Who, What, When, Where?!: Miscellaneous Celebrity News 2.0

[Vermicious Knid]

Oh boy. VH1 reviving The Surreal Life. Considering the insanity that went on in past seasons (Flavor Flav and Brigitte Nielsen hooking up for one) I am both horrified and anticipating this.

Quote

August Alsina, C.J. Perry, Dennis Rodman, Frankie Muniz, Kim Coles, Manny MUA, Stormy Daniels and Tamar Braxton will face off in what is being dubbed as a “reimagined” season of the originals. The cast of eight will come together for what VH1 describes as a “wild, over the top journey that pushes them to reveal different sides of themselves in surprising ways.”

Although with an alcoholic and a guy with liver disease in the house drinking may not be allowed this time.

[Quof]

8 hours ago, katie9918 said:

He has every right to not support discrimination in any form.

He is welcome to invite all of his unvaccinated friends to a concert in his own living room, or any other venue he owns.   

[MsJamieDornan]

3 hours ago, GaT said:

My car is not even close to costing $155,000, & when I drive I take calls through my radio. I'm sure Britney's car must be able to do the same. Also, is she stupid????? Does she think her father isn't keeping a list of everything she fucks up to prove she still needs to be under a conservatorship?

I have a feeling her father and his team had those photos posted. Reason 1 - he wants to show she was able to buy an expensive car without permission and Reason 2- she is driving illegally.

 

[Katy M]

19 hours ago, letter8358 said:

Eric Clapton says he'll cancel tours because of vaccination requirements

You know, he could take his anti-vaxxer stance and shove it where the sun doesn't shine. Better yet, he could join Ted Nugent. You two deserve each other. Jerk.

Is he anti-vaxx or is he  pro-choice on the matter?  Anyway, this is the way the free market works.  People make decisions based on the rules and companies will either adjust their rules or not due to demand and taking into consideration their own ethics.

I wouldn't go to anything with a large crowd whether all the people are vaxxed or not, because we have no idea how well they work, plus there's no evidence to support that vaxxed people can't spread the virus even if they themselves don't get sick.  So, the fewer people having concerts for whatever reason is probably good.  Fewer superspreader events.  

[Spartan Girl]

3 minutes ago, Katy M said:

Is he anti-vaxx or is he  pro-choice on the matter? 

He’s anti-vaxx. He’s made it clear he won’t take the vaccine, and he’s actively encouraged people not to get it either. In a pandemic. Fucking asshole.

As someone on Twitter said, fine because I have no intention of going to an Eric Clapton concert anyway.

[merylinkid]

6 hours ago, Zella said:

t's not really new, though. As someone earlier in the thread posted, he was spouting off incredibly racist bullshit even back in the 70s. 

Yep.   Apparently something called Rockers Against Racism was formed in response to Clapton's BS.   I didn't even know such a thing existed until all of this came up after his anti-vaxx stance.   I swear I was not living under a rock in the 70s.   I listened to Styx (Renegade is my husband's and mine song for .... reasons that make complete sense to us) so I have NO IDEA how I missed Rockers Against Racism.

[Kel Varnsen]

7 hours ago, GaT said:

I'm sure Britney's car must be able to do the same. Also, is she stupid?????

Well she started working in showbusiness before she was 10 right? And I imagine not long after that she was the main provider for her family. Completely separate from her mental health issues, I would be shocked to find out she was able to get anything better than a grade 8 education.

[GHScorpiosRule]

1 hour ago, Katy M said:

plus there's no evidence to support that vaxxed people can't spread the virus even if they themselves don't get sick.

Actually, it's vaccinated people can still be carriers. And they can still get sick--just not to the point where they'd be hospitalized and die.

[MargeGunderson]

1 hour ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Well she started working in showbusiness before she was 10 right? And I imagine not long after that she was the main provider for her family. Completely separate from her mental health issues, I would be shocked to find out she was able to get anything better than a grade 8 education.

Yeah, I think Britney is uneducated and frankly a bit dim and lacking in common sense. None of which means she should be under a conservatorship. I do think it’s all about her money - if she was just Britney Jean Spears living in Louisiana, working at a day care, having a couple of kids and behaving this way - having breakdowns, spending money recklessly, having crappy user friends - her parents wouldn’t care. But Britney’s money is involved so they they can pretend to care about her while making sure they get paid.

Edited July 23, 2021 by MargeGunderson

[Enigma X]

I mentioned in a previous post somewhere on these forums that the realization that Eric Clapton was a racist broke my heart. I got into his 70s music when I was five-years-old in the early 80s. So, I was very naïve then to his racism. As I grew older and read biographies about him I was dismayed. Am I dreaming this up (or romanticizing) that he apologized in the late 80s for his racist comments? No matter. Since, he has said and done many a thing that proves he is the same-old Eric.

[letter8358]

Is anybody ready for concerts at all? I know everyone wants to get out, but are concert venues really that important?

[letter8358]

Brilliant article on Eric Clapton

So spot on!

[ifionlyknew]

3 hours ago, merylinkid said:

Yep.   Apparently something called Rockers Against Racism was formed in response to Clapton's BS.   I didn't even know such a thing existed until all of this came up after his anti-vaxx stance.   I swear I was not living under a rock in the 70s.   I listened to Styx (Renegade is my husband's and mine song for .... reasons that make complete sense to us) so I have NO IDEA how I missed Rockers Against Racism.

I was in middle school in the late 70s and  high school in the 80s and well aware of who Eric Clapton was but I had no idea he was a racist. But back then mainstream media didn't cover as much celeb news as they do now.  The first time I remember hearing about Clapton in the news was when his son tragically fell to his death out a window.  If the internet and social media had been around 40-50 years ago I think a lot of famous people would have been if not outright cancelled at least put in the penalty box.    I mean look how long it took for Ted Nugent to be outed as an absolutely horrible person.  

[Zella]

2 hours ago, Enigma X said:

I mentioned in a previous post somewhere on these forums that the realization that Eric Clapton was a racist broke my heart. I got into his 70s music when I was five-years-old in the early 80s. So, I was very naïve then to his racism. As I grew older and read biographies about him I was dismayed. Am I dreaming this up (or romanticizing) that he apologized in the late 80s for his racist comments? No matter. Since, he has said and done many a thing that proves he is the same-old Eric.

I've seen things that talk about him apologizing and claiming he is not racist while he also continues to defend and support the racist politician whose ideas he was jumping off of. So, he has apologized, but not in a meaningful or believable way. 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

He’s anti-vaxx. He’s made it clear he won’t take the vaccine, and he’s actively encouraged people not to get it either. In a pandemic. Fucking asshole.

As someone on Twitter said, fine because I have no intention of going to an Eric Clapton concert anyway.

Actually, he says that he has had the vaccine and that he had a bad, but temporary, reaction to it. 
Eric Clapton’s Anti-Vaccine Diatribe Blames ‘Propaganda’ for ‘Disastrous’ Experience

5 hours ago, Katy M said:

Is he anti-vaxx or is he  pro-choice on the matter?  Anyway, this is the way the free market works.  People make decisions based on the rules and companies will either adjust their rules or not due to demand and taking into consideration their own ethics.

He is anti-vax but I have a bigger problem with him spreading conspiracy theories on the subject. 
Still not tired of all this, Eric Clapton continues promoting COVID misinformation

His announcement that he won’t play in venues that require vaccinations is a meaningless reaction to new rules in Britain. The venues don’t have a choice in the matter and Clapton isn’t set to play there until next year. It’s just about riling people up and getting attention.

[bobalina]

Brittany needs a new conservator  with a finite term. She needs the education most teens ans early twenties get especially if she really means to retire from the stage. That way she could learn or re learn basic skills like budgeting, driving safely and all the other stuff she needs for a safe, reasonable life.  Then turn her loose, whatever happens happens.

[Spartan Girl]

31 minutes ago, Dani said:

Actually, he says that he has had the vaccine and that he had a bad, but temporary, reaction to it. 
Eric Clapton’s Anti-Vaccine Diatribe Blames ‘Propaganda’ for ‘Disastrous’ Experience

Thanks for correcting me, I forgot. But yeah, that’s even worse! If there’s anything worse than an anti-vaxxer, it’s a hypocritical anti-vaxxer who gets vaccinated but spreads bullshit information that others won’t. So fuck you, Eric Clapton.

[SuprSuprElevated]

4 hours ago, letter8358 said:

Is anybody ready for concerts at all? I know everyone wants to get out, but are concert venues really that important?

No, probably not.  Certainly no more (or less) important than mega athletic events in virtually unvaccinated countries.

Edited July 23, 2021 by SuprSuprElevated

[aradia22]

Quote

This reminds me of the incident with driving with her baby on her lap. I looked at both and thought "Britney, no!!!" But people act like she's the first adult to make mistakes. With the the baby on her lap incident, she was a young new mom and doing what she grew up seeing as a country girl.

Quote

Well she started working in showbusiness before she was 10 right? And I imagine not long after that she was the main provider for her family. Completely separate from her mental health issues, I would be shocked to find out she was able to get anything better than a grade 8 education.

I've been trying not to make classist comments, but putting aside the worst incidents around the time of what we deem her mental health breakdown, I don't find her other behaviors that strange. Like, I remember how people salivated over the gossip of her going into a gas station bathroom without shoes on. What do people expect? She wasn't allowed to be a fully-formed adult woman with education and agency. But she was sexualized and forced to work. I don't believe it's about danger (though, to be clear, I obviously don't approve of texting while driving or holding a baby in your lap) but enjoying mocking her for not behaving like a "pop star." Basically, falling short of Jennifer Lopez glamour. You're not supposed to reflect back an unseemly version of "they're just like us."

[biakbiak]

I love Valerie, her eyes in that photo! 

 

6 hours ago, letter8358 said:

Is anybody ready for concerts at all? I know everyone wants to get out, but are concert venues really that important?

To a lot of people who work there they are. Concerts and tours employ a lot of people.

Edited July 23, 2021 by biakbiak

[MargeGunderson]

@aradia22, I think you are right that some of the comments made about Britney (not specifically here) are classist, and I’m guilty of doing it myself. Her behavior is seen as “trashy” not classy, and of course she should be classy because she has money, right? Britney thinks of herself as a small town girl at heart, but she’s portrayed in the media like she’s a member of the Beverly Hillbillies. So of course she can’t be trusted to manage her own money and life. 

[ifionlyknew]

If not for her pop music career Britney would probably never left  her small town.  Even when she became a superstar she still seemed to have that small town everyday person personality.  She liked Cheetos.  When she wasn't dressed for a red carpet she wore clothes that were what you saw young women at Wal Mart wearing.   As mentioned above she didn't do the Jennifer Lopez glamourous lifestyle.  I think that is why she got  married and had kids. She wanted a simpler life.

[praeceptrix]

After 145 Years, Bayreuth Festival Has Its First Female Conductor.

Oksana Lyniv, 43,  will open the festival this Sunday. It took them long enough!

[Annber03]

My mom's said the same thing about Britney wanting a simpler life, especially when she was a teenager. She would often comment on how there were likely days when Britney probably wished she could just go have a fun Friday/Saturday night doing what typical teenagers did, like hanging out with her friends and going to a mall for a while without any hassle, or going to a football game, or whatever. 

I wouldn't blame her for not getting too into the glam Hollywood scene, either. If I were a famous person, I'd still try and keep things as low-key as possible, too. Some people just aren't comfortable in or care for that world, they just want to sing/act/etc. and then go back to living their everyday lives. 

[aradia22]

Quote

Is anybody ready for concerts at all? I know everyone wants to get out, but are concert venues really that important?

I'm definitely feeling conflicted. Am I ready to stand around in a small bar (like 200 people max) or packed in like a sardine at Terminal 5? Absolutely not. Am I jealous of people who went to see Broadway Inspirational Voices on Little Island or who are going to the Brian Stokes Mitchell Lincoln Center concerts? Most definitely. And I know that things can't survive just on the open air venues, especially if they're not serving concessions and that sort of thing. 

[RealHousewife]

14 hours ago, Dani said:

No. She’s been photographed before driving. She’s also been photographed before on her cell phone while driving. I think the driving restriction started around the time she quit performing. 

What year was she last photographed driving with a phone in her hand? And when was the driving restriction added to the conservatorship if it wasn't there all along?

In any case, I still do not blame Britney for not knowing normal adult things when she hasn't lived a normal adult life or had a normal childhood. 

I agree with the posts that if it weren't for $, no way would all this stuff be going on. I'm still shocked by the forced IUD. I know of someone with the mental capacity of a child who has had several pregnancies back to back without anything being done. None of the children are in her care because of how dangerous it can be. 

[BetterButter]

Win for Angelina Jolie as court disqualifies judge in Brad Pitt divorce case

Quote

Court finds John Ouderkirk did not sufficiently disclose business relationships with Pitt’s attorneys

 

[Guest]

16 hours ago, RealHousewife said:

Exactly. This reminds me of the incident with driving with her baby on her lap. I looked at both and thought "Britney, no!!!" But people act like she's the first adult to make mistakes. With the the baby on her lap incident, she was a young new mom and doing what she grew up seeing as a country girl. I'm all for constructive criticism, especially regarding the safety of children, but the attacks on her were crazy. We are not born knowing how to do things, and we pick up bad habits from our parents/surroundings. Something that seems common sense for most people may not seem common sense to a person who grew up differently.

The incident with her driving with the baby in her lap wasn’t about her not knowing any better. She was being chased by paparazzi and panicked in an attempt to get out of the situation. 
With a lot of the Britney doing bad things photos you don’t see how the paparazzi is the catalyst of those bad decisions. In most of those moments she is fully in fight or flight mode. For example here is the backstory behind the umbrella incident. When you dehumanize a person to that extent it’s really not surprising that they aren’t reacting rationally. 

2 hours ago, RealHousewife said:

What year was she last photographed driving with a phone in her hand? And when was the driving restriction added to the conservatorship if it wasn't there all along?

I think she was last photographed driving with her phone in 2019. I have no clue when she was restricted from driving. 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Guest

[Blergh]

IMO, Miss Spears ,having been caught driving while operating a cellphone should be dealt with just as any other adult driver should be- nothing less but nothing more. IOW, if the California law says to fine her X$ and/ or suspend her license for X number of months, then that's what's needed to be done.  Period.  

P.S. Despite the grotesque conditions(which I have consistently expressed my belief she needs to extracted from  ASAP ) that she's been under for the past baker's dozen years, IMO I do not consider her to be any more or any less ignorant than any other typical adult driver of what the law entails re driving while operating a cell. IOW, she's NOT been under a rock or in a space capsule with zero access to media or what driving laws entail. 

[NutMeg]

Nothing surprising in Britney Spears behaving like a teenager or ever pre teen - that's the age she was when she last had agency in the best case scenario.

I don't know how you can go suddenly from a teenage state of mind to that of an adult, I think it's a process that would take time and involve many errs. It would have been smoother if the adults in her life had helped along the way, but that was not the case, and she might have to just leap across 15-20 or how many years of life (sometimes toughly earned) experience in one go, if she is allowed to - poor kid, and I call her kid and not woman here because I feel for the kid she once was and still is somehow and who was not able to grow as she should have.

I hope this woman is allowed to get back control of her life. Many other women "get crazy" after having kids, or when being stalked 24/7. Kanye West was never the victim of these, is known to not take his medication for a known condition, and will still never be submitted to what she has been. Britney S. needs, once she can, to find a very good help for navigating all her missed years and the future that she should be able to define and look forward to.   

[Vermicious Knid]

Eric Clapton complains about having side effects from the virus, but sidesteps the fact he's been having those same problems for years:

Quote

In a recent interview with Classic Rock Magazine, Eric Clapton revealed that he is suffering from peripheral neuropathy. “I’ve had quite a lot of pain over the last year. It started with lower back pain, and turned into what they call peripheral neuropathy – which is where you feel like you have electric shocks going down your leg.”

“[It’s] hard work to play the guitar and I’ve had to come to terms with the fact that it will not improve,” Clapton added.

He was already saying pre-pandemic he may have to retire because of his health issues. He's a liar and a racist. He could have said, reasonably, the vaccine magnified his neuropathy and suggested, reasonably, that patients should discuss with their doctor whether different vaccines would have different effects on the condition.

[Mabinogia]

1 hour ago, Vermicious Knid said:

He could have said, reasonably, the vaccine magnified his neuropathy and suggested, reasonably, that patients should discuss with their doctor whether different vaccines would have different effects on the condition.

That would have been a responsible, smart, and helpful thing to do. As someone with an underlying medical condition I researched the vaccine long and hard before deciding to take it. But he has no interest in helping people or saving lives. He is just an asshole who wants to spew his hatred. I hate that he was part of one of my favorite bands. Why do shit humans have to taint everything I love!?!??!??! 

[Stats Queen]

21 hours ago, Dani said:

Using a cell phone while driving isn’t evidence that she needs to be under a conservatorship. 

If it was, a whole lot of Americans would be under a convervatorship.

[LexieLily]

Brad Pitt Loses Previously Awarded Time With His Kids

[cleo]

Re the photo of Britney. The only thing that stood out to me is she still has (I assume paparazzi) and media taking pictures of everything she does and racing to post them for the world to consume. I can only imagine the kind of media scrutiny and hounding she will face if the conservatorship is lifted.

It's great the media as usual is giving no thought to how they contributed to the situation, what ethical and respectful reporting would actual look like, and will continue to gleefully target people in the name of profits and to hell with the consequences.

[WinnieWinkle]

Re the Judge in the Pitt-Jolie case I do have to wonder why of all the gin joints in all the world they had to go into the one where the judge had pre-established connections with Pitt.  That seems massively unethical to me.

Edited July 24, 2021 by WinnieWinkle

[merylinkid]

1 hour ago, WinnieWinkle said:

Re the Judge in the Pitt-Jolie case I do have to wonder why of all the gin joints in all the world they had to go into the one where the judge had pre-established connections with Pitt.  That seems massively unethical to me.

There's only so many judges per courthouse.   There is a system for assigning cases to judges.   Judges have lists of people they can NEVER hear a case about (best friends, family, members of their former law firm, stuff like that).   For the rest it is an ongoing obligation to dislcose.    Apparently, the Judge did disclose, just not in enough detail.   So its not like Brad Pitt's attorneys CHOSE the judge they thought most favorable.   They took who the court gave them.   The judge disclosed.   Jolie's attorneys objected.   The judge felt he could be fair, he denied the recusal (that's the part I don't like.   Another judge should decide on recusal but that's EVERY case not just this one).   The case went forward, Jolie appealed it was was her right.   The appellate court decided that no recusal was right in this case.  That's how the system works for EVERY litigant.  The only difference is not every litigant can afford to appeal.   

As for Brad losing time, he agreed that if the judge was found to have a conflict, he would go back to the previous schedule.   He didn't have to agree to that.   He might not be Father of the Year but doesn't mean Jolie is putting the kids first either.   For her its WIN at all costs.  

[Crs97]

I agree, merylinkid.  I hope their kids are still seeing those counselors.

[WinnieWinkle]

13 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

As for Brad losing time, he agreed that if the judge was found to have a conflict, he would go back to the previous schedule.   He didn't have to agree to that. 

Why do you think he agreed?  The idea of the judge having a conflict should never have been an issue in my opinion.  It sounds like he (Pitt) as banking on getting away with something more than a little shady but figured he needed to look good in case it didn't work out.

Edited July 24, 2021 by WinnieWinkle

[BlackberryJam]

6 minutes ago, WinnieWinkle said:

Why do you think he agreed?  The idea of the judge having a conflict should never have been an issue in my opinion.  It sounds like he (Pitt) as banking on getting away with something more than a little shady but figured he needed to look good in case it didn't work out.

Brad's decision means there's no need to have an emergency and messy hearing. It's a classy move.

I can't get over the horror of Angelina wanting her children to testify. Their wishes have already been heard/relayed to the court.  

Edited July 24, 2021 by BlackberryJam

[WinnieWinkle]

1 minute ago, BlackberryJam said:

Brad's decision means there's no need to an emergency and messy hearing. It's a classy move.

Maybe, but wouldn't it have been classier to agree with Jolie that they needed a different judge in the first place?

[BlackberryJam]

4 minutes ago, WinnieWinkle said:

Maybe, but wouldn't it have been classier to agree with Jolie that they needed a different judge in the first place?

They'd already gone pretty far down the road by the time Angelina decided she wanted a different judge. Sure Brad could have said "let's start this whole process over because you don't like the judge now, Angelina." But why? They were mostly done. 

Just to be clear the decision to remove the judge it doesn't say that he was biased.  They're saying that any reasonable person who reviewed facts could think that maybe he could be biased. That's the standard. Appearance of impropriety, not actual impropriety. There was no finding of bias against this judge at all.

They both seem like totally shit parents who probably should give the kids to Mindy Cohn as I've said over and over.

"He did something classy, but should have been classier," seems an unreasonably high standard for a custody fight.

 

 

[merylinkid]

29 minutes ago, WinnieWinkle said:

Maybe, but wouldn't it have been classier to agree with Jolie that they needed a different judge in the first place?

So why is he "shady" for not agreeing to a different judge because SHE objected?   But she is not shady for her scorched earth tactics in this case.  She is the one putting the kids smack dab in the middle which is the WORST THING you can to a kid in a divorce hearing.  She ONLY objected to the judge when things started to not go her way.   If the judge had sided with her, we wouldn't have heard a peep about bias.    

Why is Brad being held to a higher standard than Angelina?    

[Crs97]

This is the judge who married them so they both knew him prior to the custody issue.  I side eye her late term objection that she only knew he had some dealings, but not every detail of such dealings.  I think she is attempting to delay until their children are too old to be covered under any custody agreement.  Then again, maybe he is a monster who was able to fool the FBI and social services.  Again, therapy and lots of it for those kids.

[janie jones]

23 hours ago, Dani said:

His announcement that he won’t play in venues that require vaccinations is a meaningless reaction to new rules in Britain. The venues don’t have a choice in the matter and Clapton isn’t set to play there until next year. It’s just about riling people up and getting attention.

Yeah, I wouldn't even have known he was still performing if not for this.

[Irlandesa]

5 hours ago, WinnieWinkle said:

Re the Judge in the Pitt-Jolie case I do have to wonder why of all the gin joints in all the world they had to go into the one where the judge had pre-established connections with Pitt.  That seems massively unethical to me.

It wasn't about the judge's connections to Pitt.  It was about the judge's connection to Pitt's lawyers.

3 hours ago, WinnieWinkle said:

Why do you think he agreed?  The idea of the judge having a conflict should never have been an issue in my opinion.  It sounds like he (Pitt) as banking on getting away with something more than a little shady but figured he needed to look good in case it didn't work out.

I don't think it was trying to be shady.  He petitioned for more custody.  Jolie's lawyers asked if the judge still had a current relationship with Pitt's lawyers.  The judge disclosed but not enough or not soon enough, I guess.  When the appeal was filed, Pitt said he'd agree to the 2018 custody agreement if they judge was removed from the case. 

Sure, he could have done it to look good but really, this is largely a case about the clock because there's a finite amount of time custody agreements are relevant.  So having an advantage, for any length of time, is worth holding onto. If he were intentionally shady, he probably wouldn't agree to reversing the latest custody decision.  He might get overturned on appeal but that could still mean months of increased time with his kids as both sides await that decision.

With his agreement, the reversal is automatic.

[vibeology]

3 hours ago, merylinkid said:

Why is Brad being held to a higher standard than Angelina?    

For me, because he was physical with Maddox in some way. He’s got more work to do to fix this mess.
 

Even if I think Angelina has pushed a bit too much, I think she’s coming from a place of protecting her kids from Pitt’s violence. Whatever happened on that plane seemed to have really freaked her out. She left then and hasn’t looked back. I don’t think she’s trying to “win” the divorce. I think the fight really changed the way she saw Brad. 

She probably overlooked a lot of warning signs and feels like she put the kids in danger and doesn’t ever want to have that happen again.

[WinnieWinkle]

4 hours ago, merylinkid said:

Why is Brad being held to a higher standard than Angelina?    

I don't really have a dog in this fight.  Most of what I know about the court case I know from this forum.  But for me what has stood out in most of the conversations I read about the Pitt-Jolies is quite the contrary in terms of who is being held to a higher standard.  And that bugs me excessively. 

Edited July 24, 2021 by WinnieWinkle

[BlackberryJam]

OOO…now it looks like Brad is going to appeal the decision, which should take it to the California Supreme Court, if page six it to be believed. 

I’m only really interested on the legal issue if he argues 1. That Angelina objected to the judge too late and had waived the issue, or 2. That the judge’s decision should not be overturned, even if there might be an appearance of impropriety, because the facts of the case were so clear. 

If I were advising Brad, I’d tell him to just get a new judge and schedule a new hearing ASAP.  

I think Angelina gets more snark because the her statements and stated positions are more snarkworthy. Brad’s “mouth shut” approach means there’s so much less to say about him. On top of that, other than the one report about Maddox, there are no reports of him ever being physical or using physical discipline with the kids. The lack of information means a serious lack of things to say. 

 

[xfuse]

10 hours ago, BlackberryJam said:

Their wishes have already been heard/relayed to the court. 

No they haven't.  People testified on what they believed was in the best interest of the children but they didn't get to be heard. 

While other people may think they know best and sometimes they do a seventeen year old should be able to testify if he/she wants to. They are living that life and should get to have their say.

8 hours ago, Crs97 said:

 I side eye her late term objection that she only knew he had some dealings, but not every detail of such dealings.

He disclosed that he worked with Pitts lawyers on two cases, one in the past and one that was almost over in the beginning. Later her lawyers asked the judge was he still working with Pitts' lawyers and he said yes, the one case from before and more. That is why she objected. It is certainly different from I'm going to finished this one case to I'm still working cases with them. Her lawyers had to ask. That to me is shady.