Britney Spears will not face child abuse charges.

The ‘Toxic’ singer’s lawyer Laura Wasser, who attended a custody hearing with Britney’s ex-husband Kevin Federline, confirmed the action has been dropped but wouldn’t reveal details of the accusations.

Speaking outside the courthouse yesterday, Wasser said: "It does not appear the county will pursue any action at this time. I don’t know who made the complaints, but I am trying to find out."

Officials at the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services did not comment on the complaints.

Both Wasser and Kevin’s attorney Mark Vincent Kaplan refused to reveal what was discussed in yesterday’s private hearing, but said they were pleased with the outcome.

Britney and Kevin will have at least three more court hearings this year in their custody battle for their two sons, including appearances on September 14, November 26 and December 18.

The courts will review independent evaluations and consider Kevin’s request for primary custody of 23-month-old Sean Preston and Jayden James, 11 months.

Kevin’s legal team has so far subpoenaed Britney’s former manager Larry Rudolph, ex-personal assistant Shannon Funk, her cousin Alli Simms and her bodyguard-turned-‘manny’ Daimon Shippen to testify.

Meanwhile, Britney’s bodyguard Julio Camera has been charged with battery for allegedly punching a photographer who was trying to take a picture of Sean Preston in Las Vegas on July 26.

Camera is due in court on October 12 and if found guilty, faces up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine.



Remember this Britney? No one would have imagined this.

she’s so dirty- I’ll never be able to see her as sexy again.

Oh look it’s britney’s sister on the cover of a magazine.

never ending drama!!! jeez, i’m so over it.

What… no saggy ass pics?

Wonder how much they paid off the Department to have those allegations dropped?  She’s a lousy mother, no two ways about it.  I feel for those kids.

uhh, all the allegations came from hearsay. Did we see or witness anything that proved child abuse and (legal) neglect?
Kevin wanted publicity and to have an image of the ‘concerned’ dad. Now he gets money out of this ‘private meeting’ and ‘settled’ something? He doesn’t want to have the responsibility of the kids. He never did and he never was anything but a deadbeat dad. Britney is a tragic figure buit not because of weight gain and silly stuff like that but because she shows signs of being depressed and hungry for attention. She is probably the emotional age of a 9 year old. Since that is around the age she was when her parents started pimping her and her childhood was taken.
On a more superficial note: the haircolour on that mag cover was best for her. I think that is a wig but the light brownish/copperish colour with subtle high and lowlights worked best.

i remember when that rolling stones cover first came out everyone commented on her hairy stomach….now there’s sooo much more for her to be criticized about cos she’s so nasty

Contessamemily - excellent commments! I have to agree with you regarding Kevin’s sudden attention to his children with Britney. What about the other ones he has?  Cha ching! that is what’s on Kevin’s mind.

Child abuse is not just physically harming a child, there are many other factors—-neglect in absence of a parent, erratic behavior (like holding down a child to whiten his teeth) exposing a child to high risk environment, not having a toddler fastened properly in a moving vehicle, excessive junk food given to young children, exposing children to permissive and inappropriate behavior with the opposite sex and the list goes on.  None of these are strong enough charges however to have your children taken away from you or have custody time taken away from the parent.  There is probably more that Children’s Services cannot reveal to the public.

It’s all about the money. This guy is as awful as a father as Britney as a mother.

A teletubbie I remember those…

In Response to Nonnie:

“Child abuse is not just physically harming a child, there are many other factors—-neglect in absence of a parent”,

RE: That is correct. Abuse is not just physical. It can also be mental, emotional or in the form of ‘neglect’. “Neglect” is a more complex area and very hard to prove in the law. Also since our laws are not pro-active or preventative in this country, it is very difficult to charge someone with ‘neglect’ or have children removed from parents. Namely their natural mothers. If neglect were merely ‘absence’ of a parent then 99% of Hollywood would not have their children anymore legally.

erratic behavior (like holding down a child to whiten his teeth)

RE: We do not know that this happened. And it could be claimed that she was holding the child during a dental visit or exam. Many parents or caregivers who have ever taken their kids to a dentist or doctor appointment know that many times they do have to hold their kids or restrain them. Immunizations are an example.

exposing a child to high risk environment,

RE: We do not know what environments the kids are in at any given time. Probably like most celebs: with nannies. There are single mothers on welfare who constantly expose their kids to meth, coke, crack, pot, second hand smoke, drunken ‘friends’ and relatives, etc. It is difficult to even have those kids removed. ANd if they are removed, where do they go? Become wards of the state? Foster care in homes of strangers who may or may not be better than the natural parent?

not having a toddler fastened properly in a moving vehicle,

RE: I think they already cited her for that incident. They cannot charge twice (legally) for the same incident/crime.

excessive junk food given to young children,

RE: That is not abuse or neglect. That is a choice.

exposing children to permissive and inappropriate behavior with the opposite sex and the list goes on. 

RE: Again, right or wrong, this is not a crime or even a tort. This is a choice.

None of these are strong enough charges however to have your children taken away from you or have custody time taken away from the parent.

RE: And they are not charges to begin with but hearsay and rumor. Charges and allegations have to be justiciable, or preset prima facie to be heard at all (Legally speaking).

  There is probably more that Children’s Services cannot reveal to the public”.

RE: WHy do you say that? Children’s Services is a public organization and if there are ‘crimes’ it is public information. If you are that interested, you could look it up. However, do we even know that “there is probably more”? 
What we know and what SEEMS obvious are different entities. What MY opinion is? Britney needs help, and support. and Kevin needs to be clipped already.

thanks mariianne

Anything that happens to a minor child is not publc record.

oh yeah, that’s the gay teletubby that she’s holding in the picture.

The minor child is not of legal capacity. If a parent, caregiver or other adult abuses, neglects and gets charged with any of the same it will be recorded and people will be able to discover these records.

Rolling Stone was obviously going for their pedophile market.

you are welcome!

To Contessamemily—Thank-you for your detailed response to my comments.  I was speaking in general terms and was responding to your comment that “the abuse allegations were just hearsay” and “did we see or witness anything that proved child abuse and (legal) neglect?”  I was just raising an awareness to the fact that there were other ways of abusing a child.  I stated that these were not strong enough charges to have her boys taken away from her or limit her custody time with them.  It is true however that Children’s Services does with hold information from the public—until charges are filed.  The person or persons who reported these allegations is also kept in confidence—and even though Wasser, Britney’s attorney is trying to find out—who called these accusations in—any of us can remain anonymous if we call in and report WHAT WE THINK MIGHT BE ABUSE TO A CHILD.  I might add that we do not know what kind of a father Ferderline is.  Just because he parties at night when he does not have custody of the boys does not make him a bad father.  If his length of custody is increased—it does not automatically mean more child support and those records are sealed.