Reply to Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Have we talked about the following footnote addressing Freedman in each of the safe harbor letters?  Maybe this is what set Freedman off. This footnote doesn’t make it into the motion for sanctions itself, just the letters, but it’s basically a brutal personal attack (and imho likely does completely betray Freedman’s very real MO):

“We are concerned that you are [harassing Ms. Lively] in an attempt to bolster your own career and reputation at Ms. Lively’s expense. Debusmann Jr., [i]Who Is Bryan Freedman, the Lawyer Who Represents Don Lemon and Tucker Carlson?[/i], BBC (Apr, 27, 2023) (“What I realized is that if I wanted to be an entertainment lawyer, I had to sue entertainers.  No one would hire you until you built a reputation … So I started to focus on going after entertainers, and defeating established entertainment litigators … in things that were high profile so that someone would write something about it.”).

Freedman’s rep is based on his prior success in bullying entertainers into settlements. Lively is undergoing a pain cave right now, but if she can make it through to the other side, it could disrupt bottom feeders like Freedman in a way that helps others moving forward. [/quote]

I remember seeing that quote or something like it very early in this whole thing as I was becoming aware of who Bryan Freedman is. Interesting seeing it used here in letters to Freedman's clients. Last week when Freedman filed that letter and affidavit, and I was scooping my jaw up off the ground because I've never seen an allegation like that (with no real proof, literally just "I heard this third hand from someone") leveled by one attorney against another in federal court, I wondered if Freedman runs moves like that past his clients and if they understand the implications. I'm sure Freedman feels confident in his methods and it does seem like they work often enough that you can't totally discount his strategy.

But some of what Freedman does would bother me as a client because there's risk. Both risk in court and risk in the public eye. Like I'm not so sure that letter last week was effective, even if his only goal was to dominate a news cycle with focus on the Blake/Taylor relationship. The judge's response was so swift and harsh, and the media seems to have picked up on that pretty quickly. I personally think he wound up looking, if not bad, then weak. At first you could see outlets seizing his narrative and there was a round of "omg Blake's been blackmailing Taylor" headlines. But they were very quickly replaced by "...allegedly" and then replaced by "wow freedman got bench slapped." And now the only people I see who actually think Freedman was telling the truth are the die hards for JB. Everyone else, including Taylor fans and people who are paying only loose attention to this drama, now view the blackmail/threat allegations as fake news. Which not only means Freedman lost the news cycle, it may impact how news outlets and audiences view future claims coming from him.

I think Freedman has been really savvy and good thus far but I feel like in the last couple weeks he may be out over his skis and headed for a crash and burn if he doesn't reign it in.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics