1 00:00:15,396 --> 00:00:24,196 Speaker 1: Pushkin from Pushkin Industries. This is Deep Background, the show 2 00:00:24,236 --> 00:00:27,636 Speaker 1: where we explore the stories behind the stories in the news. 3 00:00:28,156 --> 00:00:33,276 Speaker 1: I'm Noah Feldman. This season we're exploring power, power in 4 00:00:33,316 --> 00:00:36,956 Speaker 1: the legal system, power in the media, the power of personality, 5 00:00:37,436 --> 00:00:42,156 Speaker 1: you name it. This is not very usual kind of episode. 6 00:00:43,196 --> 00:00:47,036 Speaker 1: It's still about power, but in an unusual way. This 7 00:00:47,156 --> 00:00:51,076 Speaker 1: past February, the New York Times released a documentary called 8 00:00:51,276 --> 00:00:55,436 Speaker 1: Framing Britney Spears, a film about Britney's rise to stardom 9 00:00:55,516 --> 00:01:00,316 Speaker 1: and the conservatorship, a legal form of guardianship she's been 10 00:01:00,356 --> 00:01:03,876 Speaker 1: in since two thousand and eight. The film brought renewed 11 00:01:03,916 --> 00:01:08,156 Speaker 1: scrutiny to Britney's conservatorship and also to conservatorship more broadly. 12 00:01:08,876 --> 00:01:13,276 Speaker 1: In a remarkable twist, some House Republicans are now calling 13 00:01:13,316 --> 00:01:18,596 Speaker 1: for national conservatorship reform. Here to help us understand conservatorship 14 00:01:18,676 --> 00:01:23,036 Speaker 1: law and what happened to Britney Spears is Adam Streisand 15 00:01:23,716 --> 00:01:27,476 Speaker 1: he's a trial attorney and really in truth, an attorney 16 00:01:27,476 --> 00:01:31,156 Speaker 1: to the stars. He's always involved in high profile litigation 17 00:01:31,516 --> 00:01:35,996 Speaker 1: and private wealth disputes of large magnitude. If you saw 18 00:01:36,036 --> 00:01:39,436 Speaker 1: the documentary, you will know who he is. In the 19 00:01:39,516 --> 00:01:44,076 Speaker 1: run up to the conservatorship application, Britney Spears met with 20 00:01:44,156 --> 00:01:48,636 Speaker 1: Adam and she hired Adam. That means, in legal terms, 21 00:01:48,676 --> 00:01:52,556 Speaker 1: he was her lawyer. He then went into court where 22 00:01:52,556 --> 00:01:57,156 Speaker 1: the judge determined that Britney Spears was unable in legal terms, 23 00:01:57,196 --> 00:01:59,916 Speaker 1: to hire her own attorney and to pick her own attorney, 24 00:02:00,156 --> 00:02:03,596 Speaker 1: and therefore gave her a court appointed attorney who represents 25 00:02:03,596 --> 00:02:06,676 Speaker 1: her to this day. Adam is going to walk us 26 00:02:06,676 --> 00:02:10,036 Speaker 1: through conservatorship. He's going to discuss whether reform is needed 27 00:02:10,076 --> 00:02:12,396 Speaker 1: and if so, how, and he's also going to talk 28 00:02:12,396 --> 00:02:15,756 Speaker 1: about his experiences with Britney's case and what it means 29 00:02:15,996 --> 00:02:20,876 Speaker 1: at the bigger level. Adam hasn't given any interviews to 30 00:02:21,116 --> 00:02:24,556 Speaker 1: any other media source that I know of since appearing 31 00:02:24,556 --> 00:02:28,356 Speaker 1: in the documentary, so we're particularly lucky that he agreed 32 00:02:28,556 --> 00:02:32,636 Speaker 1: to appear here on deep background to take us behind 33 00:02:32,756 --> 00:02:43,836 Speaker 1: the story of Britney spears conservatorship. Adam, I'm so grateful 34 00:02:43,876 --> 00:02:46,796 Speaker 1: to you for being here on deep background. I'll tell 35 00:02:46,796 --> 00:02:50,156 Speaker 1: you the backstory from my perspective, which is that since 36 00:02:50,236 --> 00:02:55,236 Speaker 1: the documentary about Britney's conservatorship, I can't even count how 37 00:02:55,236 --> 00:02:59,956 Speaker 1: many people professional and unprofessional have said to me, you know, Noah, 38 00:03:00,036 --> 00:03:02,396 Speaker 1: you know, to tell us what we should think about conservatorship. 39 00:03:02,476 --> 00:03:04,316 Speaker 1: And I said to them, look, I'm not an expert 40 00:03:04,316 --> 00:03:06,796 Speaker 1: on conservatorship. I barely remember what I learned about it 41 00:03:06,796 --> 00:03:08,796 Speaker 1: in law school. I don't even play an expert on 42 00:03:08,876 --> 00:03:11,756 Speaker 1: deep Let's talk to a real expert. And I sort 43 00:03:11,796 --> 00:03:13,836 Speaker 1: of realized at some point that the public interest in 44 00:03:13,876 --> 00:03:16,396 Speaker 1: this is so fundamental and the issues behind it are 45 00:03:16,436 --> 00:03:19,396 Speaker 1: so significant that it's really worth having a conversation with 46 00:03:19,396 --> 00:03:21,956 Speaker 1: someone who genuinely is an expert and who has first 47 00:03:21,956 --> 00:03:24,516 Speaker 1: hand knowledge of the situation. So that's the backstory of 48 00:03:24,596 --> 00:03:26,396 Speaker 1: how you're here, And so I wonder if we could 49 00:03:26,436 --> 00:03:30,076 Speaker 1: start by just walking the folks through, and that includes 50 00:03:30,156 --> 00:03:33,516 Speaker 1: me the one on one of conservatorship, what it's for, 51 00:03:33,756 --> 00:03:36,796 Speaker 1: how it's established, and when it's well functioning, whether it's 52 00:03:36,796 --> 00:03:40,156 Speaker 1: a good idea. Right. So, the most important thing to 53 00:03:40,236 --> 00:03:45,196 Speaker 1: know about conservatorships is that it's a process that's designed 54 00:03:45,236 --> 00:03:49,156 Speaker 1: to protect people who are vulnerable. And they may be 55 00:03:49,236 --> 00:03:56,596 Speaker 1: vulnerable because of mental illness, dementia, other conditions which cause 56 00:03:56,716 --> 00:04:00,356 Speaker 1: them to be either unable to manage their own lives, 57 00:04:00,436 --> 00:04:05,476 Speaker 1: their own daily activities of living, getting appropriate healthcare, feeding themselves, 58 00:04:06,036 --> 00:04:12,436 Speaker 1: taining shelter, and also making finance hual decisions, and very 59 00:04:12,476 --> 00:04:16,436 Speaker 1: importantly resisting the influence of people who might want to 60 00:04:16,436 --> 00:04:20,276 Speaker 1: take advantage of them. And let's be clear, there is 61 00:04:20,316 --> 00:04:23,836 Speaker 1: a lot of that going on, especially as our population 62 00:04:24,076 --> 00:04:28,436 Speaker 1: continues to age. Healthcare is better and better, people are 63 00:04:28,476 --> 00:04:32,316 Speaker 1: living longer lives. But it's sort of the Ronald Reagan syndrome. 64 00:04:32,356 --> 00:04:37,476 Speaker 1: They're healthy physically, but not necessarily mentally. They become more 65 00:04:37,516 --> 00:04:41,156 Speaker 1: and more vulnerable and susceptible to influence of others or 66 00:04:41,236 --> 00:04:44,516 Speaker 1: simply unable to really manage their own lives, you know, 67 00:04:44,596 --> 00:04:46,836 Speaker 1: make sure they're paying taxes on time. Yeah, seen from 68 00:04:46,876 --> 00:04:50,156 Speaker 1: that perspective, it sounds like we need conservatorship in our 69 00:04:50,196 --> 00:04:53,516 Speaker 1: system because there are people who are aging or people 70 00:04:53,516 --> 00:04:56,956 Speaker 1: who have other underlying disease and they really do need 71 00:04:56,996 --> 00:04:59,516 Speaker 1: to be taken care of. So what are the safeguards 72 00:04:59,556 --> 00:05:01,356 Speaker 1: that are in place presently, and then we can talk 73 00:05:01,356 --> 00:05:04,396 Speaker 1: about whether they're good enough so that not just anyone 74 00:05:04,476 --> 00:05:09,356 Speaker 1: is placed in a conservatorship. Sure, so, conservatives ship are 75 00:05:09,396 --> 00:05:13,556 Speaker 1: actually really really tough to obtain. You have to be 76 00:05:13,636 --> 00:05:17,116 Speaker 1: able to approve to a court at a trial by 77 00:05:17,276 --> 00:05:20,116 Speaker 1: clear and convincing evidence right, So that means not just 78 00:05:20,196 --> 00:05:23,556 Speaker 1: your normal civil standard of more probable than not, and 79 00:05:23,756 --> 00:05:27,196 Speaker 1: not your criminal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt, but 80 00:05:27,276 --> 00:05:31,476 Speaker 1: somewhere in between, a clear and convincing evidence standard that 81 00:05:31,556 --> 00:05:35,876 Speaker 1: the person needs a conservatorship because they're unable to manage 82 00:05:35,916 --> 00:05:40,836 Speaker 1: their own affairs or resist undue influence by others. And 83 00:05:40,956 --> 00:05:43,956 Speaker 1: you also have to show that a conservatorship is what 84 00:05:43,996 --> 00:05:48,876 Speaker 1: we call the least restrictive means available in order to 85 00:05:48,916 --> 00:05:52,116 Speaker 1: protect them, because there are other ways in which people 86 00:05:52,156 --> 00:05:55,716 Speaker 1: can be protected. For example, if your assets are held 87 00:05:55,716 --> 00:05:59,076 Speaker 1: in trust and you have a trustee, the trustee has 88 00:05:59,076 --> 00:06:02,316 Speaker 1: the power to make financial decisions, you can influence me 89 00:06:02,396 --> 00:06:05,556 Speaker 1: all you want. But I don't have that power anymore. 90 00:06:05,836 --> 00:06:09,796 Speaker 1: My assets are in trust, or I have a healthcare 91 00:06:09,836 --> 00:06:13,596 Speaker 1: directive a power of attorney for healthcare decisions, or I'm 92 00:06:13,636 --> 00:06:17,036 Speaker 1: getting you know, I have care and place to help 93 00:06:17,156 --> 00:06:20,956 Speaker 1: me with my daily living, so I don't necessarily need 94 00:06:21,556 --> 00:06:24,036 Speaker 1: the framework of a conservatorship. But unfortunately a lot of 95 00:06:24,076 --> 00:06:29,236 Speaker 1: people don't have those things, and conservativeships are really the 96 00:06:29,276 --> 00:06:32,956 Speaker 1: best means available to protect them. What's unusual, of course, 97 00:06:32,996 --> 00:06:36,836 Speaker 1: about the Britney case it's not unique. But it's unusual 98 00:06:37,116 --> 00:06:41,836 Speaker 1: is that she's young. Okay, she has been in a 99 00:06:41,876 --> 00:06:47,756 Speaker 1: conservatorship for thirteen years, and she seems to be functioning, right. 100 00:06:47,876 --> 00:06:51,556 Speaker 1: I mean, we see her onstage performing, we see her 101 00:06:51,556 --> 00:06:55,276 Speaker 1: on television co hosting a TV show, and we say 102 00:06:55,316 --> 00:06:57,756 Speaker 1: to ourselves, will wait a minute. If this is a 103 00:06:57,836 --> 00:07:01,436 Speaker 1: conservatorship as supposed to be a system to protect people 104 00:07:01,436 --> 00:07:04,876 Speaker 1: who can't function on their own, and only when they 105 00:07:04,916 --> 00:07:08,356 Speaker 1: really can't function in their own, how is it appropriate 106 00:07:08,436 --> 00:07:10,516 Speaker 1: for her because she seems to be able to function. 107 00:07:10,876 --> 00:07:13,916 Speaker 1: The problem is we just don't really know what's going 108 00:07:13,956 --> 00:07:16,876 Speaker 1: on behind the scenes, and that's the real problem at 109 00:07:16,876 --> 00:07:21,236 Speaker 1: this case. I have a whole barrage of questions about 110 00:07:21,276 --> 00:07:23,116 Speaker 1: the trial of procedure, but before I get to them, 111 00:07:23,156 --> 00:07:24,636 Speaker 1: I first want to I was really struck by what 112 00:07:24,676 --> 00:07:28,236 Speaker 1: you said about that a trust would be considered an alternative, 113 00:07:28,276 --> 00:07:31,356 Speaker 1: and it does seem like a less restrictive alternative. So 114 00:07:31,396 --> 00:07:33,356 Speaker 1: why isn't it the case that for just about anybody 115 00:07:33,396 --> 00:07:36,156 Speaker 1: who would be in a position where conservatorship would be 116 00:07:36,196 --> 00:07:39,836 Speaker 1: applied for that, a court would say, actually, no, let's 117 00:07:39,876 --> 00:07:41,956 Speaker 1: just create a trust, put your assets in the trust, 118 00:07:42,356 --> 00:07:47,236 Speaker 1: and appoint a trustee. Brittany's assets are in trust and 119 00:07:47,316 --> 00:07:50,076 Speaker 1: there is a trustee, and so you might ask, Will 120 00:07:50,196 --> 00:07:53,076 Speaker 1: then why does Brittany have a conservative of the estate. Well, 121 00:07:53,796 --> 00:07:56,996 Speaker 1: it can be useful to have a conservative the estate 122 00:07:56,996 --> 00:07:59,876 Speaker 1: who can be the one to make sure the trust 123 00:07:59,956 --> 00:08:03,436 Speaker 1: he's doing his job, and a conservatorship might be useful 124 00:08:03,436 --> 00:08:06,916 Speaker 1: for that purpose. If the conservatie can't really do that 125 00:08:06,996 --> 00:08:10,196 Speaker 1: and make sure, hey, the trustee is you know, dipping 126 00:08:10,316 --> 00:08:14,476 Speaker 1: or doing things inappropriate. That's actually fascinating because to watch 127 00:08:14,556 --> 00:08:17,996 Speaker 1: the documentary when had the sense that the conservatorship has 128 00:08:18,036 --> 00:08:21,796 Speaker 1: some fundamentally transformational effect on her how her affairs are run. 129 00:08:22,156 --> 00:08:25,476 Speaker 1: But if actually her wealth is in trust and the 130 00:08:25,516 --> 00:08:27,916 Speaker 1: trustee is not the person who's the conservator, which I 131 00:08:27,916 --> 00:08:30,556 Speaker 1: guess is the father, it may be that it doesn't 132 00:08:30,596 --> 00:08:34,156 Speaker 1: make such a big difference that she's in conservatorship, which 133 00:08:34,236 --> 00:08:37,436 Speaker 1: would in turn, to some degree, undercut the perhaps the 134 00:08:37,516 --> 00:08:41,196 Speaker 1: newsworthiness of the whole formulation, which is, oh my goodness, 135 00:08:41,236 --> 00:08:42,836 Speaker 1: this is so shocking. I mean, if the story were 136 00:08:43,916 --> 00:08:47,156 Speaker 1: stars assets in trust, no one would find that shocking 137 00:08:47,236 --> 00:08:50,316 Speaker 1: because many, many people's assets are in trust. Yes, And 138 00:08:50,356 --> 00:08:52,636 Speaker 1: I want to say two things to that, First of all, 139 00:08:53,636 --> 00:08:58,476 Speaker 1: when you're talking about a celebrity, a celebrity oftentimes engages 140 00:08:58,516 --> 00:09:01,076 Speaker 1: in what we call personal service contracts right when they 141 00:09:01,116 --> 00:09:06,076 Speaker 1: actually agree to perform. That's a personal service contract that 142 00:09:06,156 --> 00:09:10,316 Speaker 1: the trustee of your assets can't make. So there is 143 00:09:10,356 --> 00:09:13,316 Speaker 1: a need for her to have somebody who can make 144 00:09:13,356 --> 00:09:17,396 Speaker 1: a decision for things like you know, performing a concerts, 145 00:09:17,596 --> 00:09:20,956 Speaker 1: no doubt. So just to clarify, I think, I think 146 00:09:20,956 --> 00:09:24,756 Speaker 1: I understand. The striking thing then about the conservator is 147 00:09:24,796 --> 00:09:29,436 Speaker 1: that Britney Spears can't even sign a contract to appear 148 00:09:29,796 --> 00:09:31,596 Speaker 1: and sing or do whatever it else she'd been doing 149 00:09:31,596 --> 00:09:35,516 Speaker 1: in her appearance without the conservator signing essentially on her 150 00:09:35,516 --> 00:09:38,516 Speaker 1: behalf exactly, Whereas if it were a trust, that's just 151 00:09:38,636 --> 00:09:40,356 Speaker 1: in a trust, you take the asset that you have, 152 00:09:40,396 --> 00:09:42,636 Speaker 1: whether it's money or real estate, you put it into 153 00:09:42,636 --> 00:09:45,556 Speaker 1: the trust, and that asset gets managed, But the trustee 154 00:09:45,596 --> 00:09:49,436 Speaker 1: doesn't manage your day to day affairs, and so that 155 00:09:49,476 --> 00:09:51,676 Speaker 1: does make it actually pretty distinctive. Well, that sounds like 156 00:09:51,676 --> 00:09:55,116 Speaker 1: it's more of a justification for the documentary than there 157 00:09:55,196 --> 00:09:58,036 Speaker 1: otherwise might have been. Yeah, certainly in the context of 158 00:09:58,036 --> 00:10:01,236 Speaker 1: an entertainer. But it's really important though to understand that 159 00:10:01,316 --> 00:10:08,036 Speaker 1: conservatorships are actually fairly limited in terms of what they 160 00:10:08,076 --> 00:10:10,956 Speaker 1: can really do. To text somebody, yes, they can make 161 00:10:10,996 --> 00:10:14,516 Speaker 1: sure that if there's a contract that needs to be signed, 162 00:10:15,556 --> 00:10:19,396 Speaker 1: a conservator has to sign that contract. You can't walk 163 00:10:19,516 --> 00:10:22,916 Speaker 1: up to somebody who's incapacitated and have them sign away 164 00:10:22,996 --> 00:10:26,156 Speaker 1: their you know, their house that you don't have the 165 00:10:26,156 --> 00:10:28,876 Speaker 1: power to do that. The problem a lot of times 166 00:10:28,876 --> 00:10:33,476 Speaker 1: with conservatorships, though, is they are limited in terms of 167 00:10:33,636 --> 00:10:36,036 Speaker 1: how much you can really help a person. And let 168 00:10:36,076 --> 00:10:39,356 Speaker 1: me explain to what I mean by that. One of 169 00:10:39,396 --> 00:10:42,836 Speaker 1: the most heartbreaking things that I have in my practice 170 00:10:42,916 --> 00:10:45,556 Speaker 1: is I get parents who call me all the time 171 00:10:45,596 --> 00:10:49,676 Speaker 1: and they have kids who are adults, but they have 172 00:10:49,796 --> 00:10:54,316 Speaker 1: terrible drug problems, they have terrible eating disorders. They really are, 173 00:10:54,756 --> 00:10:58,076 Speaker 1: you know, having problems living on the street, and they 174 00:10:58,116 --> 00:11:00,876 Speaker 1: really need help. And what I have to tell them 175 00:11:01,236 --> 00:11:04,716 Speaker 1: is a conservatorship is probably not going to help. And 176 00:11:04,796 --> 00:11:09,556 Speaker 1: the reason is that you can't really force somebody who's 177 00:11:09,596 --> 00:11:14,516 Speaker 1: in a conservatorship to be compliant with things like medications 178 00:11:15,036 --> 00:11:19,676 Speaker 1: or going into a treatment program. You can't sign somebody 179 00:11:19,716 --> 00:11:23,996 Speaker 1: into a lockdown facility, you can't force them to take medications, 180 00:11:24,036 --> 00:11:27,516 Speaker 1: so if they're really not compliant, if they're not willing 181 00:11:27,556 --> 00:11:31,676 Speaker 1: to cooperate, conservatorships are pretty limited. There's a whole separate 182 00:11:31,716 --> 00:11:37,476 Speaker 1: type of conservatorship that's called an LPs conservatorship in California, 183 00:11:37,516 --> 00:11:41,916 Speaker 1: which are the initials for the legislators who designed it, 184 00:11:42,956 --> 00:11:47,076 Speaker 1: and that's a conservatorship where you can actually lock somebody up, 185 00:11:47,196 --> 00:11:49,556 Speaker 1: you can put them in a mental institution, you can 186 00:11:49,596 --> 00:11:55,276 Speaker 1: force medications and so forth. They're extremely rare that you 187 00:11:55,356 --> 00:11:58,636 Speaker 1: have to prove by essentially a quasi criminal standard, that 188 00:11:58,676 --> 00:12:02,516 Speaker 1: they're gravely disabled and there are a threat to either 189 00:12:02,596 --> 00:12:07,436 Speaker 1: themselves or others. And no one accept a mental health 190 00:12:07,996 --> 00:12:12,036 Speaker 1: facility a hospital, but all a psychiatric award can actually 191 00:12:12,316 --> 00:12:15,756 Speaker 1: seek that type of conservatorship. So a family member can't, 192 00:12:16,636 --> 00:12:19,316 Speaker 1: a friend can't. It's got to be the hospital that 193 00:12:19,436 --> 00:12:23,556 Speaker 1: says we need this protection for that person. So conservatorships 194 00:12:23,556 --> 00:12:26,676 Speaker 1: the kind that Britney is in are actually pretty limited. 195 00:12:27,396 --> 00:12:29,396 Speaker 1: That other kind you're describing, the LPs kind of sounds 196 00:12:29,436 --> 00:12:33,236 Speaker 1: like it's a version of civil committal. It really is, yeah, 197 00:12:33,276 --> 00:12:34,996 Speaker 1: where you have to prove to the court, you know, 198 00:12:35,076 --> 00:12:36,836 Speaker 1: by a very very high standard, that the prisoners are 199 00:12:36,876 --> 00:12:38,396 Speaker 1: threat to themselves. Or others, and then they can be 200 00:12:38,436 --> 00:12:42,356 Speaker 1: involuntarily restrained in a range of ways. That's right. Yeah, 201 00:12:42,396 --> 00:12:44,676 Speaker 1: And so you know there's a lot of stuff out 202 00:12:44,716 --> 00:12:49,316 Speaker 1: there about you know, Britney can't, can't leave the house, 203 00:12:49,436 --> 00:12:52,676 Speaker 1: she can't take a walk, she can't. None of that's true. 204 00:12:52,836 --> 00:12:55,556 Speaker 1: None of that is None of that is true. It's 205 00:12:55,556 --> 00:12:58,636 Speaker 1: great that people are now interested in what is a 206 00:12:58,676 --> 00:13:03,676 Speaker 1: conservatorship and doesn't really work, and that is important. But unfortunately, 207 00:13:03,756 --> 00:13:05,436 Speaker 1: and I know this is going to be shocking to you, 208 00:13:05,516 --> 00:13:10,236 Speaker 1: but there are legislators who like to grahamstand and in 209 00:13:10,236 --> 00:13:13,436 Speaker 1: our country, yeah, and want to you know, show that 210 00:13:13,476 --> 00:13:17,236 Speaker 1: they're you know, being responsive to to some public outcry. 211 00:13:18,036 --> 00:13:23,236 Speaker 1: And you know, my fear is that all the attention 212 00:13:23,316 --> 00:13:27,516 Speaker 1: that this is getting will lead to some laws that 213 00:13:28,156 --> 00:13:32,116 Speaker 1: will undermine the system and leave people who really need 214 00:13:32,196 --> 00:13:37,556 Speaker 1: protection without the protection that they that they really do need. So, Laura, 215 00:13:37,596 --> 00:13:40,156 Speaker 1: form that makes it much harder to get conservatorships will 216 00:13:40,196 --> 00:13:43,476 Speaker 1: therefore leave fewer people with conservatorships. That it will also 217 00:13:43,636 --> 00:13:46,836 Speaker 1: probably raise the cost people probably have to pay attorney's 218 00:13:46,836 --> 00:13:49,116 Speaker 1: fees to get this done, and it will cost them more. 219 00:13:49,196 --> 00:13:53,716 Speaker 1: Presumably what about the who guards the guardians problem? Once 220 00:13:53,756 --> 00:13:58,076 Speaker 1: you are the conservator, is there any function or role 221 00:13:58,196 --> 00:14:00,756 Speaker 1: for anybody to look over the shoulder of the conservator 222 00:14:01,356 --> 00:14:04,316 Speaker 1: and check on the quality of the work that person 223 00:14:04,396 --> 00:14:07,156 Speaker 1: is doing. Yeah, so that's a that's a really great question. 224 00:14:07,716 --> 00:14:11,836 Speaker 1: So look, first of all, let me say I don't 225 00:14:11,916 --> 00:14:17,236 Speaker 1: think the problem with conservatorships or necessarily this conservatorship is 226 00:14:17,236 --> 00:14:21,036 Speaker 1: a problem of the law. I think the law in 227 00:14:21,156 --> 00:14:25,716 Speaker 1: terms of the framework that it establishes is appropriate, and 228 00:14:25,796 --> 00:14:29,756 Speaker 1: it balances the difficult nature of trying to obtain a 229 00:14:29,796 --> 00:14:33,516 Speaker 1: conservatorship and maintain a conservatorship even after you get it, 230 00:14:33,996 --> 00:14:39,596 Speaker 1: and protecting the rights of the proposed conservaty. But you know, 231 00:14:40,116 --> 00:14:44,396 Speaker 1: we have a judicial system that has elasticity because we 232 00:14:44,436 --> 00:14:47,436 Speaker 1: need to make sure that in each appropriate case it 233 00:14:47,516 --> 00:14:50,076 Speaker 1: makes sense based on the facts of that case. And 234 00:14:50,156 --> 00:14:52,756 Speaker 1: we also have a system that depends on people, and 235 00:14:52,876 --> 00:14:59,396 Speaker 1: that means we have lawyers, we have judges and other professionals, doctors, 236 00:14:59,476 --> 00:15:02,956 Speaker 1: court investigators, all of whom we're human. And it is 237 00:15:03,436 --> 00:15:08,876 Speaker 1: possible that you will find somebody who is corrupt, who 238 00:15:08,996 --> 00:15:12,396 Speaker 1: is unethical, or judge who frankly isn't that smart. It 239 00:15:12,396 --> 00:15:15,396 Speaker 1: makes a bad decision, believe it or not, that happens shocking, 240 00:15:15,516 --> 00:15:20,116 Speaker 1: But so far I've yet to see a judicial system 241 00:15:20,236 --> 00:15:24,476 Speaker 1: that's better than ours in terms of the advocacy that 242 00:15:24,556 --> 00:15:29,676 Speaker 1: it's based on. An advocacy that is, everybody's interests being 243 00:15:29,916 --> 00:15:32,676 Speaker 1: argued to the court, and the court making a decision 244 00:15:33,596 --> 00:15:37,556 Speaker 1: is the best way to find the best version of 245 00:15:37,596 --> 00:15:41,196 Speaker 1: the truth. As Woodward and burst In say, let me 246 00:15:41,236 --> 00:15:44,236 Speaker 1: ask you about the advocacy structures and how they worked here. So, 247 00:15:45,076 --> 00:15:49,036 Speaker 1: if there's an application for a conservatorship, does that automatically 248 00:15:49,076 --> 00:15:51,996 Speaker 1: mean that sort of counsel is appointed if the person 249 00:15:52,356 --> 00:15:55,996 Speaker 1: for whom it sought just acquiescence. I mean, Brittany didn't 250 00:15:56,036 --> 00:16:00,396 Speaker 1: contest this conservatorship, did she? She didn't. So let me 251 00:16:00,476 --> 00:16:04,996 Speaker 1: just back up a little bit and tell you we 252 00:16:05,076 --> 00:16:08,356 Speaker 1: have somebody who can petition the court for a conservatorship. 253 00:16:08,556 --> 00:16:11,236 Speaker 1: That can be a family member, that can be a friend, 254 00:16:11,836 --> 00:16:14,436 Speaker 1: who can ask the court to establish a conservatorship, and 255 00:16:14,476 --> 00:16:16,876 Speaker 1: they're the one who have to prove that a conservatorship 256 00:16:16,956 --> 00:16:21,956 Speaker 1: is necessary. Other friends, family members can object, can show 257 00:16:22,036 --> 00:16:25,476 Speaker 1: up with lawyers and evidence and argue why a conservatorship 258 00:16:25,556 --> 00:16:28,876 Speaker 1: is not appropriate, And of course the proposed conservaty can 259 00:16:28,956 --> 00:16:31,116 Speaker 1: do that also, and a judge will have to make 260 00:16:31,116 --> 00:16:35,316 Speaker 1: a decision at a trial, and in California, the conservaty 261 00:16:35,356 --> 00:16:38,876 Speaker 1: can ask for a jury trial as well. Now, who 262 00:16:38,956 --> 00:16:42,076 Speaker 1: represents the proposed conservaty? And I want to make a 263 00:16:42,116 --> 00:16:46,156 Speaker 1: distinction between when the person is a proposed conservaty and 264 00:16:46,236 --> 00:16:49,956 Speaker 1: when the person is under a conservatorship. So when the 265 00:16:49,996 --> 00:16:54,556 Speaker 1: person is a proposed conservaty under California law and law 266 00:16:54,596 --> 00:16:57,796 Speaker 1: in most states, they have the right to have counsel 267 00:16:57,956 --> 00:17:03,156 Speaker 1: of their own choice unless they if they're unable to 268 00:17:03,476 --> 00:17:08,396 Speaker 1: retain counsel, then the court will appoint counsel for them. Okay, 269 00:17:08,516 --> 00:17:11,956 Speaker 1: somebody who is experienced in the area, and the court 270 00:17:12,116 --> 00:17:14,636 Speaker 1: knows and can appoint the first So that's a narrow 271 00:17:14,676 --> 00:17:19,196 Speaker 1: band because they have to be incompetent enough to merit conservatorship, 272 00:17:19,316 --> 00:17:22,996 Speaker 1: but not so incompetent that they couldn't hire counsels. That's right. 273 00:17:23,076 --> 00:17:28,156 Speaker 1: And it's not entirely clear what it means to say 274 00:17:28,196 --> 00:17:33,276 Speaker 1: that they are unable to retain counsel, because until there's 275 00:17:33,276 --> 00:17:38,876 Speaker 1: a conservatorship, there hasn't been an adjudication that they are incompetent. Okay, 276 00:17:38,956 --> 00:17:43,396 Speaker 1: So here's a perfect example. Adam Streisan is hired by 277 00:17:43,396 --> 00:17:47,516 Speaker 1: Brittany right, her family law attorneys contact me, asked me 278 00:17:47,796 --> 00:17:49,516 Speaker 1: to get involved because they know me and they know 279 00:17:49,636 --> 00:17:51,716 Speaker 1: my reputation. And then I do this kind of thing. 280 00:17:52,196 --> 00:17:55,716 Speaker 1: I meet with Brittany a couple of times. We have 281 00:17:56,276 --> 00:18:00,516 Speaker 1: lots of communication and otherwise by telephone. We talk about 282 00:18:00,556 --> 00:18:03,516 Speaker 1: what the circumstances are. Now I can tell you what 283 00:18:03,556 --> 00:18:07,276 Speaker 1: I told the court because that's publicly. Shout right, it's public. 284 00:18:07,756 --> 00:18:10,836 Speaker 1: And so I told the court with Brittany and I 285 00:18:10,916 --> 00:18:12,996 Speaker 1: agreed I would tell the court. What I did tell 286 00:18:13,036 --> 00:18:18,676 Speaker 1: the court is, Look, she understands that this conservatorship is 287 00:18:19,156 --> 00:18:22,036 Speaker 1: an inevitability. I mean, right now, things are out of control, 288 00:18:22,076 --> 00:18:26,716 Speaker 1: and she gets that resisting the conservatorship is going to 289 00:18:26,756 --> 00:18:29,996 Speaker 1: be very difficult but the one thing that she wants 290 00:18:30,156 --> 00:18:33,396 Speaker 1: and difficult legally. Just forgive me for asking the clarifying question. 291 00:18:33,436 --> 00:18:37,276 Speaker 1: But of course what's is fascinating but difficult. How difficult 292 00:18:37,316 --> 00:18:38,876 Speaker 1: that she couldn't have won? I mean she has Adam 293 00:18:38,916 --> 00:18:42,276 Speaker 1: streisand representing her. If you had sought to oppose it, 294 00:18:42,476 --> 00:18:46,836 Speaker 1: you would have successfully opposed it. Well, I mean, I 295 00:18:46,876 --> 00:18:50,316 Speaker 1: appreciate your confidence in me, and I also have a 296 00:18:50,396 --> 00:18:52,676 Speaker 1: high level of confidence in my own abilities, But the 297 00:18:52,716 --> 00:18:56,636 Speaker 1: fact of the matter must know that there was clearly 298 00:18:56,676 --> 00:19:02,116 Speaker 1: there was medical evidence that she has some fairly serious 299 00:19:02,196 --> 00:19:06,476 Speaker 1: mental illness. I don't know exactly what that is. We'll 300 00:19:06,516 --> 00:19:09,596 Speaker 1: talk about that a little bit is more, but we 301 00:19:09,676 --> 00:19:15,436 Speaker 1: also know because it was very public the kinds of 302 00:19:15,436 --> 00:19:18,236 Speaker 1: things that were going on with her, and she was, 303 00:19:19,036 --> 00:19:22,156 Speaker 1: you know, she was out of control. Now, frankly, ask 304 00:19:22,236 --> 00:19:26,396 Speaker 1: yourself how you would feel with all of the hundreds 305 00:19:26,396 --> 00:19:29,316 Speaker 1: of paparazzi all over you, which I got to witness firsthand, 306 00:19:29,436 --> 00:19:32,916 Speaker 1: and was insane. I don't know how that doesn't make 307 00:19:32,916 --> 00:19:35,116 Speaker 1: you feel crazy. I mean, but it's not. That's different 308 00:19:35,116 --> 00:19:38,756 Speaker 1: than underlying mental illness. That's true. Yeah, Well, if you 309 00:19:38,796 --> 00:19:41,756 Speaker 1: have underlying mental illness and you are hounded by hundreds 310 00:19:41,796 --> 00:19:44,756 Speaker 1: of paparazzi and your husband is not allowing you to 311 00:19:44,796 --> 00:19:48,796 Speaker 1: see your kids, that would make anybody pretty out of control. 312 00:19:49,636 --> 00:19:52,636 Speaker 1: And again I'm saying out of control. I don't mean 313 00:19:52,676 --> 00:19:55,876 Speaker 1: to say she's crazy or anything. Of course, things were 314 00:19:55,916 --> 00:19:59,316 Speaker 1: out of control, and it was very public, and it 315 00:19:59,436 --> 00:20:04,596 Speaker 1: was clear that the court, at least on an interim basis, 316 00:20:05,036 --> 00:20:09,556 Speaker 1: was going to put in some protection for her. It 317 00:20:09,596 --> 00:20:13,676 Speaker 1: was my judgment that what we ought to do is 318 00:20:13,756 --> 00:20:15,596 Speaker 1: we ought to try to get the one thing that 319 00:20:15,756 --> 00:20:18,636 Speaker 1: really really mattered to her, which is, I don't want 320 00:20:18,676 --> 00:20:21,996 Speaker 1: my father controlling my life, okay, which is something we 321 00:20:21,996 --> 00:20:25,596 Speaker 1: ought to talk about. And if we could do that, 322 00:20:25,676 --> 00:20:29,036 Speaker 1: if we could get an appropriate person, an independent professional, 323 00:20:29,076 --> 00:20:32,676 Speaker 1: to be that conservator for some interim basis, and then 324 00:20:32,756 --> 00:20:34,956 Speaker 1: work to try to figure out, all, right, how do 325 00:20:34,996 --> 00:20:37,556 Speaker 1: we get a little bit more control over our life, 326 00:20:37,836 --> 00:20:40,956 Speaker 1: and you know, and move on. And again, Also, I 327 00:20:41,036 --> 00:20:44,436 Speaker 1: didn't know the extent of her of her mental illness 328 00:20:45,116 --> 00:20:48,116 Speaker 1: when I walked into court. The judge said to me, 329 00:20:48,476 --> 00:20:51,756 Speaker 1: mister Streisan, I have a medical report I'm not going 330 00:20:51,796 --> 00:20:55,396 Speaker 1: to show it to you from doctor James Edward Sparr. 331 00:20:55,516 --> 00:20:58,076 Speaker 1: Now I know doctor Sparr. I've known him for years. 332 00:20:58,396 --> 00:21:01,716 Speaker 1: I know the guy is a man of integrity. I 333 00:21:01,876 --> 00:21:05,316 Speaker 1: know that he is the best of what he does 334 00:21:05,356 --> 00:21:08,996 Speaker 1: in terms of valuating mental illness. And the judge tells 335 00:21:08,996 --> 00:21:12,516 Speaker 1: me that doctor spar has concluded that she suffers from 336 00:21:12,876 --> 00:21:16,996 Speaker 1: mental illness to the point where she cannot retain a 337 00:21:17,036 --> 00:21:21,516 Speaker 1: direct counsel. Now, my perspective was she made some pretty 338 00:21:21,556 --> 00:21:25,076 Speaker 1: sound judgments, right. She was able to take my advice. Hey, 339 00:21:25,276 --> 00:21:30,276 Speaker 1: let's not try to resist. This will look reasonable. We'll 340 00:21:30,316 --> 00:21:32,916 Speaker 1: get the thing you really really want right now, which 341 00:21:33,036 --> 00:21:35,796 Speaker 1: is not your father, and then we'll work on the 342 00:21:35,796 --> 00:21:40,556 Speaker 1: next step of doing away with the conservatorship framework. I 343 00:21:40,636 --> 00:21:43,196 Speaker 1: thought that was pretty sad. But I'm not a doctor, right, 344 00:21:43,596 --> 00:21:47,556 Speaker 1: And if doctor Sparr says she's really that bad, I 345 00:21:47,596 --> 00:21:52,156 Speaker 1: said to the court, if doctor Sparr has concluded that, 346 00:21:52,676 --> 00:21:55,076 Speaker 1: I accept that. I mean, I respect doctor Sparr. And 347 00:21:55,076 --> 00:21:57,756 Speaker 1: if the court feels that she would be better served 348 00:21:58,276 --> 00:22:11,836 Speaker 1: with another lawyer, that's fine. We'll be right back. Can 349 00:22:11,876 --> 00:22:14,516 Speaker 1: I ask a a sort of loggy question here? Sure 350 00:22:15,316 --> 00:22:17,716 Speaker 1: was she your client at this point or were someone 351 00:22:17,716 --> 00:22:21,156 Speaker 1: else your client? She was my client. She signed an 352 00:22:21,156 --> 00:22:24,156 Speaker 1: engagement agreement with me. She you know, we met, we 353 00:22:24,276 --> 00:22:26,476 Speaker 1: discussed the term. So when the court said that she 354 00:22:26,556 --> 00:22:29,396 Speaker 1: lacked the capacity to retain counsel, what did that This 355 00:22:29,476 --> 00:22:31,676 Speaker 1: is the loggy question. What did that do to your 356 00:22:31,756 --> 00:22:35,716 Speaker 1: existing representational relationship with her? I mean, you had she 357 00:22:35,796 --> 00:22:38,076 Speaker 1: had signed an agreement with you, and there's the court 358 00:22:38,156 --> 00:22:41,356 Speaker 1: telling you her lawyer that she lacks the capacity to retainue. 359 00:22:41,396 --> 00:22:44,876 Speaker 1: So I mean, what happens? Well, you know, could I 360 00:22:44,956 --> 00:22:48,716 Speaker 1: have fought it. I probably could have fought it. I 361 00:22:48,796 --> 00:22:53,156 Speaker 1: did have again, respect for the conclusions that doctor Sparr reached. 362 00:22:53,876 --> 00:22:59,156 Speaker 1: If she had been adjudicated as being incompetent, that would 363 00:22:59,196 --> 00:23:01,876 Speaker 1: have seriously put into question whether or not she could 364 00:23:01,876 --> 00:23:06,116 Speaker 1: have maintained an attorney client relationship with me. Once she's 365 00:23:06,116 --> 00:23:09,516 Speaker 1: a conservative, Once there's an adjudication she lacks capa ascity 366 00:23:09,596 --> 00:23:13,956 Speaker 1: to contract, then there's a question about whether she should 367 00:23:13,956 --> 00:23:16,596 Speaker 1: be able to have a person represent her that she 368 00:23:16,636 --> 00:23:20,116 Speaker 1: wants to represent her. And the law doesn't say you can't. 369 00:23:20,756 --> 00:23:23,796 Speaker 1: The law doesn't say. The court couldn't have said, sure, 370 00:23:23,916 --> 00:23:25,956 Speaker 1: you know, mister Stisan, we're going to allow you to 371 00:23:25,996 --> 00:23:29,596 Speaker 1: be the lawyer. But the court has more latitude at 372 00:23:29,596 --> 00:23:32,156 Speaker 1: that point to say no, we're going to appoint somebody. 373 00:23:32,316 --> 00:23:38,036 Speaker 1: And it's important to remember something. First of all, Judge 374 00:23:38,076 --> 00:23:41,036 Speaker 1: Gets was Commissioner Gets at the time. She was new 375 00:23:41,076 --> 00:23:43,396 Speaker 1: to the bench, she was brand new to probate. She 376 00:23:43,436 --> 00:23:46,116 Speaker 1: didn't know me. Frankly, if the decision were made today 377 00:23:46,196 --> 00:23:48,356 Speaker 1: she knows me now, I'm sure the decision would have 378 00:23:48,356 --> 00:23:51,636 Speaker 1: been different. But she didn't know me. And I'm walking 379 00:23:51,676 --> 00:23:55,436 Speaker 1: into the courtroom saying I represent Britney spears. Now, I 380 00:23:55,516 --> 00:24:00,956 Speaker 1: could be part of the gang who's under the influencinger 381 00:24:00,956 --> 00:24:02,996 Speaker 1: and trying to take advantage of her. I could be 382 00:24:03,396 --> 00:24:07,596 Speaker 1: somebody who is being really being retained or pushed on 383 00:24:07,756 --> 00:24:11,636 Speaker 1: Britney by somebody who is manipulating her. And so I 384 00:24:11,676 --> 00:24:15,676 Speaker 1: think there is an important role for the court to 385 00:24:15,796 --> 00:24:20,036 Speaker 1: play in saying, you know what. It is important for 386 00:24:20,076 --> 00:24:22,196 Speaker 1: the Conservaty to have the right to say, this is 387 00:24:22,276 --> 00:24:25,796 Speaker 1: somebody I want to represent me. But it's also important 388 00:24:25,796 --> 00:24:27,716 Speaker 1: for the court to have the ability to say, you 389 00:24:27,756 --> 00:24:31,836 Speaker 1: know what, I've got enough evidence here that makes me think, 390 00:24:32,956 --> 00:24:36,156 Speaker 1: you know, it'd be better to appoint somebody to represent 391 00:24:36,196 --> 00:24:38,516 Speaker 1: the Conservaty. That's what happened at that moment, right. The 392 00:24:38,756 --> 00:24:42,196 Speaker 1: Court then appointed different counsel for her, and then that 393 00:24:42,236 --> 00:24:46,236 Speaker 1: council made a decision not to contest the conservatorship. Is 394 00:24:46,276 --> 00:24:50,996 Speaker 1: that right? Not only that, but that council Sammingham made 395 00:24:50,996 --> 00:24:56,236 Speaker 1: a decision for the past twelve years not to contest 396 00:24:56,676 --> 00:24:59,236 Speaker 1: the appointment of her father as the Conservative, which I 397 00:24:59,276 --> 00:25:02,116 Speaker 1: found very curious. Now, is it I don't know what 398 00:25:02,196 --> 00:25:05,596 Speaker 1: happens in closed room between her and her council. Is 399 00:25:05,636 --> 00:25:08,876 Speaker 1: it possible that a different decision was made and that 400 00:25:09,276 --> 00:25:13,636 Speaker 1: made a rational decision at that point, or or is 401 00:25:13,636 --> 00:25:18,836 Speaker 1: it possible that the quarter pointing council was not advocating 402 00:25:18,876 --> 00:25:21,716 Speaker 1: the one thing that was really really important to her. 403 00:25:21,956 --> 00:25:25,076 Speaker 1: And that's a problem that I have. I mean, that's 404 00:25:25,116 --> 00:25:28,916 Speaker 1: potentially a serious problem. And it also raises a puzzle 405 00:25:28,996 --> 00:25:31,556 Speaker 1: that I myself don't understand, and you may have some 406 00:25:31,636 --> 00:25:36,276 Speaker 1: insight into, which is, if she wanted to contest the conservatorship, 407 00:25:36,836 --> 00:25:40,036 Speaker 1: you know, into totality, or just seek a conservator who 408 00:25:40,116 --> 00:25:44,156 Speaker 1: was not her father, she would need to convince her 409 00:25:44,156 --> 00:25:47,396 Speaker 1: counsel to do that. Right. Well, it's interesting that you 410 00:25:47,476 --> 00:25:51,236 Speaker 1: say she should need to convince her counsel. Right, that's 411 00:25:51,276 --> 00:25:55,156 Speaker 1: an interesting word choice. You don't convince your lawyer to 412 00:25:55,276 --> 00:25:57,356 Speaker 1: do something unless usually you just asked them to do it. 413 00:25:57,596 --> 00:26:00,756 Speaker 1: You asked them, and the lawyer has an ethical obligation, 414 00:26:00,796 --> 00:26:03,116 Speaker 1: as you know, to be a zealous advocate, even if 415 00:26:03,116 --> 00:26:07,716 Speaker 1: the lawyer thinks that it's not in the client's best interest, right. 416 00:26:07,916 --> 00:26:11,556 Speaker 1: I mean, I always am brutally honest with clients, But 417 00:26:11,596 --> 00:26:13,996 Speaker 1: at the end of the day, the client makes the decision. 418 00:26:14,076 --> 00:26:16,716 Speaker 1: Unless it's something they're asking me to do. That's unethical 419 00:26:17,516 --> 00:26:20,556 Speaker 1: on my own part. My job is to advocate for them. 420 00:26:20,996 --> 00:26:23,836 Speaker 1: So the ethical duty of her attorney is if she 421 00:26:23,876 --> 00:26:26,236 Speaker 1: were to say to him, listen, I want to challenge 422 00:26:26,236 --> 00:26:28,956 Speaker 1: this conservatorship, he would have a duty to return to 423 00:26:29,036 --> 00:26:33,076 Speaker 1: court and start a filing and a hearing to change 424 00:26:33,076 --> 00:26:36,516 Speaker 1: the conservators ship. Presumably so, assuming that he's behaving ethically, 425 00:26:37,036 --> 00:26:39,356 Speaker 1: which we don't have any objective reason to think he isn't. 426 00:26:39,956 --> 00:26:41,956 Speaker 1: It seems like the answer that puzzle is that that's 427 00:26:41,996 --> 00:26:44,596 Speaker 1: not what Britney Spirits has done. That she hasn't challenged 428 00:26:45,116 --> 00:26:48,596 Speaker 1: the conservatorship. And if that's so, then that's a puzzle 429 00:26:48,636 --> 00:26:52,076 Speaker 1: that's in some ways at odds with the kind of 430 00:26:52,116 --> 00:26:54,636 Speaker 1: the public thrust of the Free Britney movement. Not that 431 00:26:54,636 --> 00:26:57,036 Speaker 1: I understand or claim to understand the movement in any detail, 432 00:26:57,516 --> 00:26:59,516 Speaker 1: but to the extent that it seems to be composed 433 00:26:59,516 --> 00:27:03,076 Speaker 1: of the idea that she's being involuntarily blocked from a 434 00:27:03,196 --> 00:27:07,156 Speaker 1: change in circumstances. She does have an attorney who, under 435 00:27:07,156 --> 00:27:09,876 Speaker 1: the norms of ethics, the cannons of ethics, would have 436 00:27:09,956 --> 00:27:12,716 Speaker 1: to go to court and challenge the conservatorship if she 437 00:27:12,796 --> 00:27:16,316 Speaker 1: wanted to, and he hasn't, and from that, it seems 438 00:27:16,356 --> 00:27:20,156 Speaker 1: that we could infer that most likely she has not 439 00:27:20,196 --> 00:27:22,916 Speaker 1: asked him to do so, is that chain of logic sound? 440 00:27:23,716 --> 00:27:27,956 Speaker 1: That is a sound chain of logic. The problem is 441 00:27:27,996 --> 00:27:31,076 Speaker 1: there is some countervailing evidence that gives me a little 442 00:27:31,076 --> 00:27:33,876 Speaker 1: bit of trouble, and that is, as I told you, 443 00:27:34,236 --> 00:27:36,796 Speaker 1: the one most important thing to her when I first 444 00:27:36,836 --> 00:27:39,436 Speaker 1: met with her in two thousand and eight was I 445 00:27:39,436 --> 00:27:42,756 Speaker 1: don't want my father to be the conservator. Now, once 446 00:27:42,956 --> 00:27:47,236 Speaker 1: Samingham was appointed, we never heard that again until all 447 00:27:47,236 --> 00:27:52,396 Speaker 1: of a sudden twelve years later, Sammingham files in petition 448 00:27:53,156 --> 00:27:57,396 Speaker 1: saying I don't want my father to be the conservator. 449 00:27:58,076 --> 00:28:01,476 Speaker 1: So then I asked myself, well, why did it take 450 00:28:01,516 --> 00:28:05,196 Speaker 1: twelve years for him to advocate the one thing that 451 00:28:05,276 --> 00:28:07,636 Speaker 1: was so important to her when I met with her 452 00:28:07,836 --> 00:28:12,116 Speaker 1: in two thousand a day? And if he wasn't advocated, 453 00:28:12,116 --> 00:28:14,036 Speaker 1: and again there may have been some reason why there 454 00:28:14,076 --> 00:28:18,356 Speaker 1: was a change of course, but if he wasn't advocating that, 455 00:28:18,996 --> 00:28:22,676 Speaker 1: then maybe he wasn't advocating other things that she wanted 456 00:28:23,036 --> 00:28:28,596 Speaker 1: to be advocated. And herein lies one of the problems 457 00:28:28,636 --> 00:28:32,076 Speaker 1: that I do think exists when you have to rely 458 00:28:32,156 --> 00:28:35,036 Speaker 1: on a system of people who are involved and have 459 00:28:35,356 --> 00:28:38,596 Speaker 1: various interests, some of which may conflict with the interests 460 00:28:38,596 --> 00:28:42,756 Speaker 1: of the Conservative. Sam Ingham is appointed by the Court 461 00:28:42,796 --> 00:28:47,196 Speaker 1: to be Britney's lawyer. Now sam Ingham gets paid by 462 00:28:47,276 --> 00:28:50,476 Speaker 1: making petitions to the Court for approval of his fees 463 00:28:50,516 --> 00:28:54,276 Speaker 1: to be paid from the conservatorship a state that's controlled 464 00:28:54,276 --> 00:28:58,756 Speaker 1: by the Conservator. Now, if somebody doesn't like what sam 465 00:28:58,836 --> 00:29:02,636 Speaker 1: Ingham is doing, they're more likely to object to his 466 00:29:02,796 --> 00:29:05,596 Speaker 1: petitions for fees, and there are more likely to be 467 00:29:05,676 --> 00:29:09,516 Speaker 1: questions raised about those fees. If, on the other hand, 468 00:29:09,996 --> 00:29:14,596 Speaker 1: you are peering in court and consistently saying, yes, your honor, 469 00:29:14,596 --> 00:29:16,756 Speaker 1: I think the Conservatory is doing a great job. I 470 00:29:16,836 --> 00:29:20,956 Speaker 1: support what the Conservator wants to do. How closely do 471 00:29:20,996 --> 00:29:24,796 Speaker 1: you think the Conservator is going to examine the bills, 472 00:29:24,956 --> 00:29:29,156 Speaker 1: especially because the Conservators not paying those bills. The Conservative 473 00:29:29,236 --> 00:29:34,396 Speaker 1: is paying those bills. And so if there is a 474 00:29:34,396 --> 00:29:37,796 Speaker 1: weakness in the system, that is one potential weakness. And 475 00:29:38,076 --> 00:29:42,156 Speaker 1: the problem is we do have to depend on people, 476 00:29:42,316 --> 00:29:45,476 Speaker 1: especially lawyers, to be ethical lawyers, and I tend to 477 00:29:45,516 --> 00:29:50,076 Speaker 1: believe that generally they are. There are exceptions, however, sadly, 478 00:29:50,756 --> 00:29:55,956 Speaker 1: but changing the law will have my view unintended consequences 479 00:29:56,276 --> 00:30:00,076 Speaker 1: that will really hurt people who need protection. Are the 480 00:30:00,596 --> 00:30:05,476 Speaker 1: fee applications by the lawyer representing Brittany at the court 481 00:30:05,516 --> 00:30:08,556 Speaker 1: assigned lawyer public? Does it a matter of public record 482 00:30:08,596 --> 00:30:10,916 Speaker 1: how much he's paid and how frequently he's asked for it? 483 00:30:10,916 --> 00:30:12,596 Speaker 1: And is it also a matter of public record whether 484 00:30:12,596 --> 00:30:16,116 Speaker 1: those applications have been opposed or objected to by your father? 485 00:30:17,036 --> 00:30:20,996 Speaker 1: So generally these things would be a matter of public record. 486 00:30:21,236 --> 00:30:24,876 Speaker 1: The court does have some latitude to seal those records, 487 00:30:24,876 --> 00:30:28,356 Speaker 1: and I think that's what's happened in Brittany's case. Query 488 00:30:28,396 --> 00:30:32,596 Speaker 1: whether that's really appropriate or not, because the public does 489 00:30:32,676 --> 00:30:34,716 Speaker 1: have a right to know, I mean in our system, 490 00:30:34,716 --> 00:30:36,876 Speaker 1: in the American system. I know my British colleague is 491 00:30:36,916 --> 00:30:40,436 Speaker 1: always wins at this. But one of the things that 492 00:30:41,716 --> 00:30:46,076 Speaker 1: is important in carrying out this issue of balancing the 493 00:30:46,116 --> 00:30:49,116 Speaker 1: public's right to know versus a person's right to privacy 494 00:30:50,076 --> 00:30:53,276 Speaker 1: is it it has to be applied in a way 495 00:30:53,276 --> 00:30:56,636 Speaker 1: that doesn't favor the rich. I represent a lot of 496 00:30:56,756 --> 00:30:59,116 Speaker 1: high net worth individuals right What I have to say 497 00:30:59,156 --> 00:31:01,636 Speaker 1: to them all the time is just because you have 498 00:31:01,676 --> 00:31:04,436 Speaker 1: a lot of money doesn't mean that you have a 499 00:31:04,556 --> 00:31:08,756 Speaker 1: right to greater protection of your privacy than people who 500 00:31:08,836 --> 00:31:10,636 Speaker 1: don't have a lot of money. There has to be 501 00:31:10,676 --> 00:31:12,556 Speaker 1: some other reason, right, There has to be like the 502 00:31:12,596 --> 00:31:14,996 Speaker 1: Patty Hurst reason. I mean, I was involved in the 503 00:31:15,396 --> 00:31:19,756 Speaker 1: Hearst matter. If there's a threat that somebody could be kidnapped, 504 00:31:20,396 --> 00:31:22,916 Speaker 1: we don't want that kind of financial information out in 505 00:31:22,956 --> 00:31:27,196 Speaker 1: the open, Okay, So there is an important reason for 506 00:31:27,396 --> 00:31:30,236 Speaker 1: balancing those interests. But in this case, so far, I 507 00:31:30,316 --> 00:31:34,436 Speaker 1: believe those records have been sealed. If a person under 508 00:31:34,516 --> 00:31:38,876 Speaker 1: conservatorship with a court appointed attorney wanted to hire a 509 00:31:38,876 --> 00:31:43,116 Speaker 1: different attorney and reached out, of course she wouldn't be 510 00:31:43,276 --> 00:31:47,356 Speaker 1: legally able to sign a contract with another attorney, but 511 00:31:47,436 --> 00:31:50,116 Speaker 1: she could make a phone call. And then would it 512 00:31:50,156 --> 00:31:52,796 Speaker 1: be permissible for the other attorney to then go to 513 00:31:52,916 --> 00:31:59,036 Speaker 1: court and challenge the representational efficacy of the court appointed attorney. So, 514 00:31:59,076 --> 00:32:02,236 Speaker 1: in other words, if in theory purely hypothetical, Brittany or 515 00:32:02,276 --> 00:32:04,636 Speaker 1: someone in her position were to contact you and say, listen, 516 00:32:04,676 --> 00:32:07,716 Speaker 1: I'm not happy with my lawyer, what options would you have? 517 00:32:07,716 --> 00:32:09,036 Speaker 1: Would you be able to go to court and says 518 00:32:09,316 --> 00:32:12,396 Speaker 1: the person wants me to represent them, Yes, that is 519 00:32:12,396 --> 00:32:15,876 Speaker 1: an option, but also keep in mind, and I've seen 520 00:32:15,916 --> 00:32:20,316 Speaker 1: this happen that if a Conservative says to her lawyer, 521 00:32:20,876 --> 00:32:23,836 Speaker 1: I don't want you to represent me, that lawyer then 522 00:32:23,876 --> 00:32:28,316 Speaker 1: has an ethical obligation to say to the court, your honor, 523 00:32:28,356 --> 00:32:31,716 Speaker 1: I should be relieved as counsel because I can't maintain 524 00:32:31,876 --> 00:32:36,396 Speaker 1: a relationship of trust and confidence. The Conservative does not 525 00:32:36,556 --> 00:32:39,156 Speaker 1: want me to be that lawyer, and the Court's going 526 00:32:39,236 --> 00:32:41,716 Speaker 1: to have to make a decision about whether that's something 527 00:32:41,796 --> 00:32:47,556 Speaker 1: that is appropriate to change the lawyer. Given the concerns 528 00:32:47,596 --> 00:32:50,476 Speaker 1: that you have that you've expressed about whether, in fact 529 00:32:50,556 --> 00:32:54,476 Speaker 1: this lawyer may have been fully representing Britney's best interests, 530 00:32:55,396 --> 00:32:59,036 Speaker 1: do you ever have regret about not about that moment 531 00:32:59,076 --> 00:33:02,636 Speaker 1: when you didn't contest the court's decision to remove and 532 00:33:02,676 --> 00:33:04,196 Speaker 1: replace you. I mean, I don't think you were under 533 00:33:04,236 --> 00:33:07,276 Speaker 1: any ethical obligation to do otherwise. The court had made 534 00:33:07,316 --> 00:33:10,796 Speaker 1: the decision and so that's on the court. And she 535 00:33:10,876 --> 00:33:13,076 Speaker 1: was also going to be represented by independent counsel. So 536 00:33:13,676 --> 00:33:16,076 Speaker 1: you know, ethically, I'm under the cannons of ethics. You're 537 00:33:16,116 --> 00:33:19,476 Speaker 1: clearly fine, but you have human regret about that moment. 538 00:33:20,916 --> 00:33:22,716 Speaker 1: You know. It's funny. First of all, I have to 539 00:33:22,756 --> 00:33:27,156 Speaker 1: tell you that I've represented a lot of famous people 540 00:33:27,156 --> 00:33:28,876 Speaker 1: and been involved in a lot of you know, sort 541 00:33:28,916 --> 00:33:32,356 Speaker 1: of celebrity cases and so forth, and for me in 542 00:33:32,396 --> 00:33:35,796 Speaker 1: my career, this was, you know, kind of a blitp. 543 00:33:36,116 --> 00:33:38,756 Speaker 1: So it's not like, well, you know, this is Britney 544 00:33:38,756 --> 00:33:42,516 Speaker 1: Spears and you know, the representation of my lifetime. But 545 00:33:42,676 --> 00:33:48,276 Speaker 1: I do. I accepted that people were acting honorably and 546 00:33:48,316 --> 00:33:52,596 Speaker 1: ethically as I thought I was when I agreed to 547 00:33:53,316 --> 00:33:56,316 Speaker 1: step aside and say, okay, if the court believes, based 548 00:33:56,356 --> 00:33:59,396 Speaker 1: on the evidence the Court has, that it's really more 549 00:33:59,396 --> 00:34:03,636 Speaker 1: appropriate for an independent council and that would make the 550 00:34:03,676 --> 00:34:07,556 Speaker 1: court more comfortable and maybe even more effective, right because 551 00:34:07,636 --> 00:34:09,916 Speaker 1: if the court has a point, it's somebody the court 552 00:34:09,916 --> 00:34:12,396 Speaker 1: at least should have confidence that that is a person 553 00:34:12,436 --> 00:34:14,956 Speaker 1: that the Court can trust and rely on, not necessarily 554 00:34:14,996 --> 00:34:17,236 Speaker 1: somebody who's just walking in off the street and saying 555 00:34:17,236 --> 00:34:22,236 Speaker 1: I represent Britney Spears. So I really did believe that 556 00:34:22,236 --> 00:34:26,116 Speaker 1: that might actually be helpful to Brittany at that moment. 557 00:34:26,156 --> 00:34:29,716 Speaker 1: I have to say that as time has gone by, 558 00:34:29,796 --> 00:34:33,196 Speaker 1: the one thing I keep saying to people is we 559 00:34:34,236 --> 00:34:39,476 Speaker 1: just don't know what we don't know, right, So, for example, 560 00:34:40,316 --> 00:34:44,436 Speaker 1: these Republican Congressmen who have now demanded hearings, have said 561 00:34:44,476 --> 00:34:48,476 Speaker 1: the conservatorships are used to take advantage of people and 562 00:34:48,756 --> 00:34:51,316 Speaker 1: manipulate the courts, and that the Britney case is the 563 00:34:51,356 --> 00:34:56,196 Speaker 1: prime examples, says who based on what evidence, we don't 564 00:34:56,196 --> 00:35:01,556 Speaker 1: really know what the mental illness is that she may have. 565 00:35:02,196 --> 00:35:05,116 Speaker 1: We don't really know what's going on behind closed doors. 566 00:35:05,116 --> 00:35:11,676 Speaker 1: And as you pointed out, in thirteen years, assuming that 567 00:35:11,756 --> 00:35:15,716 Speaker 1: her lawyer is acting ethically, she could have at any 568 00:35:15,796 --> 00:35:18,716 Speaker 1: time in those thirteen years, she could have every single 569 00:35:18,796 --> 00:35:22,796 Speaker 1: day for thirteen years, petition the court determinate the conservatorship 570 00:35:22,836 --> 00:35:25,036 Speaker 1: and be prepared to come forward with evidence showing that 571 00:35:25,076 --> 00:35:27,756 Speaker 1: she doesn't need a conservatorship and she's never done that. 572 00:35:28,356 --> 00:35:30,636 Speaker 1: Or she could have just gone on Facebook or Instagram 573 00:35:31,076 --> 00:35:34,636 Speaker 1: and said I'm unhappy with my attorney or i don't 574 00:35:34,636 --> 00:35:38,276 Speaker 1: like this conservatorship. It wouldn't require any great you know, 575 00:35:38,356 --> 00:35:40,396 Speaker 1: let me give you the give you the retort by 576 00:35:40,436 --> 00:35:43,516 Speaker 1: the Free Britney movement to that, though, they'll say, and 577 00:35:43,596 --> 00:35:47,036 Speaker 1: they have a point which is yes, but they're using 578 00:35:47,076 --> 00:35:50,836 Speaker 1: her children as pawns. They're threatening her that you know 579 00:35:51,236 --> 00:35:54,636 Speaker 1: you won't have visitation rights, will take your kids away 580 00:35:54,996 --> 00:35:59,596 Speaker 1: if you complain. Okay, Now, again, nobody really knows what's 581 00:35:59,676 --> 00:36:02,836 Speaker 1: actually being said, and that would be fundamentally unethical of 582 00:36:02,876 --> 00:36:06,436 Speaker 1: her attorney. It would be fundamentally unethical of her attorney. 583 00:36:06,676 --> 00:36:11,596 Speaker 1: And but I will say this, Imagine a scenario where 584 00:36:11,916 --> 00:36:17,196 Speaker 1: you have, say, a sister who is severely mentally handicapped, 585 00:36:17,956 --> 00:36:20,796 Speaker 1: or she's she's got a terrible drug problem or drinking problem, 586 00:36:21,036 --> 00:36:24,196 Speaker 1: and she's just danger to her kids, and you say, look, 587 00:36:24,916 --> 00:36:27,876 Speaker 1: unless you go into treatment, I'm going to go to 588 00:36:27,916 --> 00:36:31,836 Speaker 1: the family law court and say you shouldn't have custodial 589 00:36:31,956 --> 00:36:36,996 Speaker 1: rights over your children. Okay, So you can't just look 590 00:36:36,996 --> 00:36:38,996 Speaker 1: at everything in a vacuum and say, oh, but they're 591 00:36:39,076 --> 00:36:41,156 Speaker 1: using her kids as a pond. Well, first of all, 592 00:36:41,156 --> 00:36:45,516 Speaker 1: we don't know. But even even if there is some suggestion, 593 00:36:46,156 --> 00:36:49,556 Speaker 1: bear in mind the other side, which is it may 594 00:36:49,596 --> 00:36:53,556 Speaker 1: not be inappropriate. You know, it's always struck me that 595 00:36:53,796 --> 00:36:57,236 Speaker 1: Britney Spears's public story from as long as you know, 596 00:36:57,236 --> 00:36:58,836 Speaker 1: I've been aware of her in the media, which is, 597 00:36:58,836 --> 00:37:00,356 Speaker 1: you know, pretty much as long as she's been in 598 00:37:00,396 --> 00:37:02,876 Speaker 1: the media, which is a long time now, has always 599 00:37:02,916 --> 00:37:07,956 Speaker 1: functioned as a kind of stand in or you know, 600 00:37:08,276 --> 00:37:12,196 Speaker 1: morality to al for whatever preoccupations we have at a 601 00:37:12,196 --> 00:37:15,916 Speaker 1: given moment. You know, are we worried about the emerging 602 00:37:15,956 --> 00:37:18,596 Speaker 1: sexuality of young women, Well, let's turn that into the 603 00:37:18,596 --> 00:37:21,556 Speaker 1: Britney story. You know, are we worried about mental health 604 00:37:21,596 --> 00:37:24,556 Speaker 1: issues around childbirth? Let's turn that into the Britney story. 605 00:37:25,356 --> 00:37:27,756 Speaker 1: I'm interested in what it means this time because my 606 00:37:28,196 --> 00:37:32,036 Speaker 1: takeaway from your very, very cogent analysis is that we 607 00:37:32,076 --> 00:37:35,196 Speaker 1: don't really know whether this is a tragedy, which it 608 00:37:35,236 --> 00:37:37,316 Speaker 1: would be if she were in the grips of unethical 609 00:37:37,316 --> 00:37:39,996 Speaker 1: actors who were threatening her and making it difficult for 610 00:37:39,996 --> 00:37:43,436 Speaker 1: her to object to representation, or whether it's an instance 611 00:37:43,476 --> 00:37:45,396 Speaker 1: of the system more or less working the way it 612 00:37:45,436 --> 00:37:48,676 Speaker 1: should be, in that there is a conservator, she has representation, 613 00:37:48,796 --> 00:37:52,516 Speaker 1: her money is in a trust, and she's actually getting 614 00:37:52,556 --> 00:37:55,076 Speaker 1: what she needs and doesn't seem to be objecting to it. 615 00:37:55,396 --> 00:37:58,236 Speaker 1: So we have just profound uncertainty around this, exactly right. 616 00:37:58,356 --> 00:38:00,396 Speaker 1: So if that's the case, I guess my question is 617 00:38:00,396 --> 00:38:02,836 Speaker 1: this is really a psychological question rather than a legal one. 618 00:38:02,916 --> 00:38:07,156 Speaker 1: But what is that our preoccupation that the Free Britney 619 00:38:07,196 --> 00:38:10,276 Speaker 1: movement is focused on now, and is it maybe the 620 00:38:10,356 --> 00:38:14,756 Speaker 1: idea that women in general, and young women in particular 621 00:38:14,796 --> 00:38:20,356 Speaker 1: are really vulnerable to judgments made by men who say, 622 00:38:20,516 --> 00:38:22,716 Speaker 1: you know, you're not responsible enough to take care of yourself. 623 00:38:22,716 --> 00:38:25,436 Speaker 1: We're taking away your agency. Is this maybe a metaphor 624 00:38:25,516 --> 00:38:29,796 Speaker 1: for agency in some broader sense? I think that's absolutely right. 625 00:38:30,316 --> 00:38:33,836 Speaker 1: The thing that was wrenching for me and watching the 626 00:38:33,876 --> 00:38:39,356 Speaker 1: documentary is really seeing the frankly, the misogyny and the sexism. 627 00:38:39,356 --> 00:38:42,756 Speaker 1: And I mean from the moment she's a little girl 628 00:38:42,796 --> 00:38:46,556 Speaker 1: on stage and Ed McMahon is sexualizing her. So then 629 00:38:46,596 --> 00:38:52,036 Speaker 1: it does lead into questions about is she being treated 630 00:38:52,116 --> 00:38:56,836 Speaker 1: differently in this conservativeship process because she's a woman? Is 631 00:38:56,876 --> 00:39:02,876 Speaker 1: she more vulnerable to a system that is paternalistic right 632 00:39:03,356 --> 00:39:05,436 Speaker 1: in all senses of the term, in all sense of 633 00:39:05,436 --> 00:39:08,116 Speaker 1: the terms right, putting her father in control of her life, 634 00:39:08,156 --> 00:39:11,076 Speaker 1: that you know, sort of one person we don't want. 635 00:39:11,236 --> 00:39:14,716 Speaker 1: By the way, I do want to mention about that. 636 00:39:15,596 --> 00:39:19,316 Speaker 1: You know, the conservator could have been thousands of different people, right, 637 00:39:19,436 --> 00:39:21,956 Speaker 1: It could have been anybody. It didn't have to be 638 00:39:21,996 --> 00:39:24,596 Speaker 1: her father. And if the one thing that this system 639 00:39:24,716 --> 00:39:28,916 Speaker 1: is designed to do is to help vulnerable people, why 640 00:39:28,956 --> 00:39:32,556 Speaker 1: on the world would you make give the control and 641 00:39:32,596 --> 00:39:35,436 Speaker 1: the power to the person that makes her feel less 642 00:39:35,836 --> 00:39:39,716 Speaker 1: in controller makes her feel more vulnerable. So well, I 643 00:39:39,756 --> 00:39:42,956 Speaker 1: want to thank you for just an extraordinarily clear and 644 00:39:43,076 --> 00:39:45,836 Speaker 1: direct explanation of everything, and also for your candor about 645 00:39:45,836 --> 00:39:48,956 Speaker 1: your own experiences and your overall analysis. If you ever 646 00:39:49,276 --> 00:39:52,716 Speaker 1: get bored of being a celebrity lawyer, you can always 647 00:39:52,716 --> 00:39:56,156 Speaker 1: be a law professor on the side. So thank you 648 00:39:56,436 --> 00:39:58,796 Speaker 1: for the explanations. Well, thank you. I want you to 649 00:39:58,836 --> 00:40:02,436 Speaker 1: know I've had requests, you know, frankly, all over the 650 00:40:02,476 --> 00:40:07,716 Speaker 1: world to be interviewed, do podcast, documentaries, TV whatever. I've 651 00:40:07,756 --> 00:40:11,716 Speaker 1: ignored all of it. Yours is the one request that 652 00:40:11,836 --> 00:40:15,436 Speaker 1: I answered. I really admire you. I'm trying also to 653 00:40:15,476 --> 00:40:17,956 Speaker 1: forgive you for our latest Supreme Court justice, but I 654 00:40:18,516 --> 00:40:21,196 Speaker 1: really do. I appreciate you, I admire you. I hope 655 00:40:21,196 --> 00:40:23,796 Speaker 1: you are right about our Supreme Court justice. But it's 656 00:40:23,796 --> 00:40:25,836 Speaker 1: been a real pleasure to talk to you. Thank you 657 00:40:25,916 --> 00:40:28,756 Speaker 1: very much, and I really am deeply grateful that you agreed, 658 00:40:28,836 --> 00:40:32,316 Speaker 1: notwithstanding my views of Supreme Court, to join us. So 659 00:40:32,676 --> 00:40:43,796 Speaker 1: thank you very much. You're very welcome. That fascinating conversation 660 00:40:44,156 --> 00:40:47,436 Speaker 1: with Adam streisand tells you a lot about the complexities 661 00:40:47,476 --> 00:40:52,076 Speaker 1: of conservatorship and indeed about power. In fact, just listening 662 00:40:52,076 --> 00:40:56,356 Speaker 1: to that conversation, you hear what an excellent, brilliant lawyer 663 00:40:56,596 --> 00:41:00,396 Speaker 1: who is hired by those with unlimited resources sounds like, 664 00:41:00,716 --> 00:41:03,676 Speaker 1: and how he thinks about and analyzes legal issues. That 665 00:41:03,796 --> 00:41:08,436 Speaker 1: alone is always a matter of real value. What really 666 00:41:08,476 --> 00:41:11,916 Speaker 1: surprised me most about the conversation were the details of 667 00:41:11,956 --> 00:41:15,796 Speaker 1: the process, which was not really detailed in the documentary 668 00:41:15,836 --> 00:41:19,276 Speaker 1: of how Adam was hired by Britney Spears. How he 669 00:41:19,396 --> 00:41:22,996 Speaker 1: went into court and was then effectively told by the judge, 670 00:41:23,276 --> 00:41:27,756 Speaker 1: you can't represent her because she's not capable of hiring you. 671 00:41:28,796 --> 00:41:31,996 Speaker 1: That put Adam in an extremely difficult position of trying 672 00:41:32,036 --> 00:41:35,356 Speaker 1: to decide whether he should fight the judge's determination or 673 00:41:35,436 --> 00:41:39,196 Speaker 1: alternatively acquiesce in a judgment that was dependent on the 674 00:41:39,236 --> 00:41:44,196 Speaker 1: opinion of a doctor, and as Adam explained, he ended 675 00:41:44,236 --> 00:41:48,076 Speaker 1: up making the judgment that there might be reasons for 676 00:41:48,116 --> 00:41:50,596 Speaker 1: the court to remove him and replace him with a 677 00:41:50,636 --> 00:41:53,756 Speaker 1: court appointed attorney, because after all, how would the court 678 00:41:53,876 --> 00:41:59,036 Speaker 1: know that he was legitimate and ethical himself. That's a 679 00:41:59,076 --> 00:42:02,836 Speaker 1: classic example and a really surprising one of the kind 680 00:42:02,836 --> 00:42:05,756 Speaker 1: of difficult decision that lawyers sometimes have to make in 681 00:42:05,796 --> 00:42:08,956 Speaker 1: real time. Someone has hired you, which means that she 682 00:42:09,316 --> 00:42:12,276 Speaker 1: wants you to represent her, then a chord is telling 683 00:42:12,276 --> 00:42:15,756 Speaker 1: you she lacked the capacity to do so. That is 684 00:42:15,836 --> 00:42:19,316 Speaker 1: not a simple decision to make, and it both fascinated 685 00:42:19,316 --> 00:42:21,596 Speaker 1: and surprised me to hear that Adam was put in 686 00:42:21,636 --> 00:42:26,876 Speaker 1: that situation. Under the conservatorship system as it exists, Brittany does, 687 00:42:27,036 --> 00:42:30,876 Speaker 1: at least in principle, have mechanisms she could use to 688 00:42:30,956 --> 00:42:34,916 Speaker 1: draw attention to any dislike or dissatisfaction that she has 689 00:42:35,196 --> 00:42:39,156 Speaker 1: with her lawyer or with the conservatorship. But we don't know, 690 00:42:39,476 --> 00:42:44,356 Speaker 1: as Adam emphasized, whether there are potential distortions in the 691 00:42:44,396 --> 00:42:48,356 Speaker 1: system that nevertheless exist in which Brittany is somehow being 692 00:42:48,396 --> 00:42:52,676 Speaker 1: threatened so that she's unable to raise those concerns or 693 00:42:52,836 --> 00:42:57,196 Speaker 1: feels she's unable to raise those concerns. The whole issue 694 00:42:57,316 --> 00:43:00,556 Speaker 1: is therefore, at least as complicated, and I think actually 695 00:43:00,636 --> 00:43:04,676 Speaker 1: much more complicated than it appeared to be in the documentary, 696 00:43:05,036 --> 00:43:09,996 Speaker 1: and it demonstrates that power is complexly deployed our legal system. 697 00:43:10,636 --> 00:43:14,356 Speaker 1: You could be very rich and very famous and still 698 00:43:14,436 --> 00:43:18,436 Speaker 1: find yourself represented by a court appointed attorney, and perhaps 699 00:43:18,716 --> 00:43:23,276 Speaker 1: without the power to change the basic circumstances in which 700 00:43:23,396 --> 00:43:27,436 Speaker 1: you are operating legally speaking. At the same time, there 701 00:43:27,436 --> 00:43:31,316 Speaker 1: are also protections available in this system. As Adam pointed out, 702 00:43:31,436 --> 00:43:36,116 Speaker 1: Brittany can leave her house, the conservator cannot, in practical terms, 703 00:43:36,316 --> 00:43:38,876 Speaker 1: block her from doing most of the things that she 704 00:43:38,996 --> 00:43:43,796 Speaker 1: might choose to do. And what's more, her assets are 705 00:43:43,916 --> 00:43:47,036 Speaker 1: in trust, and the trustee of that trust is not 706 00:43:47,236 --> 00:43:53,636 Speaker 1: the conservator. The takeaway power is deployed in very complicated 707 00:43:53,676 --> 00:43:57,156 Speaker 1: ways in the legal system. The legal system designs itself 708 00:43:57,196 --> 00:43:59,556 Speaker 1: and tries to operate in such a way as to 709 00:43:59,676 --> 00:44:03,996 Speaker 1: use mutual checks so that lawyers check lawyers and we 710 00:44:04,076 --> 00:44:08,876 Speaker 1: reduce the probabilities of fundamental distortion. But as Adam said, 711 00:44:09,276 --> 00:44:12,756 Speaker 1: that process still depends to a great extent on the 712 00:44:12,796 --> 00:44:17,636 Speaker 1: assumption that lawyers will behave ethically. I would love to believe, 713 00:44:17,996 --> 00:44:20,076 Speaker 1: as a law professor and a person who cares about 714 00:44:20,076 --> 00:44:22,956 Speaker 1: the legal system, that all lawyers are ethical, but as 715 00:44:22,996 --> 00:44:27,796 Speaker 1: probably every single person listening knows, that's just not always 716 00:44:28,036 --> 00:44:32,956 Speaker 1: the case. There is no magic bullet solution to the 717 00:44:32,996 --> 00:44:36,836 Speaker 1: potential for unethical lawyering, and it remains a challenge to 718 00:44:36,876 --> 00:44:41,356 Speaker 1: figure out how legal power can be deployed as ethically 719 00:44:41,396 --> 00:44:45,156 Speaker 1: as is possible. Until the next time I speak to you, 720 00:44:45,796 --> 00:44:51,636 Speaker 1: be careful, be safe, and be well. Deep Background is 721 00:44:51,676 --> 00:44:55,436 Speaker 1: brought to you by Pushkin Industries. Our producer is Mo laboord, 722 00:44:55,796 --> 00:44:59,156 Speaker 1: our engineer is Martin Gonzalez, and our shorerunner is Sophie 723 00:44:59,196 --> 00:45:03,676 Speaker 1: Crane mckibbon. Editorial support from noahm Osband. Theme music by 724 00:45:03,756 --> 00:45:07,636 Speaker 1: Luis Guerra at Pushkin. Thanks to Mia Lobell, Julia Barton, 725 00:45:07,876 --> 00:45:12,796 Speaker 1: Lydia Jean Cott, Heather Fain, Carl mcniori, Maggie Taylor, Eric Sandler, 726 00:45:12,876 --> 00:45:15,596 Speaker 1: and Jacob Weisberg. You can find me on Twitter at 727 00:45:15,596 --> 00:45:18,996 Speaker 1: Noah R. Feldman. I also write a column for Bloomberg Opinion, 728 00:45:19,116 --> 00:45:22,196 Speaker 1: which you can find at bloomberg dot com slash Feldman. 729 00:45:22,676 --> 00:45:26,036 Speaker 1: To discover Bloomberg's original slate of podcasts, go to Bloomberg 730 00:45:26,076 --> 00:45:28,836 Speaker 1: dot com slash Podcasts, and if you liked what you 731 00:45:28,916 --> 00:45:31,676 Speaker 1: heard today, please write a review or tell a friend. 732 00:45:32,036 --> 00:45:33,436 Speaker 1: This is Deep Background.