Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Innocent until proven guilty, fwiw, is the standard of proof in certain criminal trials, where charges are brought by the state, which this is not. The Lively/Baldoni trial is a civil trial, where the standard is generally a preponderance of the evidence, so the plaintiff needs to show that their claims are more likely true than not, essentially requiring a greater than 50% chance that their facts are correct. That’s true for Lively and her claims as well as for Baldoni and his claims.

Nobody is trying to send Baldoni to jail here, this really isn’t an “innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt” kind of case. It’s a “more likely than not” civil trial where people are being sued for money, not their personal freedom.

The minute I hit send I knew someone was going to respond with a lecture about the difference between criminal and civil law. I actually started to write an addendum but then decided to watch my tv show instead. My point still stands: if she wants to win in court, it is on her to prove her case. We do not start with the presumption that he did what she said, and there is no asterisk that says *unless she’s a woman. That’s not how it works in either civil or criminal court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Innocent until proven guilty, fwiw, is the standard of proof in certain criminal trials, where charges are brought by the state, which this is not. The Lively/Baldoni trial is a civil trial, where the standard is generally a preponderance of the evidence, so the plaintiff needs to show that their claims are more likely true than not, essentially requiring a greater than 50% chance that their facts are correct. That’s true for Lively and her claims as well as for Baldoni and his claims.

Nobody is trying to send Baldoni to jail here, this really isn’t an “innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt” kind of case. It’s a “more likely than not” civil trial where people are being sued for money, not their personal freedom.

The burden of proof is so irrelevant to the conversation and almost seems like you’re trying to miss the point. Whether preponderance of the evidence or reasonable doubt, the point that women should just be believed is insane. And no, BL isn’t trying to send JB to jail, just ruin him financially because that’s so much better.

You guys are the ones that both said “innocent until proven guilty” should apply here though it does not, so look inwards.

I really did mean it colloquially; I’m so very sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Innocent until proven guilty, fwiw, is the standard of proof in certain criminal trials, where charges are brought by the state, which this is not. The Lively/Baldoni trial is a civil trial, where the standard is generally a preponderance of the evidence, so the plaintiff needs to show that their claims are more likely true than not, essentially requiring a greater than 50% chance that their facts are correct. That’s true for Lively and her claims as well as for Baldoni and his claims.

Nobody is trying to send Baldoni to jail here, this really isn’t an “innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt” kind of case. It’s a “more likely than not” civil trial where people are being sued for money, not their personal freedom.

I get what you're saying but it's a celebrity case. I also get the people saying she shouldn't automatically be believed because she made a complaint. My point of view has shifted throughout. I don't know either Lively or Baldoni other than a few episodes of Gossip Girl and Jane the Virgin. Her initial complaint sounded plausible enough to me as something that could happen on a Hollywood set and the underlying texts regarding the smear campaign are strong. I guess I was viewing it "in the light most favorable to the plaintiff," but then as Baldoni filed his own complaint and proof, I started to see his side. The video proof in particular was very compelling. Some of the other things he says also sound very plausible but are as yet also just unproven allegations (that the set was closed the day of the birth scene, that Sarowitz wasn't there for that scene, all the things Blake did to steal the movie). Right now I lean Baldoni on the sexual harassment, but that could change. I wasn't impressed with Blake's amended complaint. While I understand why some people are fully pro-Baldoni at this point, I am open to the fact that she might produce additional evidence in discovery such as depositions from others on set who back her claims, forensic evidence on the social media stuff, other written complaints from actresses on set, etc. Just as Justin may have even more additional proof to provide as well. We're only just starting the process. I don't think we can expect people commenting on social media to hold their opinions until the conclusion of the trial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some people here won’t be interested in this podcast for sure, but I found this recent Taylor Lorentz/Ophie Dokie discussion of the “Misogyny Slop Ecosystem” across various social media to be pretty interesting.

It discusses how some of these podcasts are basically the female equivalent of dudebro podcasters that are slowly moving people over to more conservative values, by feeding into a popular thirst for taking down uppity women like Amber Heard, Blake Lively, and Meghan Markle etc, which ultimately feeds directly into the Candace Owens/Megyn Kelly conservative pipeline.

People who deny this are crazy. You can criticize these women without being unhinged by throwing misogyny in it. I saw that tweet from that creator that said blake was narcissist because she took her jacket off on the red carpet. Do they not hear themselves?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw she did a promo event with Anna Kendrick. Surprised Blake's haters didn't flood this thread with the usual negative comments about her looks. I thought she looked nice.

I guess ‘okay’ for the pink dress. That look on the pic with the cast—the long orange coat with embellishments—haven’t found the words for that one yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw she did a promo event with Anna Kendrick. Surprised Blake's haters didn't flood this thread with the usual negative comments about her looks. I thought she looked nice.

I guess ‘okay’ for the pink dress. That look on the pic with the cast—the long orange coat with embellishments—haven’t found the words for that one yet.

It was ill-fitting latex with the corset sticking out at the bottom because the fit wasn’t right. Blake always looks cheap and overdone so yes it was very her.

You fans can keep reporting but a lot of people don’t like her style and don’t think she’s gorgeous because they have eyes. Deal.

[Anonymous]

Tik tokers figure out Blake’s interactions with “fans” at South by Southwest staged. https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP82rCkTG/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tik tokers figure out Blake’s interactions with “fans” at South by Southwest staged. https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP82rCkTG/

Because she took a picture with the film director's wife? That clip is meaningless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tik tokers figure out Blake’s interactions with “fans” at South by Southwest staged. https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP82rCkTG/

Because she took a picture with the film director's wife? That clip is meaningless.

Because the director’s wife was posing as a fan.

[Anonymous]

I believe Ryan is gay and Blake was hired to be his beard and you will never convince me otherwise. Once you accept that premise, everything about her career since being married to him makes sense. As does her getting him into the mud on this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tik tokers figure out Blake’s interactions with “fans” at South by Southwest staged. https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP82rCkTG/

lol. She is so low and desperate. They on legit on tilt because the masses organically find them totally detestable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tik tokers figure out Blake’s interactions with “fans” at South by Southwest staged. https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP82rCkTG/

Oy vey, Ryan’s fake pap walk, the SNL skit, now this. Their team is just digging them a deeper hole while milking them for millions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tik tokers figure out Blake’s interactions with “fans” at South by Southwest staged. https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP82rCkTG/

Because she took a picture with the film director's wife? That clip is meaningless.

Because the director’s wife was posing as a fan.

What is the evidence she is posing as a fan?

[Anonymous]

Sleuths caught Blake biting Justin's lip during kissing scene. Was this "in the script", Blake?

https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/liar-blake-lively-caught-biting-justin-baldoni%E2%80%99s-lip-during-kiss.5857257/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some people here won’t be interested in this podcast for sure, but I found this recent Taylor Lorentz/Ophie Dokie discussion of the “Misogyny Slop Ecosystem” across various social media to be pretty interesting.

It discusses how some of these podcasts are basically the female equivalent of dudebro podcasters that are slowly moving people over to more conservative values, by feeding into a popular thirst for taking down uppity women like Amber Heard, Blake Lively, and Meghan Markle etc, which ultimately feeds directly into the Candace Owens/Megyn Kelly conservative pipeline.

Is there anyone dimmer and more insufferable than Ms. Lorentz? Obnoxious woke personalities like this are literally why Trump and the GOP won in November. Ms. Lorentz just sounds deeply bitter and jealous her audience is a tiny fraction of Mrs. Owens and Mrs. Kelly.