Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I assume there are HR complaints at all businesses. And I assume what you as a business are supposed to do is appropriately address the complaint.

It sounds like these complaints were all rather minor and were all addressed appropriately. (Don’t come at me, birth scene lady! I know how you feel!) So I’m not sure why we need to dwell on them to the degree that we are.

I understand that it’s much more complicated than this because of the retaliation claim, but at the same time, I don’t necessarily think it warrants such strangulation of every complaint.

She felt uncomfortable for . . . reasons. They addressed it, as any business should. It’s what happened next where everything gets murky for me. Did she then use the complaint as extortion—or did he retaliate to delegitimize her claim? Both? Neither?

My point is that I don’t really care what Jenny Slate did or didn’t complain about. That was between Slate and Wayfarer to deal with as appropriate. I sort of wish maybe we could just agree here that Blake made a SH claim (even if you think she was being oversensitive) and move on. Seems like there’s still plenty of other stuff to argue about.

Why is this important to you? If this was your brother and he was falsely accused, would you want people to follow the evidence or would you want to assume the person who started this be required to give a deposition under oath as to what happened, etc?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone found out whether Jenny Slate actually formally lodged a complaint to Sony or simply complained about an inappropriate comment and word got back to Sony? Because the THR article has changed the wording. It's interesting if the initial claim is to be believed, how was she able to go to Sony with a complaint about a comment as innocuous as the sanctity of motherhood and Blake was allegedly not in regards to sexual harassment and told to report to wayfarer? Wouldn't they not have told Jenny to report back to Wayfarer as well? None of this adds up.

Because it’s all bullshit. This is an all hands on deck multi-million dollar crisis PR mud slinging campaign hoping to muscle Justin into a hush settlement before discovery and depositions.

I hope it doesn't settle before depositions and I hope the depos are made public. At least the transcripts. Because I want dirt!

But I don't share your viewpoint about Baldoni's side being in the right. I think Baldoni's deposition is going to be a MESS. I also assume Lively's will be as well. I think they are both super messy. But... I love mess.

Taylor, Ari, Blake and Ryan have exponentially more to lose than Justin. And Justin is on far firmer footing.

Taylor has nothing to do with any of this. She was used so BL and RR could namedrop her. She isn't involved in this idiocy.
DP

Didn't one of the actresses say in an interview that Taylor helped her get a role and also helped I. Other casting decisions? Seems like involvement.....

https://www.eonline.com/news/1413732/how-taylor-swift-was-allegedly-involved-in-casting-it-ends-with-us

Is that relevant to any of the causes of action in any of the lawsuits though? I don't think it is.

It’s relevant because Taylor’s camp has lied to the press about the meeting with Justin. She claimed she met him in passing one time when he was leaving Blake’s house and she was entering. However, Justin is on record saying he showed the casting tapes to Taylor and Blake (long before that supposed meeting) which IF’s statement corroborates. The implication is TS had more involvement than she’s admitting, which is why she will definitely be deposed.

Which legal claim is that relevant to?

Justin’s countersuit and the takeover motive in which he claims Blake used her dragons to bully him.

What legal claim is "the takeover motive" related to? Is he suing for "bullying" because that's not a legal claim.

I know this will come as a shock to some of you, but "she stole my movie" is not a legal claim, nor is "I felt really intimidated when her very famous friend told me the scene she wrote was really good." You might be mad about these things but they aren't legal claims.

His strongest claim is defamation, and it's actually not that strong unless he can prove that she falsified into in her suit or the NYT article. He's also suing for extortion but it's a huge stretch and doesn't make sense, plus what are the damages? It actually is still Wayfarer's movie even if Sony decided to release Blake's cut, and they made a ton of movie off of it.

I think the extortion claims are going to be dismissed, and he'll only proceed with the defamation claims, and that will mean all the "evidence" about Taylor, the conflict over editing and scoring, everything related to her "stealing" the movie will be deemed irrelevant.

This case is about whether SH occurred, whether Baldoni et al retaliated, and whether Blake or her team defamed Baldoni. That's it.

The rest of this stuff is extraneous BS that Baldoni's lawyer threw in to try and embarrass or intimidate Lively. It's a classic "oh you want to sue? Ok, well let's spill aaaaaaallllll the tea then." But it didn't work so the case is going to go to motions to dismiss, at a minimum, and probably at least start discovery. We'll see after that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone found out whether Jenny Slate actually formally lodged a complaint to Sony or simply complained about an inappropriate comment and word got back to Sony? Because the THR article has changed the wording. It's interesting if the initial claim is to be believed, how was she able to go to Sony with a complaint about a comment as innocuous as the sanctity of motherhood and Blake was allegedly not in regards to sexual harassment and told to report to wayfarer? Wouldn't they not have told Jenny to report back to Wayfarer as well? None of this adds up.

Because it’s all bullshit. This is an all hands on deck multi-million dollar crisis PR mud slinging campaign hoping to muscle Justin into a hush settlement before discovery and depositions.

I hope it doesn't settle before depositions and I hope the depos are made public. At least the transcripts. Because I want dirt!

But I don't share your viewpoint about Baldoni's side being in the right. I think Baldoni's deposition is going to be a MESS. I also assume Lively's will be as well. I think they are both super messy. But... I love mess.

Taylor, Ari, Blake and Ryan have exponentially more to lose than Justin. And Justin is on far firmer footing.

Taylor has nothing to do with any of this. She was used so BL and RR could namedrop her. She isn't involved in this idiocy.
DP

Didn't one of the actresses say in an interview that Taylor helped her get a role and also helped I. Other casting decisions? Seems like involvement.....

https://www.eonline.com/news/1413732/how-taylor-swift-was-allegedly-involved-in-casting-it-ends-with-us

Is that relevant to any of the causes of action in any of the lawsuits though? I don't think it is.

It’s relevant because Taylor’s camp has lied to the press about the meeting with Justin. She claimed she met him in passing one time when he was leaving Blake’s house and she was entering. However, Justin is on record saying he showed the casting tapes to Taylor and Blake (long before that supposed meeting) which IF’s statement corroborates. The implication is TS had more involvement than she’s admitting, which is why she will definitely be deposed.

I don't think Justin has ever said he met Taylor on several occasions. I think he gave the tape to Blake who showed Taylor.

He said “I was casting and I showed the tape to Blake and Taylor”

He said this in an interview, it's not part of his complaint. There is no allegation related to Taylor somehow participating in casting.

Taylor is barely involved in this thing and will not be called as a witness, sorry.

[Anonymous]

I know this will come as a shock to some of you, but "she stole my movie" is not a legal claim, nor is "I felt really intimidated when her very famous friend told me the scene she wrote was really good." You might be mad about these things but they aren't legal claims.

His strongest claim is defamation, and it's actually not that strong unless he can prove that she falsified into in her suit or the NYT article. He's also suing for extortion but it's a huge stretch and doesn't make sense, plus what are the damages? It actually is still Wayfarer's movie even if Sony decided to release Blake's cut, and they made a ton of movie off of it.

I think the extortion claims are going to be dismissed, and he'll only proceed with the defamation claims, and that will mean all the "evidence" about Taylor, the conflict over editing and scoring, everything related to her "stealing" the movie will be deemed irrelevant.

That's reasonable. I went back to his complaint. It says (as one of the elements of extortion under CA law): Defendants’ threats included demands that money, property, services, or other
sources of value be conferred upon Defendants without consideration or contractual entitlement
thereto.

I think you're right that he didn't really allege that because the Wayfarer parties did continue to own the IP and made their money. I don't think that you can argue that specific credits or names listed on a poster are "money, property, services, or other sources of value." Maybe they have caselaw to that effect. Perhaps it ihas been litigated in California before. But it does scream kitchen sink, yes.

[Anonymous]

I know this will come as a shock to some of you, but "she stole my movie" is not a legal claim, nor is "I felt really intimidated when her very famous friend told me the scene she wrote was really good." You might be mad about these things but they aren't legal claims.

Well, it's just that Justin is such a feminist and so committed to the female gaze that Taylor's opinion mattered so much to him!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone found out whether Jenny Slate actually formally lodged a complaint to Sony or simply complained about an inappropriate comment and word got back to Sony? Because the THR article has changed the wording. It's interesting if the initial claim is to be believed, how was she able to go to Sony with a complaint about a comment as innocuous as the sanctity of motherhood and Blake was allegedly not in regards to sexual harassment and told to report to wayfarer? Wouldn't they not have told Jenny to report back to Wayfarer as well? None of this adds up.

Because it’s all bullshit. This is an all hands on deck multi-million dollar crisis PR mud slinging campaign hoping to muscle Justin into a hush settlement before discovery and depositions.

I hope it doesn't settle before depositions and I hope the depos are made public. At least the transcripts. Because I want dirt!

But I don't share your viewpoint about Baldoni's side being in the right. I think Baldoni's deposition is going to be a MESS. I also assume Lively's will be as well. I think they are both super messy. But... I love mess.

Taylor, Ari, Blake and Ryan have exponentially more to lose than Justin. And Justin is on far firmer footing.

Taylor has nothing to do with any of this. She was used so BL and RR could namedrop her. She isn't involved in this idiocy.
DP

Didn't one of the actresses say in an interview that Taylor helped her get a role and also helped I. Other casting decisions? Seems like involvement.....

https://www.eonline.com/news/1413732/how-taylor-swift-was-allegedly-involved-in-casting-it-ends-with-us

Is that relevant to any of the causes of action in any of the lawsuits though? I don't think it is.

It’s relevant because Taylor’s camp has lied to the press about the meeting with Justin. She claimed she met him in passing one time when he was leaving Blake’s house and she was entering. However, Justin is on record saying he showed the casting tapes to Taylor and Blake (long before that supposed meeting) which IF’s statement corroborates. The implication is TS had more involvement than she’s admitting, which is why she will definitely be deposed.

Which legal claim is that relevant to?

Justin’s countersuit and the takeover motive in which he claims Blake used her dragons to bully him.

What legal claim is "the takeover motive" related to? Is he suing for "bullying" because that's not a legal claim.

I know this will come as a shock to some of you, but "she stole my movie" is not a legal claim, nor is "I felt really intimidated when her very famous friend told me the scene she wrote was really good." You might be mad about these things but they aren't legal claims.

His strongest claim is defamation, and it's actually not that strong unless he can prove that she falsified into in her suit or the NYT article. He's also suing for extortion but it's a huge stretch and doesn't make sense, plus what are the damages? It actually is still Wayfarer's movie even if Sony decided to release Blake's cut, and they made a ton of movie off of it.

I think the extortion claims are going to be dismissed, and he'll only proceed with the defamation claims, and that will mean all the "evidence" about Taylor, the conflict over editing and scoring, everything related to her "stealing" the movie will be deemed irrelevant.

This case is about whether SH occurred, whether Baldoni et al retaliated, and whether Blake or her team defamed Baldoni. That's it.

The rest of this stuff is extraneous BS that Baldoni's lawyer threw in to try and embarrass or intimidate Lively. It's a classic "oh you want to sue? Ok, well let's spill aaaaaaallllll the tea then." But it didn't work so the case is going to go to motions to dismiss, at a minimum, and probably at least start discovery. We'll see after that.

The motive and defamation are connected

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone found out whether Jenny Slate actually formally lodged a complaint to Sony or simply complained about an inappropriate comment and word got back to Sony? Because the THR article has changed the wording. It's interesting if the initial claim is to be believed, how was she able to go to Sony with a complaint about a comment as innocuous as the sanctity of motherhood and Blake was allegedly not in regards to sexual harassment and told to report to wayfarer? Wouldn't they not have told Jenny to report back to Wayfarer as well? None of this adds up.

Because it’s all bullshit. This is an all hands on deck multi-million dollar crisis PR mud slinging campaign hoping to muscle Justin into a hush settlement before discovery and depositions.

I hope it doesn't settle before depositions and I hope the depos are made public. At least the transcripts. Because I want dirt!

But I don't share your viewpoint about Baldoni's side being in the right. I think Baldoni's deposition is going to be a MESS. I also assume Lively's will be as well. I think they are both super messy. But... I love mess.

Taylor, Ari, Blake and Ryan have exponentially more to lose than Justin. And Justin is on far firmer footing.

Taylor has nothing to do with any of this. She was used so BL and RR could namedrop her. She isn't involved in this idiocy.
DP

Didn't one of the actresses say in an interview that Taylor helped her get a role and also helped I. Other casting decisions? Seems like involvement.....

https://www.eonline.com/news/1413732/how-taylor-swift-was-allegedly-involved-in-casting-it-ends-with-us

Is that relevant to any of the causes of action in any of the lawsuits though? I don't think it is.

It’s relevant because Taylor’s camp has lied to the press about the meeting with Justin. She claimed she met him in passing one time when he was leaving Blake’s house and she was entering. However, Justin is on record saying he showed the casting tapes to Taylor and Blake (long before that supposed meeting) which IF’s statement corroborates. The implication is TS had more involvement than she’s admitting, which is why she will definitely be deposed.

I don't think Justin has ever said he met Taylor on several occasions. I think he gave the tape to Blake who showed Taylor.

He said “I was casting and I showed the tape to Blake and Taylor”

He said this in an interview, it's not part of his complaint. There is no allegation related to Taylor somehow participating in casting.

Taylor is barely involved in this thing and will not be called as a witness, sorry.

Taylor will definitely be deposed. You’re delusional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone found out whether Jenny Slate actually formally lodged a complaint to Sony or simply complained about an inappropriate comment and word got back to Sony? Because the THR article has changed the wording. It's interesting if the initial claim is to be believed, how was she able to go to Sony with a complaint about a comment as innocuous as the sanctity of motherhood and Blake was allegedly not in regards to sexual harassment and told to report to wayfarer? Wouldn't they not have told Jenny to report back to Wayfarer as well? None of this adds up.

Because it’s all bullshit. This is an all hands on deck multi-million dollar crisis PR mud slinging campaign hoping to muscle Justin into a hush settlement before discovery and depositions.

I hope it doesn't settle before depositions and I hope the depos are made public. At least the transcripts. Because I want dirt!

But I don't share your viewpoint about Baldoni's side being in the right. I think Baldoni's deposition is going to be a MESS. I also assume Lively's will be as well. I think they are both super messy. But... I love mess.

Taylor, Ari, Blake and Ryan have exponentially more to lose than Justin. And Justin is on far firmer footing.

Taylor has nothing to do with any of this. She was used so BL and RR could namedrop her. She isn't involved in this idiocy.
DP

Didn't one of the actresses say in an interview that Taylor helped her get a role and also helped I. Other casting decisions? Seems like involvement.....

https://www.eonline.com/news/1413732/how-taylor-swift-was-allegedly-involved-in-casting-it-ends-with-us

Is that relevant to any of the causes of action in any of the lawsuits though? I don't think it is.

It’s relevant because Taylor’s camp has lied to the press about the meeting with Justin. She claimed she met him in passing one time when he was leaving Blake’s house and she was entering. However, Justin is on record saying he showed the casting tapes to Taylor and Blake (long before that supposed meeting) which IF’s statement corroborates. The implication is TS had more involvement than she’s admitting, which is why she will definitely be deposed.

Which legal claim is that relevant to?

Justin’s countersuit and the takeover motive in which he claims Blake used her dragons to bully him.

What legal claim is "the takeover motive" related to? Is he suing for "bullying" because that's not a legal claim.

I know this will come as a shock to some of you, but "she stole my movie" is not a legal claim, nor is "I felt really intimidated when her very famous friend told me the scene she wrote was really good." You might be mad about these things but they aren't legal claims.

His strongest claim is defamation, and it's actually not that strong unless he can prove that she falsified into in her suit or the NYT article. He's also suing for extortion but it's a huge stretch and doesn't make sense, plus what are the damages? It actually is still Wayfarer's movie even if Sony decided to release Blake's cut, and they made a ton of movie off of it.

I think the extortion claims are going to be dismissed, and he'll only proceed with the defamation claims, and that will mean all the "evidence" about Taylor, the conflict over editing and scoring, everything related to her "stealing" the movie will be deemed irrelevant.

This case is about whether SH occurred, whether Baldoni et al retaliated, and whether Blake or her team defamed Baldoni. That's it.

The rest of this stuff is extraneous BS that Baldoni's lawyer threw in to try and embarrass or intimidate Lively. It's a classic "oh you want to sue? Ok, well let's spill aaaaaaallllll the tea then." But it didn't work so the case is going to go to motions to dismiss, at a minimum, and probably at least start discovery. We'll see after that.

The motive and defamation are connected

Articulate how.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I assume there are HR complaints at all businesses. And I assume what you as a business are supposed to do is appropriately address the complaint.

It sounds like these complaints were all rather minor and were all addressed appropriately. (Don’t come at me, birth scene lady! I know how you feel!) So I’m not sure why we need to dwell on them to the degree that we are.

I understand that it’s much more complicated than this because of the retaliation claim, but at the same time, I don’t necessarily think it warrants such strangulation of every complaint.

She felt uncomfortable for . . . reasons. They addressed it, as any business should. It’s what happened next where everything gets murky for me. Did she then use the complaint as extortion—or did he retaliate to delegitimize her claim? Both? Neither?

My point is that I don’t really care what Jenny Slate did or didn’t complain about. That was between Slate and Wayfarer to deal with as appropriate. I sort of wish maybe we could just agree here that Blake made a SH claim (even if you think she was being oversensitive) and move on. Seems like there’s still plenty of other stuff to argue about.

Article was stealth edited. There was no HR complaint. It is hearsay and gossip. Nothing more. Mud thrown at the wall by you know who. BL & RR pulling every lever and string they can. I hope he never settles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone found out whether Jenny Slate actually formally lodged a complaint to Sony or simply complained about an inappropriate comment and word got back to Sony? Because the THR article has changed the wording. It's interesting if the initial claim is to be believed, how was she able to go to Sony with a complaint about a comment as innocuous as the sanctity of motherhood and Blake was allegedly not in regards to sexual harassment and told to report to wayfarer? Wouldn't they not have told Jenny to report back to Wayfarer as well? None of this adds up.

Because it’s all bullshit. This is an all hands on deck multi-million dollar crisis PR mud slinging campaign hoping to muscle Justin into a hush settlement before discovery and depositions.

I hope it doesn't settle before depositions and I hope the depos are made public. At least the transcripts. Because I want dirt!

But I don't share your viewpoint about Baldoni's side being in the right. I think Baldoni's deposition is going to be a MESS. I also assume Lively's will be as well. I think they are both super messy. But... I love mess.

Taylor, Ari, Blake and Ryan have exponentially more to lose than Justin. And Justin is on far firmer footing.

Taylor has nothing to do with any of this. She was used so BL and RR could namedrop her. She isn't involved in this idiocy.
DP

Didn't one of the actresses say in an interview that Taylor helped her get a role and also helped I. Other casting decisions? Seems like involvement.....

https://www.eonline.com/news/1413732/how-taylor-swift-was-allegedly-involved-in-casting-it-ends-with-us

Is that relevant to any of the causes of action in any of the lawsuits though? I don't think it is.

It’s relevant because Taylor’s camp has lied to the press about the meeting with Justin. She claimed she met him in passing one time when he was leaving Blake’s house and she was entering. However, Justin is on record saying he showed the casting tapes to Taylor and Blake (long before that supposed meeting) which IF’s statement corroborates. The implication is TS had more involvement than she’s admitting, which is why she will definitely be deposed.

I don't think Justin has ever said he met Taylor on several occasions. I think he gave the tape to Blake who showed Taylor.

He said “I was casting and I showed the tape to Blake and Taylor”

He said this in an interview, it's not part of his complaint. There is no allegation related to Taylor somehow participating in casting.

Taylor is barely involved in this thing and will not be called as a witness, sorry.

Taylor will definitely be deposed. You’re delusional.

I guess we'll see. I don't think it will ever happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I assume there are HR complaints at all businesses. And I assume what you as a business are supposed to do is appropriately address the complaint.

It sounds like these complaints were all rather minor and were all addressed appropriately. (Don’t come at me, birth scene lady! I know how you feel!) So I’m not sure why we need to dwell on them to the degree that we are.

I understand that it’s much more complicated than this because of the retaliation claim, but at the same time, I don’t necessarily think it warrants such strangulation of every complaint.

She felt uncomfortable for . . . reasons. They addressed it, as any business should. It’s what happened next where everything gets murky for me. Did she then use the complaint as extortion—or did he retaliate to delegitimize her claim? Both? Neither?

My point is that I don’t really care what Jenny Slate did or didn’t complain about. That was between Slate and Wayfarer to deal with as appropriate. I sort of wish maybe we could just agree here that Blake made a SH claim (even if you think she was being oversensitive) and move on. Seems like there’s still plenty of other stuff to argue about.

Article was stealth edited. There was no HR complaint. It is hearsay and gossip. Nothing more. Mud thrown at the wall by you know who. BL & RR pulling every lever and string they can. I hope he never settles.

They edited it back and now it says complaint again, so I'm guessing there was a complaint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I assume there are HR complaints at all businesses. And I assume what you as a business are supposed to do is appropriately address the complaint.

It sounds like these complaints were all rather minor and were all addressed appropriately. (Don’t come at me, birth scene lady! I know how you feel!) So I’m not sure why we need to dwell on them to the degree that we are.

I understand that it’s much more complicated than this because of the retaliation claim, but at the same time, I don’t necessarily think it warrants such strangulation of every complaint.

She felt uncomfortable for . . . reasons. They addressed it, as any business should. It’s what happened next where everything gets murky for me. Did she then use the complaint as extortion—or did he retaliate to delegitimize her claim? Both? Neither?

My point is that I don’t really care what Jenny Slate did or didn’t complain about. That was between Slate and Wayfarer to deal with as appropriate. I sort of wish maybe we could just agree here that Blake made a SH claim (even if you think she was being oversensitive) and move on. Seems like there’s still plenty of other stuff to argue about.

Article was stealth edited. There was no HR complaint. It is hearsay and gossip. Nothing more. Mud thrown at the wall by you know who. BL & RR pulling every lever and string they can. I hope he never settles.

They edited it back and now it says complaint again, so I'm guessing there was a complaint.

Ooh. Any screenshots?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone found out whether Jenny Slate actually formally lodged a complaint to Sony or simply complained about an inappropriate comment and word got back to Sony? Because the THR article has changed the wording. It's interesting if the initial claim is to be believed, how was she able to go to Sony with a complaint about a comment as innocuous as the sanctity of motherhood and Blake was allegedly not in regards to sexual harassment and told to report to wayfarer? Wouldn't they not have told Jenny to report back to Wayfarer as well? None of this adds up.

Because it’s all bullshit. This is an all hands on deck multi-million dollar crisis PR mud slinging campaign hoping to muscle Justin into a hush settlement before discovery and depositions.

I hope it doesn't settle before depositions and I hope the depos are made public. At least the transcripts. Because I want dirt!

But I don't share your viewpoint about Baldoni's side being in the right. I think Baldoni's deposition is going to be a MESS. I also assume Lively's will be as well. I think they are both super messy. But... I love mess.

Taylor, Ari, Blake and Ryan have exponentially more to lose than Justin. And Justin is on far firmer footing.

Taylor has nothing to do with any of this. She was used so BL and RR could namedrop her. She isn't involved in this idiocy.
DP

Didn't one of the actresses say in an interview that Taylor helped her get a role and also helped I. Other casting decisions? Seems like involvement.....

https://www.eonline.com/news/1413732/how-taylor-swift-was-allegedly-involved-in-casting-it-ends-with-us

Is that relevant to any of the causes of action in any of the lawsuits though? I don't think it is.

It’s relevant because Taylor’s camp has lied to the press about the meeting with Justin. She claimed she met him in passing one time when he was leaving Blake’s house and she was entering. However, Justin is on record saying he showed the casting tapes to Taylor and Blake (long before that supposed meeting) which IF’s statement corroborates. The implication is TS had more involvement than she’s admitting, which is why she will definitely be deposed.

Which legal claim is that relevant to?

Justin’s countersuit and the takeover motive in which he claims Blake used her dragons to bully him.

What legal claim is "the takeover motive" related to? Is he suing for "bullying" because that's not a legal claim.

I know this will come as a shock to some of you, but "she stole my movie" is not a legal claim, nor is "I felt really intimidated when her very famous friend told me the scene she wrote was really good." You might be mad about these things but they aren't legal claims.

His strongest claim is defamation, and it's actually not that strong unless he can prove that she falsified into in her suit or the NYT article. He's also suing for extortion but it's a huge stretch and doesn't make sense, plus what are the damages? It actually is still Wayfarer's movie even if Sony decided to release Blake's cut, and they made a ton of movie off of it.

I think the extortion claims are going to be dismissed, and he'll only proceed with the defamation claims, and that will mean all the "evidence" about Taylor, the conflict over editing and scoring, everything related to her "stealing" the movie will be deemed irrelevant.

This case is about whether SH occurred, whether Baldoni et al retaliated, and whether Blake or her team defamed Baldoni. That's it.

The rest of this stuff is extraneous BS that Baldoni's lawyer threw in to try and embarrass or intimidate Lively. It's a classic "oh you want to sue? Ok, well let's spill aaaaaaallllll the tea then." But it didn't work so the case is going to go to motions to dismiss, at a minimum, and probably at least start discovery. We'll see after that.

The motive and defamation are connected

Articulate how.

The embellished SH accusations and the threat to make them public—which she ultimately followed through with in the lead up to the premiere as her team started spreading breadcrumbs—were defamation and the goal was to steal the movie/sequel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone found out whether Jenny Slate actually formally lodged a complaint to Sony or simply complained about an inappropriate comment and word got back to Sony? Because the THR article has changed the wording. It's interesting if the initial claim is to be believed, how was she able to go to Sony with a complaint about a comment as innocuous as the sanctity of motherhood and Blake was allegedly not in regards to sexual harassment and told to report to wayfarer? Wouldn't they not have told Jenny to report back to Wayfarer as well? None of this adds up.

Because it’s all bullshit. This is an all hands on deck multi-million dollar crisis PR mud slinging campaign hoping to muscle Justin into a hush settlement before discovery and depositions.

I hope it doesn't settle before depositions and I hope the depos are made public. At least the transcripts. Because I want dirt!

But I don't share your viewpoint about Baldoni's side being in the right. I think Baldoni's deposition is going to be a MESS. I also assume Lively's will be as well. I think they are both super messy. But... I love mess.

Taylor, Ari, Blake and Ryan have exponentially more to lose than Justin. And Justin is on far firmer footing.

Taylor has nothing to do with any of this. She was used so BL and RR could namedrop her. She isn't involved in this idiocy.
DP

Didn't one of the actresses say in an interview that Taylor helped her get a role and also helped I. Other casting decisions? Seems like involvement.....

https://www.eonline.com/news/1413732/how-taylor-swift-was-allegedly-involved-in-casting-it-ends-with-us

Is that relevant to any of the causes of action in any of the lawsuits though? I don't think it is.

It’s relevant because Taylor’s camp has lied to the press about the meeting with Justin. She claimed she met him in passing one time when he was leaving Blake’s house and she was entering. However, Justin is on record saying he showed the casting tapes to Taylor and Blake (long before that supposed meeting) which IF’s statement corroborates. The implication is TS had more involvement than she’s admitting, which is why she will definitely be deposed.

Which legal claim is that relevant to?

Justin’s countersuit and the takeover motive in which he claims Blake used her dragons to bully him.

What legal claim is "the takeover motive" related to? Is he suing for "bullying" because that's not a legal claim.

I know this will come as a shock to some of you, but "she stole my movie" is not a legal claim, nor is "I felt really intimidated when her very famous friend told me the scene she wrote was really good." You might be mad about these things but they aren't legal claims.

His strongest claim is defamation, and it's actually not that strong unless he can prove that she falsified into in her suit or the NYT article. He's also suing for extortion but it's a huge stretch and doesn't make sense, plus what are the damages? It actually is still Wayfarer's movie even if Sony decided to release Blake's cut, and they made a ton of movie off of it.

I think the extortion claims are going to be dismissed, and he'll only proceed with the defamation claims, and that will mean all the "evidence" about Taylor, the conflict over editing and scoring, everything related to her "stealing" the movie will be deemed irrelevant.

This case is about whether SH occurred, whether Baldoni et al retaliated, and whether Blake or her team defamed Baldoni. That's it.

The rest of this stuff is extraneous BS that Baldoni's lawyer threw in to try and embarrass or intimidate Lively. It's a classic "oh you want to sue? Ok, well let's spill aaaaaaallllll the tea then." But it didn't work so the case is going to go to motions to dismiss, at a minimum, and probably at least start discovery. We'll see after that.

The motive and defamation are connected

Articulate how.

The embellished SH accusations and the threat to make them public—which she ultimately followed through with in the lead up to the premiere as her team started spreading breadcrumbs—were defamation and the goal was to steal the movie/sequel.

That would be reason to depose Blake, not Taylor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I assume there are HR complaints at all businesses. And I assume what you as a business are supposed to do is appropriately address the complaint.

It sounds like these complaints were all rather minor and were all addressed appropriately. (Don’t come at me, birth scene lady! I know how you feel!) So I’m not sure why we need to dwell on them to the degree that we are.

I understand that it’s much more complicated than this because of the retaliation claim, but at the same time, I don’t necessarily think it warrants such strangulation of every complaint.

She felt uncomfortable for . . . reasons. They addressed it, as any business should. It’s what happened next where everything gets murky for me. Did she then use the complaint as extortion—or did he retaliate to delegitimize her claim? Both? Neither?

My point is that I don’t really care what Jenny Slate did or didn’t complain about. That was between Slate and Wayfarer to deal with as appropriate. I sort of wish maybe we could just agree here that Blake made a SH claim (even if you think she was being oversensitive) and move on. Seems like there’s still plenty of other stuff to argue about.

Article was stealth edited. There was no HR complaint. It is hearsay and gossip. Nothing more. Mud thrown at the wall by you know who. BL & RR pulling every lever and string they can. I hope he never settles.

They edited it back and now it says complaint again, so I'm guessing there was a complaint.

Ooh. Any screenshots?

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/justin-baldoni-bahai-blake-lively-legal-feud-1236142565/

"THR has learned more about the nature of the complaint that It Ends With Us actress Jenny Slate lodged, which is referenced in court documents but with Slate’s name redacted" it says it back again