.

Further, is the father required to undergo random drug tests? If not why not?

All depends on the state, RGS. In NJ, it's almost impossible to take kids away from the mother unless you have outright proof of illegalities going on that would be a detriment to the child.

My boss had an awesome case against his ex-wife to get their 5 year old daughter out of a house that he KNEW was a party house, but not having physical proof of drug use, he actually lost the case...but not without a strict admonition to the mother fropm the judge...which basically told me that the judge himself knew that drugs were probably involved, but without that proof, he couldn't do anything about it. I mean, the woman had gone through about $100,000 in a little over a year and had almost nothing to show for it, including an eviction from a previous apartment, and my boss had that money loss shown on paper, and the judge didn't give him the kid. I know the woman personally, as the man's been my boss for 6 years, and i can fully attest that she was a raving coke-head.

In this case with spears though, how can you call bullshit? THe girl parties every night. And it's not just alcohol...and even if it WAS just alcohol, you still have to be parentally responsible while consuming that alcohol.

I think if a guy like Federline was awarded full custody, there must have been a pretty convincing and damning case against Britney.



And i can't even believe i'm having a discussion about Britney Spears.