Brandon Busteed: In Education, Technology Changes Everything and…
Sharon Stone Sued By Former Nanny
Spears custody case documents to be made public
Filed under: Divorce & Custody, Celeb Kids, Celeb Parents, Media
Usually, family court cases are considered private and court documents are sealed when minor children are involved. But not this time. Los Angeles County Superior Court Commissioner Scott M. Gordon has ruled that some of the court documents in the Spears-Federline custody case will be unsealed and therefore available for public consumption. In essence, the judge has said that the public's interest in the couple's case overrides any privacy concerns.
"In this matter, the children have not been afforded the choice of litigating this matter in public and must suffer the 'good and bad' as a result of the decisions of those who care for them," Gordon wrote. "The evidence presented in this case clearly demonstrates a tremendous and ongoing media interest."
I don't disagree with the judge's assertion that there is intense public interest in this case. Britney Spears' life has been publicly unraveling since she hooked up with Federline and the resulting drama fascinates and horrifies us.
But I am surprised by the judge's opinion that the public's desire to know trumps the kids' right to privacy. Do you think the judge made the right decision? Or should Sean Preston and Jayden James have the same right to privacy as do children without famous parents?
"In this matter, the children have not been afforded the choice of litigating this matter in public and must suffer the 'good and bad' as a result of the decisions of those who care for them," Gordon wrote. "The evidence presented in this case clearly demonstrates a tremendous and ongoing media interest."
I don't disagree with the judge's assertion that there is intense public interest in this case. Britney Spears' life has been publicly unraveling since she hooked up with Federline and the resulting drama fascinates and horrifies us.
But I am surprised by the judge's opinion that the public's desire to know trumps the kids' right to privacy. Do you think the judge made the right decision? Or should Sean Preston and Jayden James have the same right to privacy as do children without famous parents?
Your<span>Voice</span>
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
Recently Asked
TheTalkies:RelatedVideos
-
Federal Judge Asks BP to Unseal Documents In Atlantis Case
The Republican presidential candidates are facing dwindling cash reserves as the protracted nominating fight takes its toll.
-
Supreme Court Reconvenes
People line up to get inside
-
Why Obamacare Is "the Most Important Case" in 50 Years
Does the fate of a federal government with limited powers rest in the hands of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia? And if so, will he rule against broad federal powers (Gonzales case) or in favor of the feds' right to regulate just about anything (Raich case)? The rulings on the Supreme Court case over The Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare, will determine where the line between constitutional power, federal government, and individual freedom lies.
-
The Supreme Court Case of Sackett V. EPA
The decision in the Supreme Court case Sackett v. EPA, due later this spring, could very well affect the meaning of property rights and due process in the United States. So how did a small-town couple from Northern Idaho ever become the center of such a momentous case? Reason.tv talked with the Sacketts and their attorney to find out.
SitesWeLove
- Site Map
- |
- Staff
- |
- Terms of Service
- |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Trademarks
- |
- Advertise With Us
- |
- About Our Ads
- |
- AOL Downloads
- |
- Contact Us
- |
© Copyright 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Aol Family
ReaderComments (Page 1 of 1)
9-19-2007 @ 3:59PM
Courtney said...I have felt bad for those kids all along, but my thoughts are, if Brittney is going to make everything (and I do mean everything) public, why not this? I do feel sorry for those kids though. You can't choose your parents!
Reply
9-19-2007 @ 4:39PM
queenoqueens said...I don't understand HOW their custody battle is anyone's business. What the parents do in public is one thing....but shouldn't a court case in a family matter be private EVERY TIME? How is it anyone else's business other than Brittney, Kevin and the courts? These rules must have been bent, because it would be more convenient for the courts.
Am I missing something, or is the judge an unprincipled twit?
Reply
9-19-2007 @ 5:53PM
Ann Adams said...I think the judge was wrong. It should always be the best interests of the children, no matter how hungry the public is for Britney news.
Reply
9-19-2007 @ 7:34PM
nicolebarber said...Do People ever think of the best interest of a child other then as an object. These little boys deserve some privacy and consideration to their mental and emotional stability. It's bad enough with all the reports of a tug of war custody battle, a drug and alcoholic momma and a money hungry daddy.
Reply
9-20-2007 @ 12:42AM
blisssx said...Maybe the judge made some parts of the case public because there is such intense public scrutiny. The media is watching and commenting on every move; perhaps the judge is making the case transparent so as to prevent any perceptions that Ms Spears or Mr Federline are getting preferential treatment because they are famous.
Reply
9-25-2007 @ 9:32AM
JazzyPoo said...I thnk da bytch shouldnt have kut ha hair.... kuz she look like a cancer patient!!!!
Reply