Gwyneth Paltrow court case

[Anonymous]

Of all these versions, ski instructor’s makes the most sense. Of course he didn’t actually witness the collision, so his doesn’t count either. Hope the guy who is suing because of the exploding vagina candle has more success. And hope the Paltrows are enjoying some good snow and recouping their lost half day of skiing. Because a lost half day of skiing must have been devastating.

[Anonymous]

I wonder what she’s thinking:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CqN5pQaA1ES/?igshid=ZWZhZTRhOWQ=

[Anonymous]

Ouch!
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CqObaJ6pJ7e/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

[Anonymous]

Did she really drop the "eff" bomb in court? The judge should have cited her for contempt and let her sleep a night or two in jail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did she really drop the "eff" bomb in court? The judge should have cited her for contempt and let her sleep a night or two in jail.

Oh FFS. Grow up, Judy.

[Anonymous]

I'm no fan of Gwyneth but I applaud her for owning that she is Hollywood royalty and she cannot hide it, even with all the smirking and eye rolling. She is who she is, definitely not putting on an acting show. I actually kinda like this side of her, this is someone I could have a glass of wine with and share some laughs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she really drop the "eff" bomb in court? The judge should have cited her for contempt and let her sleep a night or two in jail.

Oh FFS. Grow up, Judy.

Yes Judy, grow up! lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She should make this stop before she forces her kids to testify. She already said they didn’t witness anything. I would settle and say we agree to disagree but the energy from the back and forth is not worth it. I would then move on with my hot husband and make more weirdly fascinating products.

One of the court tv talking heads said that Sanderson didn’t want to settle and he’s been singularly focused on bringing her to trial

Yes it’s pretty clear he is fixated on blaming her for all his life’s woes. I actually do believe she is the one that hit him due to his injuries, but he should have accepted that bad things can happen when you ski and moved on. I ski 40-50 days a year, and I’m always worried about collisions. Deer valley, in particular, is not my favorite place because the runs are groomed so well that people fly down the hill much faster than they would on less immaculate slopes.

Just move on? I ski and have never, ever run in to anyone. If someone injures me, they are going to pay for the medical bills and more if it's serious.

You're going to have to prove they ran into you. That's not clear cut in the current case. But you're free to spend 7 years of your life pursuing a few hundred thousand which will never make you whole again.

She is countersuing for $1 PLUS attorney fees. Which will be huge, considering this has been going on for 7 yrs. I hope she wins. Clearly he is just exploiting her. Like it or not, that is wrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She should make this stop before she forces her kids to testify. She already said they didn’t witness anything. I would settle and say we agree to disagree but the energy from the back and forth is not worth it. I would then move on with my hot husband and make more weirdly fascinating products.

One of the court tv talking heads said that Sanderson didn’t want to settle and he’s been singularly focused on bringing her to trial

Yes it’s pretty clear he is fixated on blaming her for all his life’s woes. I actually do believe she is the one that hit him due to his injuries, but he should have accepted that bad things can happen when you ski and moved on. I ski 40-50 days a year, and I’m always worried about collisions. Deer valley, in particular, is not my favorite place because the runs are groomed so well that people fly down the hill much faster than they would on less immaculate slopes.

Just move on? I ski and have never, ever run in to anyone. If someone injures me, they are going to pay for the medical bills and more if it's serious.

You're going to have to prove they ran into you. That's not clear cut in the current case. But you're free to spend 7 years of your life pursuing a few hundred thousand which will never make you whole again.

She is countersuing for $1 PLUS attorney fees. Which will be huge, considering this has been going on for 7 yrs. I hope she wins. Clearly he is just exploiting her. Like it or not, that is wrong

DP. The post you quoted wasn’t about the GP case, it was in reply to another poster who said she would definitely sue if someone hit her (skiing or car, can’t remember which). Anyway, all of you who hope GP wins, how are you so sure she is right? It’s basically a he said/she said. The one witness supports the plaintiff. Pretend they are two random people and focus on the evidence, not whether GP is wealthy, or is being pressured by her insurance company, or that the plaintiff seems like a crackpot. That’s not what a trial is about. It’s about evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a shakedown. He wanted 3 million. And she was on the bunny slopes with her kids with 2 instructors.

The instructors back up her version of the story, which is that she had the right of way and he ran into her. He has a witness supporting his version.

She pays the instructors to ski with her kids so they can skip the lines. If I was on the jury I would have doubts about their veracity

Literally everyone we know pays ski instructors to take their kids so they can go and actually enjoy skiing. And so their kids learn to be strong skiers. We don't, because we're broke. But it's an odd thing to get hung up about.

We call them “guides” and hire them for the first full day our family skis at a place we haven’t skied before. Really helpful for big mountain ranges, connecting resorts, speaking the local language (one side of the mountain speaks German and the other side Italian) and lunch spot recommendations/reservations help, etc.

Oh, good God... this has to be THE most insufferable humble brag on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Omg! The comments at the bottom of this article had me rolling! 🤣

https://dlisted.com/2023/03/23/the-alleged-victim-in-gwyneth-paltrows-ski-accident-trial-claims-he-can-no-longer-enjoy-wine-tasting-because-of-her/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eric Christensen - Moses ski instructor is now testifying. Most sane person to testify to date and seems fairly impartial as he has contradicted GPs testimony significantly.

Unepxeted fact: Ski instructor must be in his late 60s at least. Has been a ski instructor for 44 years.

He had been watching Sanderson as he was coming down the slope with a lot of speed and was clearly a strong skiier making 'GS Slalom like' turns on his edges. He watched until Sanderson passed him and Moses and then he heard a scream and looked over and the two of them were tangled on the ground. He skiied over and Sanderson was laying on his back head up the hill and Paltrow was on top of him with their legs and skiis entangled. He helped them get their skiis off. Paltrow was angry and Sanderson wasn't saying much. Ramon was still skiing towards them as he had been much farther uphill.

It sounds like they just colliided without warning where they both turned into each other. I don't think either knows exactly what happened. Sanderson likely was hurt (concussion and broken ribs) because he was travelling at higher speed and came to a sudden stop and fell backwards quite hard and then had Paltrow land on top of him. She wasn't hurt as she had been skiiing slower and had a softer landing.

Also not a good idea for any wealthy, high profile person to set the precedent that if you run into them at a ski resort (or with your car or on a bike or wherever) and then sue them, however frivolously, they will settle with you and just give you cash.
CHristensen testified that Sanderson was never unconscious and initially said he was okay and didn't need assistance. He did say he wasn't saying much but he did say sorry. He said Paltrow wasn't yelling but was using a sharp tone. Christensen first helped Paltrow up then Sandersen up.

Instead of contradicting I think he corroborates Paltrow's version. Someone skiing up behind you could knock you backwards and you could fall back hard on them breaking a few ribs. He also refutes Sanderson's claim that he was sticking to the right because of his poor eyesight.

Gwyneth's testonmony was that he slowly skiied up behind her and put his skiis between her legs and pressed his body against hers for a few seconds while making grunting noises before they fell and he spooned her on the ground. None of that happened according to the ski instructor. He wasn't behind her as he was criss crossing the hill and she was over on the right side. I do think he skiied into her / they skiied into each other as they turned.

The ski instructor didn't see the actual collision so he's not saying that did or did not happen.

The time period between when he had looked at Sanderson and then heard the scream and looked over given the position of the two skiiers would not have allowed for that. Additionally his description of the speed and position of the two of them right before and right after the collision would not allow for that to be a true version of events.

Oh ok. I guess you're the only one who has it all figured out. You bolded "for a few seconds" but she never actually said that. Go back and listen again.

She did say that at one point - I listened to her testimony. I listened to the ski instructor testimony today - he was there! His version of events contradicts hers (and the plaintiffs)

I think you're really misinterpreting what she said. She said that for a second she thought it was a prank or something sexual, because his skis came between her legs and she heard grunting sounds behind her before she fell, but that it all happened very quickly. She was clearly using "for a second" euphemistically, not like actually 1/60th of a minute... especially with the emphasis on how fast everything happened. I thought the ski instructor's version of what happened was totally credible and not meaningfully inconsistent with GP trying to recall events of 7 years ago. It was completely inconsistent with what the plaintiff claimed & what his friend claim... 2 versions that were inconsistent with each other too & didn't make sense. This is clearly a cash grab. For those who are asking why GP didn't settle, the plaintiff REFUSED to settle and was initially asking for $3 million. She never had the option to settle for $300K and certainly not for a lower amount.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm no fan of Gwyneth but I applaud her for owning that she is Hollywood royalty and she cannot hide it, even with all the smirking and eye rolling. She is who she is, definitely not putting on an acting show. I actually kinda like this side of her, this is someone I could have a glass of wine with and share some laughs.

She wouldn't deign to spend time with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She should make this stop before she forces her kids to testify. She already said they didn’t witness anything. I would settle and say we agree to disagree but the energy from the back and forth is not worth it. I would then move on with my hot husband and make more weirdly fascinating products.

One of the court tv talking heads said that Sanderson didn’t want to settle and he’s been singularly focused on bringing her to trial

Yes it’s pretty clear he is fixated on blaming her for all his life’s woes. I actually do believe she is the one that hit him due to his injuries, but he should have accepted that bad things can happen when you ski and moved on. I ski 40-50 days a year, and I’m always worried about collisions. Deer valley, in particular, is not my favorite place because the runs are groomed so well that people fly down the hill much faster than they would on less immaculate slopes.

Just move on? I ski and have never, ever run in to anyone. If someone injures me, they are going to pay for the medical bills and more if it's serious.

You're going to have to prove they ran into you. That's not clear cut in the current case. But you're free to spend 7 years of your life pursuing a few hundred thousand which will never make you whole again.

She is countersuing for $1 PLUS attorney fees. Which will be huge, considering this has been going on for 7 yrs. I hope she wins. Clearly he is just exploiting her. Like it or not, that is wrong

DP. The post you quoted wasn’t about the GP case, it was in reply to another poster who said she would definitely sue if someone hit her (skiing or car, can’t remember which). Anyway, all of you who hope GP wins, how are you so sure she is right? It’s basically a he said/she said. The one witness supports the plaintiff. Pretend they are two random people and focus on the evidence, not whether GP is wealthy, or is being pressured by her insurance company, or that the plaintiff seems like a crackpot. That’s not what a trial is about. It’s about evidence.

Yes it’s about evidence of which Terry has none and looked like an ass during his testimony. He’s suing her so he has the burden of proof. Many people fond him unbelievable because he is inconsistent and seems to have a remarkable memory for something he also complains knocked him out cold and gave him a brain injury. I think the people who don’t like GP and assume she must be at fault because they don’t like her candles, should question why they are ignoring the way this case is going and listen to all the contradictory evidence.

[Anonymous]

This Hollywood kook is guilty as hell. She sounds like Amber Heard on the stand.