Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha ha, Blake bots going back to accusing others of the same thing they've been accused of doing!

Looks pretty stupid, doesn't it? Maybe you should stop.

That's not what looks stupid. Nice try pretending you didn't get the point of what was said.

The point is ridiculous. Did that moron go after the dissertation writer for being a "bot"? What other person other than a paid shill would write that much nonsense about this case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will wait and see. There were many cases where the Baldoni side was very sure in their speculation which turned out to be incorrect. Ferrer's silence along with that text message were taken as strong support for Baldoni, until she filed that motion essentially saying he was threatening and coercing her over the attorney's fee. Then the narrative shifted to Ferrer being a snake.

Baldoni fans were speculating that Taylor Swift announced her engagement on Blake's birthday as a diss or something like that, and that songs "Cancelled" and "Ruin the Friendship" were anti-Blake and that Swift has passed info to Freedman to help Baldoni. Only Swift did not agree to be deposed by Baldoni at all, and wouldn't unless forced, and most observers think "Cancelled" is pro-Blake. Which is admittedly weird, as Swift has not made any public overtures.

And I'm not even saying they ARE still friends, just that I'm open to various possibilities as we only know the tip of the iceberg in what is going on.

Just look at those depo pages that got unredacted... we only got a couple of pages of 3 depos out of dozens that have taken place, not to mention all the rest of discovery. We really know very little so far. It is not good to be making proclamations about how things are so that when it turns out it isn't that way, you have to add another person to the long list of conspirators with Blake.

Those aren't the examples I'd use (I don't think Ferrer or Taylor are particularly central to this case) but I agree with the idea that we don't know very much.

I think it's weird that people reject the notion anyone can be neutral on this case. I genuinely am. I found Blake's original complaint compelling, and then I found Baldoni's complaint compelling in a way that made me question Blake's allegations, and then I have found the discussion and dismissal of Baldon's complaint interesting in a way that has made me question Baldoni's defense against Blake's allegations. Thus I truly am neutral at this point and curious for more to come out and wonder if we'll ever really know what happened. I especially want to hear from other people who were present -- cast and crew members, people from Sony, etc. Would love to see more footage from the set.

I find myself very skeptical of people on either side who are 100% convinced that either Baldoni or Blake is totally in the right. I think there's no way that's the case either way -- they are probably both culpable for the conflict between them, and it's just a question of whether it's 50-50 or like 80-20, and if 80-20, which is which. And I really couldn't tell you. I wasn't there and I've seen evidence to support both sides.

Anyone who comes along and tries to tell me they know exactly what is going on in this case, I immediately distrust. Of course you don't know! You weren't there, and you don't personally know any of these people. You are just picking a team and rooting for them. That's not compelling to me.

Baldoni taking capability for a workplace dispute or a difficult workplace relationship? Totally fair. Seems what people have a problem with is that Blake ran to the NYT me too reporter and screamed sexual harassment while her very powerful husband has been walking around calling Baldoni a sexual predator.

And then, when Baldoni came out with some receipts and his side of the story, people are rightfully saying Blake, you need to take some accountability. It certainly seems like a lot of things in that article were out of context.

It seemed like Blakes people thought she was untouchable and would never have to take accountability for this. Now people are expecting some accountability and Blake supporters are saying oh we don’t believe women.

If Blake has treated this like a sexual harassment lawsuit and had the courts deal with it, I would be a lot more sympathetic to her. She chose to make this a PR battle and now she’s losing badly, so yeah I don’t have a lot of sympathy for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha ha, Blake bots going back to accusing others of the same thing they've been accused of doing!

Looks pretty stupid, doesn't it? Maybe you should stop.

That's not what looks stupid. Nice try pretending you didn't get the point of what was said.

The point is ridiculous. Did that moron go after the dissertation writer for being a "bot"? What other person other than a paid shill would write that much nonsense about this case?

It was a dumb post. Probably not a bot. In general on this thread, people could stand to edit. Like that post could have just said:

Blake supporters don't understand that her case is less compelling to people because no one has come out to say "me too" about Baldoni. So it's just less persuasive than other "me too" moments where the guy turned out to be gross to lots of women in the industry. The truths that people tend not to believe women when they stand alone, and that's a lot of what is happening to Blake here, despite her high profile and industry power before this all came out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will wait and see. There were many cases where the Baldoni side was very sure in their speculation which turned out to be incorrect. Ferrer's silence along with that text message were taken as strong support for Baldoni, until she filed that motion essentially saying he was threatening and coercing her over the attorney's fee. Then the narrative shifted to Ferrer being a snake.

Baldoni fans were speculating that Taylor Swift announced her engagement on Blake's birthday as a diss or something like that, and that songs "Cancelled" and "Ruin the Friendship" were anti-Blake and that Swift has passed info to Freedman to help Baldoni. Only Swift did not agree to be deposed by Baldoni at all, and wouldn't unless forced, and most observers think "Cancelled" is pro-Blake. Which is admittedly weird, as Swift has not made any public overtures.

And I'm not even saying they ARE still friends, just that I'm open to various possibilities as we only know the tip of the iceberg in what is going on.

Just look at those depo pages that got unredacted... we only got a couple of pages of 3 depos out of dozens that have taken place, not to mention all the rest of discovery. We really know very little so far. It is not good to be making proclamations about how things are so that when it turns out it isn't that way, you have to add another person to the long list of conspirators with Blake.

Those aren't the examples I'd use (I don't think Ferrer or Taylor are particularly central to this case) but I agree with the idea that we don't know very much.

I think it's weird that people reject the notion anyone can be neutral on this case. I genuinely am. I found Blake's original complaint compelling, and then I found Baldoni's complaint compelling in a way that made me question Blake's allegations, and then I have found the discussion and dismissal of Baldon's complaint interesting in a way that has made me question Baldoni's defense against Blake's allegations. Thus I truly am neutral at this point and curious for more to come out and wonder if we'll ever really know what happened. I especially want to hear from other people who were present -- cast and crew members, people from Sony, etc. Would love to see more footage from the set.

I find myself very skeptical of people on either side who are 100% convinced that either Baldoni or Blake is totally in the right. I think there's no way that's the case either way -- they are probably both culpable for the conflict between them, and it's just a question of whether it's 50-50 or like 80-20, and if 80-20, which is which. And I really couldn't tell you. I wasn't there and I've seen evidence to support both sides.

Anyone who comes along and tries to tell me they know exactly what is going on in this case, I immediately distrust. Of course you don't know! You weren't there, and you don't personally know any of these people. You are just picking a team and rooting for them. That's not compelling to me.

Baldoni taking capability for a workplace dispute or a difficult workplace relationship? Totally fair. Seems what people have a problem with is that Blake ran to the NYT me too reporter and screamed sexual harassment while her very powerful husband has been walking around calling Baldoni a sexual predator.

And then, when Baldoni came out with some receipts and his side of the story, people are rightfully saying Blake, you need to take some accountability. It certainly seems like a lot of things in that article were out of context.

It seemed like Blakes people thought she was untouchable and would never have to take accountability for this. Now people are expecting some accountability and Blake supporters are saying oh we don’t believe women.

If Blake has treated this like a sexual harassment lawsuit and had the courts deal with it, I would be a lot more sympathetic to her. She chose to make this a PR battle and now she’s losing badly, so yeah I don’t have a lot of sympathy for that.

I disagree that Blake is the one who made it a PR battle. I think it was a PR battle by its nature, and that Blake played that game, as did Baldoni.

As a lawyer, Blake's legal team has played the case much more straight as an employment/sexual harassment case. I'm sure her PR team does other stuff, but her legal decisions don't appear to be PR driven for the most part. On that front, it's definitely been mostly Baldoni's side making it a PR circus, I think ultimately to their detriment because if they'd treated it more like a straight up employment dispute, I think they'd be in a better position now both legally and on the PR front. They flew too close to the sun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha ha, Blake bots going back to accusing others of the same thing they've been accused of doing!

Looks pretty stupid, doesn't it? Maybe you should stop.

That's not what looks stupid. Nice try pretending you didn't get the point of what was said.

The point is ridiculous. Did that moron go after the dissertation writer for being a "bot"? What other person other than a paid shill would write that much nonsense about this case?

It was a dumb post. Probably not a bot. In general on this thread, people could stand to edit. Like that post could have just said:

Blake supporters don't understand that her case is less compelling to people because no one has come out to say "me too" about Baldoni. So it's just less persuasive than other "me too" moments where the guy turned out to be gross to lots of women in the industry. The truths that people tend not to believe women when they stand alone, and that's a lot of what is happening to Blake here, despite her high profile and industry power before this all came out.

I think "Baldoni supporters" are the ones who fundamentally don't understand this case. Or law in general. The Judge is biased, right? Isn't that the foolish mantra of the uninformed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will wait and see. There were many cases where the Baldoni side was very sure in their speculation which turned out to be incorrect. Ferrer's silence along with that text message were taken as strong support for Baldoni, until she filed that motion essentially saying he was threatening and coercing her over the attorney's fee. Then the narrative shifted to Ferrer being a snake.

Baldoni fans were speculating that Taylor Swift announced her engagement on Blake's birthday as a diss or something like that, and that songs "Cancelled" and "Ruin the Friendship" were anti-Blake and that Swift has passed info to Freedman to help Baldoni. Only Swift did not agree to be deposed by Baldoni at all, and wouldn't unless forced, and most observers think "Cancelled" is pro-Blake. Which is admittedly weird, as Swift has not made any public overtures.

And I'm not even saying they ARE still friends, just that I'm open to various possibilities as we only know the tip of the iceberg in what is going on.

Just look at those depo pages that got unredacted... we only got a couple of pages of 3 depos out of dozens that have taken place, not to mention all the rest of discovery. We really know very little so far. It is not good to be making proclamations about how things are so that when it turns out it isn't that way, you have to add another person to the long list of conspirators with Blake.

Those aren't the examples I'd use (I don't think Ferrer or Taylor are particularly central to this case) but I agree with the idea that we don't know very much.

I think it's weird that people reject the notion anyone can be neutral on this case. I genuinely am. I found Blake's original complaint compelling, and then I found Baldoni's complaint compelling in a way that made me question Blake's allegations, and then I have found the discussion and dismissal of Baldon's complaint interesting in a way that has made me question Baldoni's defense against Blake's allegations. Thus I truly am neutral at this point and curious for more to come out and wonder if we'll ever really know what happened. I especially want to hear from other people who were present -- cast and crew members, people from Sony, etc. Would love to see more footage from the set.

I find myself very skeptical of people on either side who are 100% convinced that either Baldoni or Blake is totally in the right. I think there's no way that's the case either way -- they are probably both culpable for the conflict between them, and it's just a question of whether it's 50-50 or like 80-20, and if 80-20, which is which. And I really couldn't tell you. I wasn't there and I've seen evidence to support both sides.

Anyone who comes along and tries to tell me they know exactly what is going on in this case, I immediately distrust. Of course you don't know! You weren't there, and you don't personally know any of these people. You are just picking a team and rooting for them. That's not compelling to me.

Like many of us, I’m a lawyer. I disagree that we don’t know what the parties have, the support for the discovery motions and the second amended complaint tell us a lot about what Blake has. Example one, the content creator affidavits, she dropped each one that was challenged, which she would not have done if she had evidence to support collusion between the content creator and WF. Example two, the second amended complaint, even after a good amount of discovery exchanged, she has discovered nothing to connect Wallace to the case to establish jurisdiction over him. Example three, the motions to get wide ranging discovery from Freedman and his law firm, Blake presented no evidence showing a connection between Freedman and anything other than the public website made to present Justin’s timeline after the complaint was filed. A year in, and no other women, from this cast or others, has accused Baldoni or Heath of sexual harassment.

[Anonymous]

FYI NotActuallyGolden (NAG) is doing a TikTok live today at 1pm with two other lawyers who post on TT, LittleGirlAttorney (LGA) and BB

LGA is a lawyer who works in CA and has experience with employment law, SH claims, etc. She’s also clerked in CA courts.

BB is a former federal court clerk and brings a lot of insight into federal court workings and how judges operate.

And all three don’t think Blake has a strong case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FYI NotActuallyGolden (NAG) is doing a TikTok live today at 1pm with two other lawyers who post on TT, LittleGirlAttorney (LGA) and BB

LGA is a lawyer who works in CA and has experience with employment law, SH claims, etc. She’s also clerked in CA courts.

BB is a former federal court clerk and brings a lot of insight into federal court workings and how judges operate.

And all three don’t think Blake has a strong case

I have tried watching videos from NAG and LGA but I cannot get past the way they talk and interact with the camera. NAG is always fussing with her clothes and hair and is obviously just looking at herself, and I really dislike the tone she takes. I can't explain it exactly. It's like everything she says is said with the tone of "yeah, so that's just how it is, right?" LGA has this very weird monotone and similarly delivers everything in the same tone and it grates. She will also interrupt her videos randomly to talk about something else or zoom in on her dog.

I cannot take these people seriously, I'm sorry.

[Anonymous]

NAG is saying that BL and Ayoub must have a friendly relationship because Ayoub appears to have just given Lively the recording of Sarowitz -- it was not subpoenaed.

I don't know if I agree, just because the Sarowitz quote is so outrageous. If someone said that to me about someone else, and I had it on tape, I could see myself reaching out and just saying "look I don't know you but I felt you should hear this" and giving them the recording. Just because it's such an over the top, offensive thing to say (I'd be really bothered by the Israel/Hamas language, especially since like Ayoub I am pro-Palestine). So I'd share it just to stick it to Sarowitz. The enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NAG is saying that BL and Ayoub must have a friendly relationship because Ayoub appears to have just given Lively the recording of Sarowitz -- it was not subpoenaed.

I don't know if I agree, just because the Sarowitz quote is so outrageous. If someone said that to me about someone else, and I had it on tape, I could see myself reaching out and just saying "look I don't know you but I felt you should hear this" and giving them the recording. Just because it's such an over the top, offensive thing to say (I'd be really bothered by the Israel/Hamas language, especially since like Ayoub I am pro-Palestine). So I'd share it just to stick it to Sarowitz. The enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that.

Liz Plank is the link, that’s why it’s friendly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NAG is saying that BL and Ayoub must have a friendly relationship because Ayoub appears to have just given Lively the recording of Sarowitz -- it was not subpoenaed.

I don't know if I agree, just because the Sarowitz quote is so outrageous. If someone said that to me about someone else, and I had it on tape, I could see myself reaching out and just saying "look I don't know you but I felt you should hear this" and giving them the recording. Just because it's such an over the top, offensive thing to say (I'd be really bothered by the Israel/Hamas language, especially since like Ayoub I am pro-Palestine). So I'd share it just to stick it to Sarowitz. The enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that.

Liz Plank is the link, that’s why it’s friendly

Cite?

[Anonymous]

Reddit’s found the friendly connections

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NAG is saying that BL and Ayoub must have a friendly relationship because Ayoub appears to have just given Lively the recording of Sarowitz -- it was not subpoenaed.

I don't know if I agree, just because the Sarowitz quote is so outrageous. If someone said that to me about someone else, and I had it on tape, I could see myself reaching out and just saying "look I don't know you but I felt you should hear this" and giving them the recording. Just because it's such an over the top, offensive thing to say (I'd be really bothered by the Israel/Hamas language, especially since like Ayoub I am pro-Palestine). So I'd share it just to stick it to Sarowitz. The enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that.

Liz Plank is the link, that’s why it’s friendly

Cite?

Just google, people screenshotted that Liz followed her on insta right after the declaration was unsealed. Liz has since unfollowed her which just drew more attention to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NAG is saying that BL and Ayoub must have a friendly relationship because Ayoub appears to have just given Lively the recording of Sarowitz -- it was not subpoenaed.

I don't know if I agree, just because the Sarowitz quote is so outrageous. If someone said that to me about someone else, and I had it on tape, I could see myself reaching out and just saying "look I don't know you but I felt you should hear this" and giving them the recording. Just because it's such an over the top, offensive thing to say (I'd be really bothered by the Israel/Hamas language, especially since like Ayoub I am pro-Palestine). So I'd share it just to stick it to Sarowitz. The enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that.

Liz Plank is the link, that’s why it’s friendly

Cite?

Just google, people screenshotted that Liz followed her on insta right after the declaration was unsealed. Liz has since unfollowed her which just drew more attention to it.

More accurate to say that Liz had been following at the time the declaration was unsealed, bad phrasing on my part.

[Anonymous]

The mommy sleuths also found a podcast Liz did and where Claire commented enthusiastically about Liz