Britney Spears drugged: shocking documents from her former lawyer and ex-manager revealed

Placed under the guardianship of her father in 2008, Britney Spears was deprived of her financial, professional, but also intimate freedom for 13 long years. If the singer finally became completely independent again in 2021, following a court decision, this terrible period of her life still seems to have some secrets to reveal. In effect, shocking documents were revealed on Tuesday, July 5, 2022 on Twitter. These involve the former management company of the musician, Tri Star, directed by Lou Taylor. According to the pop star’s lawyer, Mathew Rosengart, this company played a major role in the guardianship of his client, while pocketing nearly $18 million during their collaboration between 2008 and 2020.

The documents in question are in fact email exchanges between Lou Taylor and Britney Spears’ former lawyer, Geraldine Wyle. “We encountered a problem with the choice of judge… The only judge who can hear our case on Friday is one that won’t give Jamie the power to administer mind-altering drugs. Lou…we must preserve the credibility of all our witnesses, especially the family, and especially Lynne (Lynne Spears, mother of Britney Spears, editor’s note), because a big part of this case hinges on his credibility. I’m so glad you got them home on Monday night – that’s the key“, indicate these famous emails. It would therefore seem that the singer was possibly drugged by her former manager and her former lawyer.

Britney Spears: her lawyer will investigate her former management company

“I am the right person for this. I fought for Jamie for 3 years, i prayed and fasted with him every week and life changed drastically thanks to this determination“, also wrote the lawyer of the father of Britney Spears, which would seem to highlight the fact that she was aiming to become the”co-tutor” of the musician. Following these revelations, the current lawyer of Britney Spears “publicly pledged to fully investigate Tri Star“. To achieve this, his firm called on the Kroll company, with the aim of “investigate the conduct of the businessin addition to that of his father“. For their part, the people cited in this case have categorically denied their involvement.