Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think Baldoni's "receipts" disprove Blake's allegations. In some cases, they actually confirm them. Others aren't addressed at all. The video they released shows a visibly uncomfortable Lively repeatedly asking for their characters to be talking and dancing while Baldoni insists more physical closeness than is scripted or than Lively is comfortable with. The voice memo he released is a rambling Baldoni who clearly knows he's crossed lines and been inappropriate, apologizing but also continuing to overshare and say weird things, sent at 2am. His timeline repeatedly confirms some of her allegations.

There are some details where they allege different facts, but he does NOT have receipts for them, or at least hasn't shared them. Yet repeatedly people take his word over her even though neither has released video footage or pictures or other evidence that would prove one or the other wrong.

It's really fascinating to me. It's fairly obvious that he was inappropriate on the set -- he admits it himself multiple times, his publicist (Jen Abel) confirms it in text messages to others, he cycles through a variety of excuses for his behavior (neurodivergence, being intimidated by Lively's fame, misunderstandings) but when discussing the details of the allegations, he rarely offers a clear "no I didn't do that." Instead it will be contextualization that muddies the waters.

There also are apparently allegations from Slate and potential one or more other actresses on set. This might just be Robyn Lively, Blake's sister, but might include Isabella Ferrer. We don't know for sure and it might be a bit before we find out. But that's 3-4 different women on the set with complaints about Baldoni's or Heath's behavior. If 3-4 women in your workplace had told you that a man you work with was inappropriate and made them uncomfortable, would you assume he was 100% innocent and being wrongly accused? Or would you think "huh, even if these individual incidents don't each sound that bad, together maybe this guy has an issue"? I would think the latter.

I don't know if all Lively's allegations together will add up to whatever the legal definition of sexual harassment is. I think the alleged retaliation is more clearcut and looks bad. She could still lose though, I don't. I think it's always a risk bringing a case like this unless the allegations are REALLY bad. Whereas this sounds more run of the mill and a jury might decide there's no liability. I think that's possible. I really don't feel I have all the facts.

But based on what we do know, I don't understand the people caping for Baldoni like he's some wronged victim. He clearly mismanaged this set, did some weird and inappropriate things, and made several women uncomfortable. He might not be a sexual harasser but he is, at a minimum, not a great director and maybe shouldn't be in charge of big sets like this. Some people do not have the people skills for a job like that. He might be one of them. And I do think he put himself in this situation by promoting himself as an advocate for women and someone who listens to women, and deciding to direct a movie with domestic violence and women's empowerment themes. Even if he's not a sexual harasser, he strikes me as tone deaf, arrogant, and a bad boss. It's not like the allegations against him have been totally made up. This stuff happened, they just exist in this gray area where it's not clear if it constitutes harassment or not. A jury will have to figure that out.

Baldoni is not an innocent victim, it is so wild to me that some people see it that way. Were it not for his own bad and weird choices, he would not be in this situation regardless of Blake's actions.

No other victims have come forward. That’s all speculation. Sources close to Isabella said Blake wanted to drag her into this to back up her allegations, but she couldn’t do that because she didn’t see it with her own eyes. Those sources say she feels shafted by Blake and removing her pictures was no accident. Jenny Slate hasn’t come forward, and if the rumors are true, her alleged complaint does not equal SH. If you go to someone playing the mother card and asking for a better apartment for your toddler, you cannot then cry sexual harassment when they give you the money for the new apartment while emphasizing the importance of motherhood. These allegations are absolutely outrageous.

IMO, Blake’s camp leaked the fake complaints to make it more comfortable for her to attend the SNL special. YMMV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think Baldoni's "receipts" disprove Blake's allegations. In some cases, they actually confirm them. Others aren't addressed at all. The video they released shows a visibly uncomfortable Lively repeatedly asking for their characters to be talking and dancing while Baldoni insists more physical closeness than is scripted or than Lively is comfortable with. The voice memo he released is a rambling Baldoni who clearly knows he's crossed lines and been inappropriate, apologizing but also continuing to overshare and say weird things, sent at 2am. His timeline repeatedly confirms some of her allegations.

There are some details where they allege different facts, but he does NOT have receipts for them, or at least hasn't shared them. Yet repeatedly people take his word over her even though neither has released video footage or pictures or other evidence that would prove one or the other wrong.

It's really fascinating to me. It's fairly obvious that he was inappropriate on the set -- he admits it himself multiple times, his publicist (Jen Abel) confirms it in text messages to others, he cycles through a variety of excuses for his behavior (neurodivergence, being intimidated by Lively's fame, misunderstandings) but when discussing the details of the allegations, he rarely offers a clear "no I didn't do that." Instead it will be contextualization that muddies the waters.

There also are apparently allegations from Slate and potential one or more other actresses on set. This might just be Robyn Lively, Blake's sister, but might include Isabella Ferrer. We don't know for sure and it might be a bit before we find out. But that's 3-4 different women on the set with complaints about Baldoni's or Heath's behavior. If 3-4 women in your workplace had told you that a man you work with was inappropriate and made them uncomfortable, would you assume he was 100% innocent and being wrongly accused? Or would you think "huh, even if these individual incidents don't each sound that bad, together maybe this guy has an issue"? I would think the latter.

I don't know if all Lively's allegations together will add up to whatever the legal definition of sexual harassment is. I think the alleged retaliation is more clearcut and looks bad. She could still lose though, I don't. I think it's always a risk bringing a case like this unless the allegations are REALLY bad. Whereas this sounds more run of the mill and a jury might decide there's no liability. I think that's possible. I really don't feel I have all the facts.

But based on what we do know, I don't understand the people caping for Baldoni like he's some wronged victim. He clearly mismanaged this set, did some weird and inappropriate things, and made several women uncomfortable. He might not be a sexual harasser but he is, at a minimum, not a great director and maybe shouldn't be in charge of big sets like this. Some people do not have the people skills for a job like that. He might be one of them. And I do think he put himself in this situation by promoting himself as an advocate for women and someone who listens to women, and deciding to direct a movie with domestic violence and women's empowerment themes. Even if he's not a sexual harasser, he strikes me as tone deaf, arrogant, and a bad boss. It's not like the allegations against him have been totally made up. This stuff happened, they just exist in this gray area where it's not clear if it constitutes harassment or not. A jury will have to figure that out.

Baldoni is not an innocent victim, it is so wild to me that some people see it that way. Were it not for his own bad and weird choices, he would not be in this situation regardless of Blake's actions.

No other victims have come forward. That’s all speculation. Sources close to Isabella said Blake wanted to drag her into this to back up her allegations, but she couldn’t do that because she didn’t see it with her own eyes. Those sources say she feels shafted by Blake and removing her pictures was no accident. Jenny Slate hasn’t come forward, and if the rumors are true, her alleged complaint does not equal SH. If you go to someone playing the mother card and asking for a better apartment for your toddler, you cannot then cry sexual harassment when they give you the money for the new apartment while emphasizing the importance of motherhood. These allegations are absolutely outrageous.

IMO, Blake’s camp leaked the fake complaints to make it more comfortable for her to attend the SNL special. YMMV.

Come. On. Her amended complaint lists negative comments and/or complaint about Baldoni by other women and apecidically at least one other female cast member. Her lawyer attested to that and noted they had permission from these people to include these statements and that they were prepared to testify to same. The idea these are made up complaints is nonsense.

[Anonymous]

It’s like Trump reality bought through the media at this point. People are believing what influencers say on tiktok and it is not really real. Every time someone starts telling their fantasies about Taylor Swift, or Lively as some monster, they lose me (but that’s fine, I’m not part of the intended circle jerk audience ha).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I found out Heath was black, it all made sense to me. I knew the doctor tied to the delivery allegations would be a man of color. When I saw a clip of the scene, I was correct. Blake went pure ghetto profiling.

And when receipts were produced by Baldoni, more people realized that she had lied. She did not expect for receipts to be on hand.

I am a pro Baldoni poster who was not aware of this. That’s really shameful. I also saw a TikTok recently where the doctor actor confirmed that Blake was wearing short in the birth scene.

Uh, the guy who played the doctor in the birth scene is white. He's also close friends with Baldoni and Heath and they all belong to the same church.

Is this going to be like when a bunch of people claimed Baldoni is a person of color because he is Italian? Cause that was a weird chapter and I'd prefer not to repeat it. Having dark hair or tan skin does not make you black. Y'all need to stop with this Rachel Dolezal nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think Baldoni's "receipts" disprove Blake's allegations. In some cases, they actually confirm them. Others aren't addressed at all. The video they released shows a visibly uncomfortable Lively repeatedly asking for their characters to be talking and dancing while Baldoni insists more physical closeness than is scripted or than Lively is comfortable with. The voice memo he released is a rambling Baldoni who clearly knows he's crossed lines and been inappropriate, apologizing but also continuing to overshare and say weird things, sent at 2am. His timeline repeatedly confirms some of her allegations.

There are some details where they allege different facts, but he does NOT have receipts for them, or at least hasn't shared them. Yet repeatedly people take his word over her even though neither has released video footage or pictures or other evidence that would prove one or the other wrong.

It's really fascinating to me. It's fairly obvious that he was inappropriate on the set -- he admits it himself multiple times, his publicist (Jen Abel) confirms it in text messages to others, he cycles through a variety of excuses for his behavior (neurodivergence, being intimidated by Lively's fame, misunderstandings) but when discussing the details of the allegations, he rarely offers a clear "no I didn't do that." Instead it will be contextualization that muddies the waters.

There also are apparently allegations from Slate and potential one or more other actresses on set. This might just be Robyn Lively, Blake's sister, but might include Isabella Ferrer. We don't know for sure and it might be a bit before we find out. But that's 3-4 different women on the set with complaints about Baldoni's or Heath's behavior. If 3-4 women in your workplace had told you that a man you work with was inappropriate and made them uncomfortable, would you assume he was 100% innocent and being wrongly accused? Or would you think "huh, even if these individual incidents don't each sound that bad, together maybe this guy has an issue"? I would think the latter.

I don't know if all Lively's allegations together will add up to whatever the legal definition of sexual harassment is. I think the alleged retaliation is more clearcut and looks bad. She could still lose though, I don't. I think it's always a risk bringing a case like this unless the allegations are REALLY bad. Whereas this sounds more run of the mill and a jury might decide there's no liability. I think that's possible. I really don't feel I have all the facts.

But based on what we do know, I don't understand the people caping for Baldoni like he's some wronged victim. He clearly mismanaged this set, did some weird and inappropriate things, and made several women uncomfortable. He might not be a sexual harasser but he is, at a minimum, not a great director and maybe shouldn't be in charge of big sets like this. Some people do not have the people skills for a job like that. He might be one of them. And I do think he put himself in this situation by promoting himself as an advocate for women and someone who listens to women, and deciding to direct a movie with domestic violence and women's empowerment themes. Even if he's not a sexual harasser, he strikes me as tone deaf, arrogant, and a bad boss. It's not like the allegations against him have been totally made up. This stuff happened, they just exist in this gray area where it's not clear if it constitutes harassment or not. A jury will have to figure that out.

Baldoni is not an innocent victim, it is so wild to me that some people see it that way. Were it not for his own bad and weird choices, he would not be in this situation regardless of Blake's actions.

No other victims have come forward. That’s all speculation. Sources close to Isabella said Blake wanted to drag her into this to back up her allegations, but she couldn’t do that because she didn’t see it with her own eyes. Those sources say she feels shafted by Blake and removing her pictures was no accident. Jenny Slate hasn’t come forward, and if the rumors are true, her alleged complaint does not equal SH. If you go to someone playing the mother card and asking for a better apartment for your toddler, you cannot then cry sexual harassment when they give you the money for the new apartment while emphasizing the importance of motherhood. These allegations are absolutely outrageous.

IMO, Blake’s camp leaked the fake complaints to make it more comfortable for her to attend the SNL special. YMMV.

Come. On. Her amended complaint lists negative comments and/or complaint about Baldoni by other women and apecidically at least one other female cast member. Her lawyer attested to that and noted they had permission from these people to include these statements and that they were prepared to testify to same. The idea these are made up complaints is nonsense.

How quickly we forget the fake written personnel complaints that were circulating that weekend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back on discovery deadlines, I note that Baldoni will have 179 ROG responses due on Monday. Then, by Friday, he will need to file his proposed amended complaint that will fix all of the problems noted in the various MTDs -- that Freedman and team think are valid arguments that would otherwise kill their claims -- as well as blend anything in that they need from their weird fact appendix that also might otherwise be struck. That's quite a bit of work for them over the next seven days, those lawyers had better be ready for some grubhub and consider setting up cots in the office like Elon's Big Balls team. Hopefully, Freedman has already made a start on the amended complaint and wasn't actually relying on the whole "we are keeping our fingers crossed" requests in their MTD oppositions to file their amendment after the MTD rulings.

Honestly, it does make sense for the court to get the proposed amended complaint first because it actually should assist Judge Liman in ruling on the MTDs, and provide information re whether amendment would be futile. Right now in deciding these MTDs, the judge is really in the dark as to how Freedman might repair some of the issues with the complaint and the timeline exhibit. Judge Liman probably even tried to signal this earlier when granting the NYT's motion to stay discovery back on March 4, noting that Wayfarer could accelerate the filing of their amended complaint if they were worried about delay.

Baldoni has known at least since late February when NYT filed its MTD that they would need to file an amended complaint. (But really they must have known since late January when they filed their first amended complaint with its clearly non-compliant timeline appendix.) This is not some surprise. He should be on draft five already tbh.

I looked it up and Los Angeles public schools are on Spring Break this week, which has got to hurt for the lowly associates and support staff at Freedman’s LA firm who may not be able to afford private school (yet). Cooped up all week searching through docs looking for evidence to try to find anything to make some of these claims stick, only seven days to do it because your boss with the big mouth effed up, and meanwhile your kids are off on break.

I’ve had hairy deadlines, but that has got to hurt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think Baldoni's "receipts" disprove Blake's allegations. In some cases, they actually confirm them. Others aren't addressed at all. The video they released shows a visibly uncomfortable Lively repeatedly asking for their characters to be talking and dancing while Baldoni insists more physical closeness than is scripted or than Lively is comfortable with. The voice memo he released is a rambling Baldoni who clearly knows he's crossed lines and been inappropriate, apologizing but also continuing to overshare and say weird things, sent at 2am. His timeline repeatedly confirms some of her allegations.

There are some details where they allege different facts, but he does NOT have receipts for them, or at least hasn't shared them. Yet repeatedly people take his word over her even though neither has released video footage or pictures or other evidence that would prove one or the other wrong.

It's really fascinating to me. It's fairly obvious that he was inappropriate on the set -- he admits it himself multiple times, his publicist (Jen Abel) confirms it in text messages to others, he cycles through a variety of excuses for his behavior (neurodivergence, being intimidated by Lively's fame, misunderstandings) but when discussing the details of the allegations, he rarely offers a clear "no I didn't do that." Instead it will be contextualization that muddies the waters.

There also are apparently allegations from Slate and potential one or more other actresses on set. This might just be Robyn Lively, Blake's sister, but might include Isabella Ferrer. We don't know for sure and it might be a bit before we find out. But that's 3-4 different women on the set with complaints about Baldoni's or Heath's behavior. If 3-4 women in your workplace had told you that a man you work with was inappropriate and made them uncomfortable, would you assume he was 100% innocent and being wrongly accused? Or would you think "huh, even if these individual incidents don't each sound that bad, together maybe this guy has an issue"? I would think the latter.

I don't know if all Lively's allegations together will add up to whatever the legal definition of sexual harassment is. I think the alleged retaliation is more clearcut and looks bad. She could still lose though, I don't. I think it's always a risk bringing a case like this unless the allegations are REALLY bad. Whereas this sounds more run of the mill and a jury might decide there's no liability. I think that's possible. I really don't feel I have all the facts.

But based on what we do know, I don't understand the people caping for Baldoni like he's some wronged victim. He clearly mismanaged this set, did some weird and inappropriate things, and made several women uncomfortable. He might not be a sexual harasser but he is, at a minimum, not a great director and maybe shouldn't be in charge of big sets like this. Some people do not have the people skills for a job like that. He might be one of them. And I do think he put himself in this situation by promoting himself as an advocate for women and someone who listens to women, and deciding to direct a movie with domestic violence and women's empowerment themes. Even if he's not a sexual harasser, he strikes me as tone deaf, arrogant, and a bad boss. It's not like the allegations against him have been totally made up. This stuff happened, they just exist in this gray area where it's not clear if it constitutes harassment or not. A jury will have to figure that out.

Baldoni is not an innocent victim, it is so wild to me that some people see it that way. Were it not for his own bad and weird choices, he would not be in this situation regardless of Blake's actions.

I don’t understand why you (and maybe one other poster?) keep posting as if Baldoni supporters love him or think he did nothing wrong.

It’s pretty clear he let Blake walk all over him and was way too passive. He has a lot to learn as a director. But that doesn’t change that he clearly, and with receipts, did not SH her. And it doesn’t change the fact that he was clearly a victim of harassment, extortion, and bullying by Blake and her husband.

This is one of the most public celebrity couples in Hollywood, and other than SNL and a few selfies, they have laid low because they know what is going on and they know the public is very against them. They don’t have any public supporters, including Bestie Taylor, who is known to stand up for women who are going through a tough time.

She and the Jonas brother’s ex were not even that close and hadn’t been photographed together in years. But when she was having a tough time during the divorce announcement, Taylor purposely was seen in public with her. Taylor is Blake’s kids godmother, and nothing. And we are at eight months and counting.

They’ve lost. Sorry, but they’ve lost.

This just seems scattered. Who care's about Taylor Swift's relationship with a Jonas brother's ex? It's irrelevant. Also, I know this might shock some people, but I don't actually view Taylor Swift's opinion on this case as important. I don't really care about her friendship with Blake. This stuff is just idle gossip to me.

If you can look at this case and see that obviously Baldoni did some stuff that is not great, even if it falls short of sexual harassment, I simply don't understand the die hard posts in his favor, people saying that Blake is crazy not to settle (like, pay him money? for what exactly? she directly contests all of his allegations against her) or that "she's lost," I'm honestly confused.

Is Blake Lively a terrific person who deserves nothing but flowers and rainbows? No, not at all. She also did some weird stuff in this case and I think is not entirely innocent. But it also seems like Baldoni did some inappropriate things and that Blake's anger with him is genuine -- I truly do not think she is just making up stories to "steal" a movie, especially when the movie actually still belongs to Wayfarer and they made a metric ton of money off of it, so that theory makes no sense whatsoever.

So we have two imperfect people, a really intriguing set of facts that might come down to perceptions of behavior and what third parties say and a lot of context, most of which I honestly do not think we have yet. That's interesting! But I simply don't get the Team JB or Team BL approach, and I definitely don't get why people are talking about this random gossip about people who are, at best, barely involved in this case. Like Swift or Hugh Jackman. The whole Harvey Weinstein commentary this last week was also dumb -- who cares what that old sh*tstain thinks about literally anything?

If you don’t understand why Taylor Swift’s actions in this are relevant, then you really don’t understand anything about publicity or public relations. I feel like you were being deliberately obtuse because I don’t believe anyone can be as clueless.

If Blake’s popularity goes up when she’s seen at the Super Bowl suite with Taylor, you can bet it’s going to go down when Taylor refuses to be seen with her when she’s going through what her own public relations people have described as the worst time in her life. For her to abandon her in this moment, when she has a history of lifting women up when they are going through the hardest times, is telling.

If it doesn’t matter to you, fine. It matters to Blake and Ryan, or they wouldn’t be planting stories like they are horses with their kids in Rhode Island near Taylor’s home, only to have Internet sleuths find out that Taylor’s home in Rhode Island is being renovated, and no one has stayed on the premises for several months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think Baldoni's "receipts" disprove Blake's allegations. In some cases, they actually confirm them. Others aren't addressed at all. The video they released shows a visibly uncomfortable Lively repeatedly asking for their characters to be talking and dancing while Baldoni insists more physical closeness than is scripted or than Lively is comfortable with. The voice memo he released is a rambling Baldoni who clearly knows he's crossed lines and been inappropriate, apologizing but also continuing to overshare and say weird things, sent at 2am. His timeline repeatedly confirms some of her allegations.

There are some details where they allege different facts, but he does NOT have receipts for them, or at least hasn't shared them. Yet repeatedly people take his word over her even though neither has released video footage or pictures or other evidence that would prove one or the other wrong.

It's really fascinating to me. It's fairly obvious that he was inappropriate on the set -- he admits it himself multiple times, his publicist (Jen Abel) confirms it in text messages to others, he cycles through a variety of excuses for his behavior (neurodivergence, being intimidated by Lively's fame, misunderstandings) but when discussing the details of the allegations, he rarely offers a clear "no I didn't do that." Instead it will be contextualization that muddies the waters.

There also are apparently allegations from Slate and potential one or more other actresses on set. This might just be Robyn Lively, Blake's sister, but might include Isabella Ferrer. We don't know for sure and it might be a bit before we find out. But that's 3-4 different women on the set with complaints about Baldoni's or Heath's behavior. If 3-4 women in your workplace had told you that a man you work with was inappropriate and made them uncomfortable, would you assume he was 100% innocent and being wrongly accused? Or would you think "huh, even if these individual incidents don't each sound that bad, together maybe this guy has an issue"? I would think the latter.

I don't know if all Lively's allegations together will add up to whatever the legal definition of sexual harassment is. I think the alleged retaliation is more clearcut and looks bad. She could still lose though, I don't. I think it's always a risk bringing a case like this unless the allegations are REALLY bad. Whereas this sounds more run of the mill and a jury might decide there's no liability. I think that's possible. I really don't feel I have all the facts.

But based on what we do know, I don't understand the people caping for Baldoni like he's some wronged victim. He clearly mismanaged this set, did some weird and inappropriate things, and made several women uncomfortable. He might not be a sexual harasser but he is, at a minimum, not a great director and maybe shouldn't be in charge of big sets like this. Some people do not have the people skills for a job like that. He might be one of them. And I do think he put himself in this situation by promoting himself as an advocate for women and someone who listens to women, and deciding to direct a movie with domestic violence and women's empowerment themes. Even if he's not a sexual harasser, he strikes me as tone deaf, arrogant, and a bad boss. It's not like the allegations against him have been totally made up. This stuff happened, they just exist in this gray area where it's not clear if it constitutes harassment or not. A jury will have to figure that out.

Baldoni is not an innocent victim, it is so wild to me that some people see it that way. Were it not for his own bad and weird choices, he would not be in this situation regardless of Blake's actions.

I don’t understand why you (and maybe one other poster?) keep posting as if Baldoni supporters love him or think he did nothing wrong.

It’s pretty clear he let Blake walk all over him and was way too passive. He has a lot to learn as a director. But that doesn’t change that he clearly, and with receipts, did not SH her. And it doesn’t change the fact that he was clearly a victim of harassment, extortion, and bullying by Blake and her husband.

This is one of the most public celebrity couples in Hollywood, and other than SNL and a few selfies, they have laid low because they know what is going on and they know the public is very against them. They don’t have any public supporters, including Bestie Taylor, who is known to stand up for women who are going through a tough time.

She and the Jonas brother’s ex were not even that close and hadn’t been photographed together in years. But when she was having a tough time during the divorce announcement, Taylor purposely was seen in public with her. Taylor is Blake’s kids godmother, and nothing. And we are at eight months and counting.

They’ve lost. Sorry, but they’ve lost.

This just seems scattered. Who care's about Taylor Swift's relationship with a Jonas brother's ex? It's irrelevant. Also, I know this might shock some people, but I don't actually view Taylor Swift's opinion on this case as important. I don't really care about her friendship with Blake. This stuff is just idle gossip to me.

If you can look at this case and see that obviously Baldoni did some stuff that is not great, even if it falls short of sexual harassment, I simply don't understand the die hard posts in his favor, people saying that Blake is crazy not to settle (like, pay him money? for what exactly? she directly contests all of his allegations against her) or that "she's lost," I'm honestly confused.

Is Blake Lively a terrific person who deserves nothing but flowers and rainbows? No, not at all. She also did some weird stuff in this case and I think is not entirely innocent. But it also seems like Baldoni did some inappropriate things and that Blake's anger with him is genuine -- I truly do not think she is just making up stories to "steal" a movie, especially when the movie actually still belongs to Wayfarer and they made a metric ton of money off of it, so that theory makes no sense whatsoever.

So we have two imperfect people, a really intriguing set of facts that might come down to perceptions of behavior and what third parties say and a lot of context, most of which I honestly do not think we have yet. That's interesting! But I simply don't get the Team JB or Team BL approach, and I definitely don't get why people are talking about this random gossip about people who are, at best, barely involved in this case. Like Swift or Hugh Jackman. The whole Harvey Weinstein commentary this last week was also dumb -- who cares what that old sh*tstain thinks about literally anything?

If you don’t understand why Taylor Swift’s actions in this are relevant, then you really don’t understand anything about publicity or public relations. I feel like you were being deliberately obtuse because I don’t believe anyone can be as clueless.

If Blake’s popularity goes up when she’s seen at the Super Bowl suite with Taylor, you can bet it’s going to go down when Taylor refuses to be seen with her when she’s going through what her own public relations people have described as the worst time in her life. For her to abandon her in this moment, when she has a history of lifting women up when they are going through the hardest times, is telling.

If it doesn’t matter to you, fine. It matters to Blake and Ryan, or they wouldn’t be planting stories like they are horses with their kids in Rhode Island near Taylor’s home, only to have Internet sleuths find out that Taylor’s home in Rhode Island is being renovated, and no one has stayed on the premises for several months.

DP but everything you are saying is just speculation. You’re deeply invested in some PR story. And you’re trying to make it sound like the people who haven’t jumped down there in this hole with you are clueless. Nah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think Baldoni's "receipts" disprove Blake's allegations. In some cases, they actually confirm them. Others aren't addressed at all. The video they released shows a visibly uncomfortable Lively repeatedly asking for their characters to be talking and dancing while Baldoni insists more physical closeness than is scripted or than Lively is comfortable with. The voice memo he released is a rambling Baldoni who clearly knows he's crossed lines and been inappropriate, apologizing but also continuing to overshare and say weird things, sent at 2am. His timeline repeatedly confirms some of her allegations.

There are some details where they allege different facts, but he does NOT have receipts for them, or at least hasn't shared them. Yet repeatedly people take his word over her even though neither has released video footage or pictures or other evidence that would prove one or the other wrong.

It's really fascinating to me. It's fairly obvious that he was inappropriate on the set -- he admits it himself multiple times, his publicist (Jen Abel) confirms it in text messages to others, he cycles through a variety of excuses for his behavior (neurodivergence, being intimidated by Lively's fame, misunderstandings) but when discussing the details of the allegations, he rarely offers a clear "no I didn't do that." Instead it will be contextualization that muddies the waters.

There also are apparently allegations from Slate and potential one or more other actresses on set. This might just be Robyn Lively, Blake's sister, but might include Isabella Ferrer. We don't know for sure and it might be a bit before we find out. But that's 3-4 different women on the set with complaints about Baldoni's or Heath's behavior. If 3-4 women in your workplace had told you that a man you work with was inappropriate and made them uncomfortable, would you assume he was 100% innocent and being wrongly accused? Or would you think "huh, even if these individual incidents don't each sound that bad, together maybe this guy has an issue"? I would think the latter.

I don't know if all Lively's allegations together will add up to whatever the legal definition of sexual harassment is. I think the alleged retaliation is more clearcut and looks bad. She could still lose though, I don't. I think it's always a risk bringing a case like this unless the allegations are REALLY bad. Whereas this sounds more run of the mill and a jury might decide there's no liability. I think that's possible. I really don't feel I have all the facts.

But based on what we do know, I don't understand the people caping for Baldoni like he's some wronged victim. He clearly mismanaged this set, did some weird and inappropriate things, and made several women uncomfortable. He might not be a sexual harasser but he is, at a minimum, not a great director and maybe shouldn't be in charge of big sets like this. Some people do not have the people skills for a job like that. He might be one of them. And I do think he put himself in this situation by promoting himself as an advocate for women and someone who listens to women, and deciding to direct a movie with domestic violence and women's empowerment themes. Even if he's not a sexual harasser, he strikes me as tone deaf, arrogant, and a bad boss. It's not like the allegations against him have been totally made up. This stuff happened, they just exist in this gray area where it's not clear if it constitutes harassment or not. A jury will have to figure that out.

Baldoni is not an innocent victim, it is so wild to me that some people see it that way. Were it not for his own bad and weird choices, he would not be in this situation regardless of Blake's actions.

I don’t understand why you (and maybe one other poster?) keep posting as if Baldoni supporters love him or think he did nothing wrong.

It’s pretty clear he let Blake walk all over him and was way too passive. He has a lot to learn as a director. But that doesn’t change that he clearly, and with receipts, did not SH her. And it doesn’t change the fact that he was clearly a victim of harassment, extortion, and bullying by Blake and her husband.

This is one of the most public celebrity couples in Hollywood, and other than SNL and a few selfies, they have laid low because they know what is going on and they know the public is very against them. They don’t have any public supporters, including Bestie Taylor, who is known to stand up for women who are going through a tough time.

She and the Jonas brother’s ex were not even that close and hadn’t been photographed together in years. But when she was having a tough time during the divorce announcement, Taylor purposely was seen in public with her. Taylor is Blake’s kids godmother, and nothing. And we are at eight months and counting.

They’ve lost. Sorry, but they’ve lost.

This just seems scattered. Who care's about Taylor Swift's relationship with a Jonas brother's ex? It's irrelevant. Also, I know this might shock some people, but I don't actually view Taylor Swift's opinion on this case as important. I don't really care about her friendship with Blake. This stuff is just idle gossip to me.

If you can look at this case and see that obviously Baldoni did some stuff that is not great, even if it falls short of sexual harassment, I simply don't understand the die hard posts in his favor, people saying that Blake is crazy not to settle (like, pay him money? for what exactly? she directly contests all of his allegations against her) or that "she's lost," I'm honestly confused.

Is Blake Lively a terrific person who deserves nothing but flowers and rainbows? No, not at all. She also did some weird stuff in this case and I think is not entirely innocent. But it also seems like Baldoni did some inappropriate things and that Blake's anger with him is genuine -- I truly do not think she is just making up stories to "steal" a movie, especially when the movie actually still belongs to Wayfarer and they made a metric ton of money off of it, so that theory makes no sense whatsoever.

So we have two imperfect people, a really intriguing set of facts that might come down to perceptions of behavior and what third parties say and a lot of context, most of which I honestly do not think we have yet. That's interesting! But I simply don't get the Team JB or Team BL approach, and I definitely don't get why people are talking about this random gossip about people who are, at best, barely involved in this case. Like Swift or Hugh Jackman. The whole Harvey Weinstein commentary this last week was also dumb -- who cares what that old sh*tstain thinks about literally anything?

If you don’t understand why Taylor Swift’s actions in this are relevant, then you really don’t understand anything about publicity or public relations. I feel like you were being deliberately obtuse because I don’t believe anyone can be as clueless.

If Blake’s popularity goes up when she’s seen at the Super Bowl suite with Taylor, you can bet it’s going to go down when Taylor refuses to be seen with her when she’s going through what her own public relations people have described as the worst time in her life. For her to abandon her in this moment, when she has a history of lifting women up when they are going through the hardest times, is telling.

If it doesn’t matter to you, fine. It matters to Blake and Ryan, or they wouldn’t be planting stories like they are horses with their kids in Rhode Island near Taylor’s home, only to have Internet sleuths find out that Taylor’s home in Rhode Island is being renovated, and no one has stayed on the premises for several months.

Different poster (lawyer who is interested in the legal case) here who does not follow the gossip world but appreciates reading about the theories (which I take with a grain of salt as just that, theories). I think sometimes the lawposters get annoyed with the celebgossipposters and vice versa because we are looking at it from different angles. This is very clear when concepts like "malice" are discussed. But to some extent, the PR stuff may impact strategy in the legal case so it's good to talk about that too. Like to me, Blake and Ryan going to Rhode Island means nothing, other than they like Rhode Island and wanted to go on vacation. It would never in a million years occur to me to know if Taylor Swift owns property there and look into whether her home is occupied or being renovated (!), but maybe these posters were onto something because in later weeks overtures seem to have been made between Taylor and Blake. So it's interesting for me to know those theories exist at least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think Baldoni's "receipts" disprove Blake's allegations. In some cases, they actually confirm them. Others aren't addressed at all. The video they released shows a visibly uncomfortable Lively repeatedly asking for their characters to be talking and dancing while Baldoni insists more physical closeness than is scripted or than Lively is comfortable with. The voice memo he released is a rambling Baldoni who clearly knows he's crossed lines and been inappropriate, apologizing but also continuing to overshare and say weird things, sent at 2am. His timeline repeatedly confirms some of her allegations.

There are some details where they allege different facts, but he does NOT have receipts for them, or at least hasn't shared them. Yet repeatedly people take his word over her even though neither has released video footage or pictures or other evidence that would prove one or the other wrong.

It's really fascinating to me. It's fairly obvious that he was inappropriate on the set -- he admits it himself multiple times, his publicist (Jen Abel) confirms it in text messages to others, he cycles through a variety of excuses for his behavior (neurodivergence, being intimidated by Lively's fame, misunderstandings) but when discussing the details of the allegations, he rarely offers a clear "no I didn't do that." Instead it will be contextualization that muddies the waters.

There also are apparently allegations from Slate and potential one or more other actresses on set. This might just be Robyn Lively, Blake's sister, but might include Isabella Ferrer. We don't know for sure and it might be a bit before we find out. But that's 3-4 different women on the set with complaints about Baldoni's or Heath's behavior. If 3-4 women in your workplace had told you that a man you work with was inappropriate and made them uncomfortable, would you assume he was 100% innocent and being wrongly accused? Or would you think "huh, even if these individual incidents don't each sound that bad, together maybe this guy has an issue"? I would think the latter.

I don't know if all Lively's allegations together will add up to whatever the legal definition of sexual harassment is. I think the alleged retaliation is more clearcut and looks bad. She could still lose though, I don't. I think it's always a risk bringing a case like this unless the allegations are REALLY bad. Whereas this sounds more run of the mill and a jury might decide there's no liability. I think that's possible. I really don't feel I have all the facts.

But based on what we do know, I don't understand the people caping for Baldoni like he's some wronged victim. He clearly mismanaged this set, did some weird and inappropriate things, and made several women uncomfortable. He might not be a sexual harasser but he is, at a minimum, not a great director and maybe shouldn't be in charge of big sets like this. Some people do not have the people skills for a job like that. He might be one of them. And I do think he put himself in this situation by promoting himself as an advocate for women and someone who listens to women, and deciding to direct a movie with domestic violence and women's empowerment themes. Even if he's not a sexual harasser, he strikes me as tone deaf, arrogant, and a bad boss. It's not like the allegations against him have been totally made up. This stuff happened, they just exist in this gray area where it's not clear if it constitutes harassment or not. A jury will have to figure that out.

Baldoni is not an innocent victim, it is so wild to me that some people see it that way. Were it not for his own bad and weird choices, he would not be in this situation regardless of Blake's actions.

I don’t understand why you (and maybe one other poster?) keep posting as if Baldoni supporters love him or think he did nothing wrong.

It’s pretty clear he let Blake walk all over him and was way too passive. He has a lot to learn as a director. But that doesn’t change that he clearly, and with receipts, did not SH her. And it doesn’t change the fact that he was clearly a victim of harassment, extortion, and bullying by Blake and her husband.

This is one of the most public celebrity couples in Hollywood, and other than SNL and a few selfies, they have laid low because they know what is going on and they know the public is very against them. They don’t have any public supporters, including Bestie Taylor, who is known to stand up for women who are going through a tough time.

She and the Jonas brother’s ex were not even that close and hadn’t been photographed together in years. But when she was having a tough time during the divorce announcement, Taylor purposely was seen in public with her. Taylor is Blake’s kids godmother, and nothing. And we are at eight months and counting.

They’ve lost. Sorry, but they’ve lost.

This just seems scattered. Who care's about Taylor Swift's relationship with a Jonas brother's ex? It's irrelevant. Also, I know this might shock some people, but I don't actually view Taylor Swift's opinion on this case as important. I don't really care about her friendship with Blake. This stuff is just idle gossip to me.

If you can look at this case and see that obviously Baldoni did some stuff that is not great, even if it falls short of sexual harassment, I simply don't understand the die hard posts in his favor, people saying that Blake is crazy not to settle (like, pay him money? for what exactly? she directly contests all of his allegations against her) or that "she's lost," I'm honestly confused.

Is Blake Lively a terrific person who deserves nothing but flowers and rainbows? No, not at all. She also did some weird stuff in this case and I think is not entirely innocent. But it also seems like Baldoni did some inappropriate things and that Blake's anger with him is genuine -- I truly do not think she is just making up stories to "steal" a movie, especially when the movie actually still belongs to Wayfarer and they made a metric ton of money off of it, so that theory makes no sense whatsoever.

So we have two imperfect people, a really intriguing set of facts that might come down to perceptions of behavior and what third parties say and a lot of context, most of which I honestly do not think we have yet. That's interesting! But I simply don't get the Team JB or Team BL approach, and I definitely don't get why people are talking about this random gossip about people who are, at best, barely involved in this case. Like Swift or Hugh Jackman. The whole Harvey Weinstein commentary this last week was also dumb -- who cares what that old sh*tstain thinks about literally anything?

If you don’t understand why Taylor Swift’s actions in this are relevant, then you really don’t understand anything about publicity or public relations. I feel like you were being deliberately obtuse because I don’t believe anyone can be as clueless.

If Blake’s popularity goes up when she’s seen at the Super Bowl suite with Taylor, you can bet it’s going to go down when Taylor refuses to be seen with her when she’s going through what her own public relations people have described as the worst time in her life. For her to abandon her in this moment, when she has a history of lifting women up when they are going through the hardest times, is telling.

If it doesn’t matter to you, fine. It matters to Blake and Ryan, or they wouldn’t be planting stories like they are horses with their kids in Rhode Island near Taylor’s home, only to have Internet sleuths find out that Taylor’s home in Rhode Island is being renovated, and no one has stayed on the premises for several months.

Different poster (lawyer who is interested in the legal case) here who does not follow the gossip world but appreciates reading about the theories (which I take with a grain of salt as just that, theories). I think sometimes the lawposters get annoyed with the celebgossipposters and vice versa because we are looking at it from different angles. This is very clear when concepts like "malice" are discussed. But to some extent, the PR stuff may impact strategy in the legal case so it's good to talk about that too. Like to me, Blake and Ryan going to Rhode Island means nothing, other than they like Rhode Island and wanted to go on vacation. It would never in a million years occur to me to know if Taylor Swift owns property there and look into whether her home is occupied or being renovated (!), but maybe these posters were onto something because in later weeks overtures seem to have been made between Taylor and Blake. So it's interesting for me to know those theories exist at least.

It’s relevant because Blake and Ryan planted the story, which means they care about the PR angle. The RI story itself said Blake and Ryan go there all the time, so why are we getting a story about this only now? And why does that story mention TS lives nearby? B/c their PR wanted it to. This entire case started because of PR, so there’s no reason to pretend it doesn’t matter, it’s basically all that matters to the parties on both sides imo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think Baldoni's "receipts" disprove Blake's allegations. In some cases, they actually confirm them. Others aren't addressed at all. The video they released shows a visibly uncomfortable Lively repeatedly asking for their characters to be talking and dancing while Baldoni insists more physical closeness than is scripted or than Lively is comfortable with. The voice memo he released is a rambling Baldoni who clearly knows he's crossed lines and been inappropriate, apologizing but also continuing to overshare and say weird things, sent at 2am. His timeline repeatedly confirms some of her allegations.

There are some details where they allege different facts, but he does NOT have receipts for them, or at least hasn't shared them. Yet repeatedly people take his word over her even though neither has released video footage or pictures or other evidence that would prove one or the other wrong.

It's really fascinating to me. It's fairly obvious that he was inappropriate on the set -- he admits it himself multiple times, his publicist (Jen Abel) confirms it in text messages to others, he cycles through a variety of excuses for his behavior (neurodivergence, being intimidated by Lively's fame, misunderstandings) but when discussing the details of the allegations, he rarely offers a clear "no I didn't do that." Instead it will be contextualization that muddies the waters.

There also are apparently allegations from Slate and potential one or more other actresses on set. This might just be Robyn Lively, Blake's sister, but might include Isabella Ferrer. We don't know for sure and it might be a bit before we find out. But that's 3-4 different women on the set with complaints about Baldoni's or Heath's behavior. If 3-4 women in your workplace had told you that a man you work with was inappropriate and made them uncomfortable, would you assume he was 100% innocent and being wrongly accused? Or would you think "huh, even if these individual incidents don't each sound that bad, together maybe this guy has an issue"? I would think the latter.

I don't know if all Lively's allegations together will add up to whatever the legal definition of sexual harassment is. I think the alleged retaliation is more clearcut and looks bad. She could still lose though, I don't. I think it's always a risk bringing a case like this unless the allegations are REALLY bad. Whereas this sounds more run of the mill and a jury might decide there's no liability. I think that's possible. I really don't feel I have all the facts.

But based on what we do know, I don't understand the people caping for Baldoni like he's some wronged victim. He clearly mismanaged this set, did some weird and inappropriate things, and made several women uncomfortable. He might not be a sexual harasser but he is, at a minimum, not a great director and maybe shouldn't be in charge of big sets like this. Some people do not have the people skills for a job like that. He might be one of them. And I do think he put himself in this situation by promoting himself as an advocate for women and someone who listens to women, and deciding to direct a movie with domestic violence and women's empowerment themes. Even if he's not a sexual harasser, he strikes me as tone deaf, arrogant, and a bad boss. It's not like the allegations against him have been totally made up. This stuff happened, they just exist in this gray area where it's not clear if it constitutes harassment or not. A jury will have to figure that out.

Baldoni is not an innocent victim, it is so wild to me that some people see it that way. Were it not for his own bad and weird choices, he would not be in this situation regardless of Blake's actions.

No other victims have come forward. That’s all speculation. Sources close to Isabella said Blake wanted to drag her into this to back up her allegations, but she couldn’t do that because she didn’t see it with her own eyes. Those sources say she feels shafted by Blake and removing her pictures was no accident. Jenny Slate hasn’t come forward, and if the rumors are true, her alleged complaint does not equal SH. If you go to someone playing the mother card and asking for a better apartment for your toddler, you cannot then cry sexual harassment when they give you the money for the new apartment while emphasizing the importance of motherhood. These allegations are absolutely outrageous.

IMO, Blake’s camp leaked the fake complaints to make it more comfortable for her to attend the SNL special. YMMV.

I had the exact same thought. They are so transparent. They haven’t seemed to have evolved their PR strategy to keep up with the times. It’s a really fascinating part of this whole situation for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think Baldoni's "receipts" disprove Blake's allegations. In some cases, they actually confirm them. Others aren't addressed at all. The video they released shows a visibly uncomfortable Lively repeatedly asking for their characters to be talking and dancing while Baldoni insists more physical closeness than is scripted or than Lively is comfortable with. The voice memo he released is a rambling Baldoni who clearly knows he's crossed lines and been inappropriate, apologizing but also continuing to overshare and say weird things, sent at 2am. His timeline repeatedly confirms some of her allegations.

There are some details where they allege different facts, but he does NOT have receipts for them, or at least hasn't shared them. Yet repeatedly people take his word over her even though neither has released video footage or pictures or other evidence that would prove one or the other wrong.

It's really fascinating to me. It's fairly obvious that he was inappropriate on the set -- he admits it himself multiple times, his publicist (Jen Abel) confirms it in text messages to others, he cycles through a variety of excuses for his behavior (neurodivergence, being intimidated by Lively's fame, misunderstandings) but when discussing the details of the allegations, he rarely offers a clear "no I didn't do that." Instead it will be contextualization that muddies the waters.

There also are apparently allegations from Slate and potential one or more other actresses on set. This might just be Robyn Lively, Blake's sister, but might include Isabella Ferrer. We don't know for sure and it might be a bit before we find out. But that's 3-4 different women on the set with complaints about Baldoni's or Heath's behavior. If 3-4 women in your workplace had told you that a man you work with was inappropriate and made them uncomfortable, would you assume he was 100% innocent and being wrongly accused? Or would you think "huh, even if these individual incidents don't each sound that bad, together maybe this guy has an issue"? I would think the latter.

I don't know if all Lively's allegations together will add up to whatever the legal definition of sexual harassment is. I think the alleged retaliation is more clearcut and looks bad. She could still lose though, I don't. I think it's always a risk bringing a case like this unless the allegations are REALLY bad. Whereas this sounds more run of the mill and a jury might decide there's no liability. I think that's possible. I really don't feel I have all the facts.

But based on what we do know, I don't understand the people caping for Baldoni like he's some wronged victim. He clearly mismanaged this set, did some weird and inappropriate things, and made several women uncomfortable. He might not be a sexual harasser but he is, at a minimum, not a great director and maybe shouldn't be in charge of big sets like this. Some people do not have the people skills for a job like that. He might be one of them. And I do think he put himself in this situation by promoting himself as an advocate for women and someone who listens to women, and deciding to direct a movie with domestic violence and women's empowerment themes. Even if he's not a sexual harasser, he strikes me as tone deaf, arrogant, and a bad boss. It's not like the allegations against him have been totally made up. This stuff happened, they just exist in this gray area where it's not clear if it constitutes harassment or not. A jury will have to figure that out.

Baldoni is not an innocent victim, it is so wild to me that some people see it that way. Were it not for his own bad and weird choices, he would not be in this situation regardless of Blake's actions.

I don’t understand why you (and maybe one other poster?) keep posting as if Baldoni supporters love him or think he did nothing wrong.

It’s pretty clear he let Blake walk all over him and was way too passive. He has a lot to learn as a director. But that doesn’t change that he clearly, and with receipts, did not SH her. And it doesn’t change the fact that he was clearly a victim of harassment, extortion, and bullying by Blake and her husband.

This is one of the most public celebrity couples in Hollywood, and other than SNL and a few selfies, they have laid low because they know what is going on and they know the public is very against them. They don’t have any public supporters, including Bestie Taylor, who is known to stand up for women who are going through a tough time.

She and the Jonas brother’s ex were not even that close and hadn’t been photographed together in years. But when she was having a tough time during the divorce announcement, Taylor purposely was seen in public with her. Taylor is Blake’s kids godmother, and nothing. And we are at eight months and counting.

They’ve lost. Sorry, but they’ve lost.

This just seems scattered. Who care's about Taylor Swift's relationship with a Jonas brother's ex? It's irrelevant. Also, I know this might shock some people, but I don't actually view Taylor Swift's opinion on this case as important. I don't really care about her friendship with Blake. This stuff is just idle gossip to me.

If you can look at this case and see that obviously Baldoni did some stuff that is not great, even if it falls short of sexual harassment, I simply don't understand the die hard posts in his favor, people saying that Blake is crazy not to settle (like, pay him money? for what exactly? she directly contests all of his allegations against her) or that "she's lost," I'm honestly confused.

Is Blake Lively a terrific person who deserves nothing but flowers and rainbows? No, not at all. She also did some weird stuff in this case and I think is not entirely innocent. But it also seems like Baldoni did some inappropriate things and that Blake's anger with him is genuine -- I truly do not think she is just making up stories to "steal" a movie, especially when the movie actually still belongs to Wayfarer and they made a metric ton of money off of it, so that theory makes no sense whatsoever.

So we have two imperfect people, a really intriguing set of facts that might come down to perceptions of behavior and what third parties say and a lot of context, most of which I honestly do not think we have yet. That's interesting! But I simply don't get the Team JB or Team BL approach, and I definitely don't get why people are talking about this random gossip about people who are, at best, barely involved in this case. Like Swift or Hugh Jackman. The whole Harvey Weinstein commentary this last week was also dumb -- who cares what that old sh*tstain thinks about literally anything?

If you don’t understand why Taylor Swift’s actions in this are relevant, then you really don’t understand anything about publicity or public relations. I feel like you were being deliberately obtuse because I don’t believe anyone can be as clueless.

If Blake’s popularity goes up when she’s seen at the Super Bowl suite with Taylor, you can bet it’s going to go down when Taylor refuses to be seen with her when she’s going through what her own public relations people have described as the worst time in her life. For her to abandon her in this moment, when she has a history of lifting women up when they are going through the hardest times, is telling.

If it doesn’t matter to you, fine. It matters to Blake and Ryan, or they wouldn’t be planting stories like they are horses with their kids in Rhode Island near Taylor’s home, only to have Internet sleuths find out that Taylor’s home in Rhode Island is being renovated, and no one has stayed on the premises for several months.

DP but everything you are saying is just speculation. You’re deeply invested in some PR story. And you’re trying to make it sound like the people who haven’t jumped down there in this hole with you are clueless. Nah.

All celebrity PR is speculation. It’s how the game is played. Blake and Ryan used to master it, not so much anymore.

Before the lawsuit and this brand crisis they are experiencing, they would have an almost daily pap walk in NYC, holding hands.

A celebrity podcast or I follow lives near them and would see when the paps setting up. It’s clearly all planned, which is fine. That’s their business, but why do you think they do that? Because they want people to speculate, oh their marriage is going well, oh they’re happy, or just oh there’s more pictures of them, they must be famous. I’m not really sure all the reasons celebs do it frankly, but certainly the primary result is speculation.

So yeah, unfortunately, when things are on the downturn and not going well for you, people just don’t stop speculating. that’s just not how the game is played.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The subpoena is not "mysterious." This has been addressed here and elsewhere. California and other states give people the option of a pre-litigation subpoena for evidence that is at risk of being lost or destroyed and could be important to a case they are considering filing.

And the texts were 100% the property of Jonesworks. Jones may have violated her contract with Wayfarer in showing them to Leslie Sloane before the subpoena, but would not be in violation when she produced them for Lively and her lawyers in October via the subpoena.

And no, there is no penalty for "leaking" the texts to the NYT. The only "confidentiality" that would have covered the texts was via the contract between Wayfarer and Jones. It would not apply to Lively or the NYT. The texts do not contain protected communications -- no violation of HIPAA or other sensitive info.

I feel like people need to learn a lesson about how private their texts and emails are, especially anything sent or received using a work-owned device.

The subpoena may not be a mystery to you, but it is still a mystery as no one has seen it. If there’s nothing fishy going on, why hasn’t it been produced?

I agree, I haven’t cared much about the subpoena since The NY Times apparently saw it or at least claims to have, but the fact that it has yet to be produced is very suspect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The subpoena is not "mysterious." This has been addressed here and elsewhere. California and other states give people the option of a pre-litigation subpoena for evidence that is at risk of being lost or destroyed and could be important to a case they are considering filing.

And the texts were 100% the property of Jonesworks. Jones may have violated her contract with Wayfarer in showing them to Leslie Sloane before the subpoena, but would not be in violation when she produced them for Lively and her lawyers in October via the subpoena.

And no, there is no penalty for "leaking" the texts to the NYT. The only "confidentiality" that would have covered the texts was via the contract between Wayfarer and Jones. It would not apply to Lively or the NYT. The texts do not contain protected communications -- no violation of HIPAA or other sensitive info.

I feel like people need to learn a lesson about how private their texts and emails are, especially anything sent or received using a work-owned device.

The subpoena may not be a mystery to you, but it is still a mystery as no one has seen it. If there’s nothing fishy going on, why hasn’t it been produced?

I agree, I haven’t cared much about the subpoena since The NY Times apparently saw it or at least claims to have, but the fact that it has yet to be produced is very suspect.

At this point I imagine it has been produced, or will be soon, in discovery because Freedman is definitely going to ask for it. We may see it mentioned in the amended complaint, if they feel it wasn't kosher.

[Anonymous]

A lawyer on tik tok has a theory that Blake initially sued Jones and during arbitration Jones said you’re barking up the wrong tree sue Jen and Wayfarer instead. She theorizes that the subpoena was issued as part of that case against Jones, which is why Jones doesn’t want the public to see the actual document.

The lawyer thinks a pre litigation subpoena is less likely and she gives a few reasons. First, you have to give a really good reason for a pre litigation subpoena like the records are likely to be destroyed (in which case the court is more likely to grant a motion to preserve) or a person is very sick and likely to die so they need to be deposed. She said courts don’t like fishing expeditions so the bar for pre litigation subpoena is high. She also said that in California a pre litigation order to produce documents would be called a court order, not a subpoena, so the terminology jones and Blake’s attorneys have been using don’t track with the pre litigation theory. The final reason she gave was that even if the documents were subpoenaed, jones could have moved to quash and certainly should’ve notified wayfarer. She thinks that the fact jones did not do those two things to protect client confidentiality shows she had some ulterior motive (like deterring her own lawsuit).