By Tracey Paleo, Gia On The Move
The coverage of the Britney Spears conservatorship has been nothing short of sensational.
In the last several months alone, we’ve seen a firestorm of dramatic testimony, intense media speculation, the advance of the #FreeBritney movement, aggressive social media backlash against Jamie Spears, her father, by the singer’s supporters and fans, and public confessions from Britney herself about the truth of what she says she’s had to endure. There is even a re-emergence of the bipartisan bill Guardianship Accountability Act potentially headed to the Senate once again – all because of Britney Spears.
Now, the release of three documentaries, FRAMING BRITNEY SPEARS (February 2021), Netflix’s new film BRITNEY vs SPEARS and last week’s Hulu and FX follow up to FBS, in conjunction with The New York Times, CONTROLLING BRITNEY SPEARS, which aired just days ahead of her high-profile court date on September 29th.
The chronicling of Spear’s life and hardships from the inception of her conservatorship in 2008, and the explosive turnaround that is happening in real-time has layered on just as many questions as it offers answers about her 13-years as a conservatee.
Aron Solomon, chief legal analyst for Esquire Digital, and an expert in the Spears’ conservatorship battle has been providing commentary on Britney’s battle to end her conservatorship for Yahoo! News, BuzzFeed, and more.
In his newly published article, DID THE NEW YORK TIMES SAVE BRITNEY, Solomon takes a look at the CONTROLLING BRITNEY SPEARS documentary through a legal lens and offers insights into how the evidence presented could play a powerful role in her case.
With all the investigating for answers and results, I thought it was a good time to ask Aron one simple question regarding the case, that many of us continue to ask:
“Why was it so easy (or at least seem to be) to put Britney in conservatorship in the first place? How could her father legally put her under a conservatorship, so quickly, without warning, without her knowledge, without her even being a minor (she was 26? at the time and a mother), and under the flimsiest of circumstances?”
“It was the perfect storm of deeply unfortunate circumstances for Britney from 2007-2008 particularly. Enough powerful people created at least a partial fiction that Britney, as stated in a court report, “lacked the capacity to manage her own financial affairs without being subject to undue influence.” Further, while a good attorney could have unbundled much of what was happening to Britney before it gathered the momentum that it did, she was deemed so unwell that she “lacked capacity” to hire her own counsel. So, essentially, this marked the moment when Jamie Spears legally became Britney Spears and so began what very well could have been her ultimate undoing. But it’s 2021, she survived, and she has a hearing tomorrow.”
About Aron Solomon
Aron Solomon, JD, is the Chief Legal Analyst for Esquire Digital and the Editor of Today’s Esquire. He has taught entrepreneurship at McGill University and the University of Pennsylvania, and was elected to Fastcase 50, recognizing the top 50 legal innovators in the world. Aron has been featured in CBS News, USA Today, ESPN, TechCrunch, The Hill, BuzzFeed,Fortune, Venture Beat, The Independent, Yahoo!, ABA Journal, Law.com, The Boston Globe, and many other leading publications.