TMZ

Our TV Shows

Got a Tip?

Call TMZ at (888) 847-9869 or Click Here

Britney Officially

Not a Criminal!

10/21/2008 5:36 PM PDT BY TMZ STAFF

Britney SpearsThe judge in the trial of the century has dismissed the criminal charge against Ms. Britney Spears.

A mistrial was declared after the jury was hopelessly deadlocked at 10-2, in favor of not guilty. Britney was on trial for driving without a valid California license.

The judge just dismissed the case outright. The prosecutor said in court he was "troubled by the outside impressions that were brought into the courtroom."

We're wondering...for a woman who was carted off to the hospital twice after shaving her head and running around town without panties, how is it exactly that the prosecutor was at a disadvantage?

UPDATE: At a press conference afterwards, someone asked the City Attorney whether or not it would be difficult for him to listen to Britney's music now. He responded, "You mean more difficult than before?" Sore loser much?


More Today in TMZ History

76 COMMENTS

No Avatar
31.

Disgusting    

The City Attorney should prosecute celebs and not continue this double standard justice.

However, this case was not the case to use as a token celeb prosecution.

It is unfortunate because now the City Attorney will probably continue its non-prosecution of celebs thinking that jurors won't convict a celeb.

It wasn't that Britney is a celeb, the jurors probably didn't think the crime didn't merit a such a full blown jury trial. The City Attorney (and DA) let celebs off the hook for more serious and endangering crimes, so it sets an example to jurors not to take violations seriously. Every time the City Attorney and DA let a celeb off the hook people think breaking the law is not serious and they can get away with it too.

(btw, that was a pretty clever answer by the prosecutor)

2101 days ago
32.

What goes around will come around, Harvey    

29. ... It wasn't that Britney is a celeb, the jurors probably didn't think the crime didn't merit a such a full blown jury trial.

________________________

It couldn't possibly be that the jury thought that, because IT WAS BRITNEY WHO INSISTED THAT THIS CASE GO TO TRIAL, NOT THE PROSECUTORS!

2101 days ago
33.

Big Bear    

Why try the poor lady?? Britney is too mentally ill to help in her own defense. Leave the crazy lady alone!!!

2101 days ago
34.

Obama Hussein Barak is the Anti-Christ    

britbritisaskank, i still don't understand why you must comment on every britney post. I skip over the people i do not like, you should try the same.

I did answer the question you asked me about her talent ... funny, I got not response ...

2101 days ago
35.

Christine    

Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of Britney but this whole court case was BS.

2101 days ago
36.

JustDave    

Britney for President... Wait ..."Global leader" She's everthing all young girls should aspire to becoming. give us a break. Not her fault that bad things happen to her, its everybody else to blame.

2101 days ago
37.

jwoolman    

Her lawyer was just trying to make some more money off her - she should have just taken care of it properly earlier, just like other people do when a police officer tells them at least 3 times to get a license for the right state... She could keep her Louisiana license while holding a license from another state, but it's silly to claim she's just been "visiting" in California for all these years. They had dropped the hit and run charges because she eventually paid up for damages to the other person's car, so she already got a good deal just from that. I doubt very much that she was in danger of jail time, but there is a limit for how much scoff-lawing any judge will put up with.

It should be considered "common knowledge" that you need to get a driver's license for the state of residence once you've been there a certain amount of time (varies state by state), I knew it when I moved to a different state, nobody had to tell me - I just checked with the local DMV, got the booklet and studied it, and passed the written test. Duh.

2101 days ago
38.

Fred    

The prosecutor makes the decision to take a case to trial or not. He offered her a deal, she turned it down. He never softened the deal and after she continued to turn it down he made the decision to go to trial. All he had to do was offer to drop the charges if she paid the fine and this would have been over. Instead he kept demanding a plea of guilty to a misdemeanor and probation. One year probation is usually only offered in a felony case.

All you people who are saying that she forced the trial are showing just how dumb you all are.

Some other idiot wrote that she had been warned 2 previous times to get a California license. Warnings by the cops are nothing more than a conversation and have no place in a court. The officers could have written a ticket but did not. No different than being told you have a burned out taillight.

2101 days ago
39.

energydrink    

Thank god Britney is free of charge yesssssssss . The judge has finally let her go. I'm so happy for Britney now that she doesn't have to put up with this any longer and can now live her life happy with her kids and family and to continue her career. She will keep us entertaining . YOU go Britney your the coolest !

2101 days ago
40.

What goes around will come around, Harvey    

31. She had a frickin' license in Lousiana... if she wasn't a celebrity it wouldn't have been such a huge deal. Thank goodness!

Posted at 7:07PM on Oct 21st 2008 by katie

The law in California states that if a person spends at least 6 months out of a 12-month period in California and they drive, they MUST get a California driver's license, whether they have a license of another state or not.

Sorry, but that's the law in California. You may not like it, and if not, you are free to petition your state representatives to change the law ... or to try to get a referendum on the ballot.

Britney spent a lot more than 6 months a year in California during the past several years, and she was driving during that time. Therefore, by law, she had to get a Calif. driver's license. Period.

Also, she was caught twice in the past during a two-year period driving without a California license, and both times, she was ordered to get that license. And both times, she refused to comply with the law and do so. Then, when she was caught a third time driving without a Calif. license, the authorities did to her what they would also do to you or me in the same situation: they charged her with a misdemeanor.

And as has been mentioned here a few times already, IT WAS BRITNEY WHO INSISTED ON TAKING THIS TO TRIAL. She could have pleaded guilty, paid a fine, and ended up with probabtion, which is the same that would be offered to you or me in the same situation. However, SHE decided to waste the taxpayers' money and go to court, instead.

So if you don't like the way that this was handled, blame that immature, spoiled brat Britney.

2101 days ago
41.

What goes around will come around, Harvey    

33. Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of Britney but this whole court case was BS.

Posted at 7:49PM on Oct 21st 2008 by Christine

BRITNEY is the one who chose to take it to court. Blame her if you don't like the BS.

2101 days ago
42.

mistysmom    

Who cares about a small thing like driving with an out of state license? Why waste money on this and time covering it?No wonder this country in so screwed up:we major in minors and minor in majors.

2101 days ago
43.

What goes around will come around, Harvey    

36. The prosecutor makes the decision to take a case to trial or not. He offered her a deal, she turned it down. He never softened the deal and after she continued to turn it down he made the decision to go to trial. All he had to do was offer to drop the charges if she paid the fine and this would have been over. Instead he kept demanding a plea of guilty to a misdemeanor and probation. One year probation is usually only offered in a felony case.

All you people who are saying that she forced the trial are showing just how dumb you all are.

Some other idiot wrote that she had been warned 2 previous times to get a California license. Warnings by the cops are nothing more than a conversation and have no place in a court. The officers could have written a ticket but did not. No different than being told you have a burned out taillight.
*****
California law states that if a person who drives spends at least six months per year in California, they MUST get a California driver's license. The police who stopped her in the past informed her of that law, which is in effect whether they said anything to her or not. Therefore, she can't say that she didn't know the law, which means that she deliberately flouted it.

It is perfectly valid to bring that fact up in court, because it helps substantiate the fact that she knowinging broke that law at least two times.

Then, she suffered the consequences.

2101 days ago
44.

anon    

Just another addition to celebrities who get off on celebrity. She lives in California right now, therefore she should adhere to California Law. She hit someone. I hate California right now, shame on them

2101 days ago
45.

What goes around will come around, Harvey    

41. Who cares about a small thing like driving with an out of state license? Why waste money on this and time covering it?No wonder this country in so screwed up:we major in minors and minor in majors.

Posted at 9:19PM on Oct 21st 2008 by mistysmom
***************************************************************************************************
One thing about this country is that we have a few avenues for changing laws that we don't like. You can petition your State congressman or congresswoman to introduce a bill to change or repeal the law. Also, in California, you can get enough signatures on a petition and then get a referendum on the ballot.

If you really believe that this law is unfair, then put some energy into trying to change it.

Simply complaining that it's unfair will change nothing.

In the mean time, until a law gets changed or repealed, we will have to suffer legal consequences if we choose not to obey it. This applies to Britney Spears as much as it applies to you and me.

2101 days ago
Previous 15 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Around The Web