Britney Spears "vehicular crime" trial set for June

[Novice]

Britney Fails to Get Charges Dropped



Britney Spears has failed to get her driving without a license charges dropped, despite her lawyers claiming that she’s a changed woman. The charges stem from the August 2007 incident in which Spears banged her Mercedes into a parked car with photographers watching.
Spears might have settled the matter with the car’s owner, but Los Angeles City attorney has asserted that “It’s the fairest way to treat her. We’re not affected by her celebrity status.”
Really? Is that even hard to do anymore? Britney’s been spending her fair share of time in court recently and another little speedbump, legally speaking, is hardly something that will get her sympathy. Her trial has been scheduled for trial in June– I’m still curious of the outcome regardless.
Splash News Online - Celebrity Gossip, Celebrity Pictures, Celebrity Pics, Celebrity Videos, Celebrity Blog

[NicoleWasHere]

I hope she's never able to drive, again. And I hope she has to pay a huge, huge fine.

[sparkly]

I saw that video, and NOT ONCE did she check out the other lady's car to see if she banged it or anything. Dumb cunt.

[Beeyotch]

I don't understand why they have just now come forward with this. This should have been dealt with at the same time as her hit and run charge. It stemmed from the same incident, so wtf? They never should have given her a license in the first place since she got the hit and run charge first, and only after that went to the DMV to get a license. Revoke that thing for at least a year and make her pay the fines for driving without a license.

And while they're at it, bust her for never registering her car. There's months and months of photos of her driving that white mercedes with no tags. Fine and ticket her ass like they would anybody else, since they're claiming they're not giving her preferential treatment because she's a celebrity.

[Novice]

Its been ongoing for a while, hasn't it B?
I've posted bits as they're been to court, but the judge is determind not to let her off. When she first was in court she'd not even been in touch with the car's owner that she damaged & had "conveniently" managed to avoid any response. As soon as the judge appeared to be treating it with teh same gravitas as any "normal" bod, she gave the woman a cheque...

Could it be that one is a "mis-demeanor" while the other isn't?