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][quote=Anonymous]
I mean, [b]I'm not accusing someone who reported being sexually harassed by her law professor of being a morally corrupt grifter who only had a fully consensual relationship with that teacher. [/b] And I'm not calling myself a male feminist while encouraging my attorney to overturn a law that protects victims of sexual assault and harassment as unconstitutional.  And I'm not constantly posting mean attacks about the personal appearance of Justin Baldoni on this website or other spiteful remarks about his wife or his marriage.  But that's just me.   [/quote]

Sorry, I only pop into this thread once every few days. Who is this in reference to? The only law professor scandal I know was Amy Chua's husband Jed Rubenfeld at YLS.[/quote]

Oh this female lawyer filed an amicus brief to support the newish (I think) CA law that Blake is trying to rely on to shield her from defamation liability for making SH claims and to recoup legal fees. Freedman had objected to its use, claiming she doesn’t merit the protection because she acted with malice (lied), and also claiming the law may be unconstitutional. In theory, the law might be a good idea- protect SH victims from being sued for defamation by their abusers. But obviously a lot of people don’t think Blake is really a victim and this is a misuse of the law.

The amicus lawyer was in a relationship with a married law school professor (who also worked for the FTC and had great connections) that continued after she graduated. He helped her land various cushy jobs, etc. She reported him at some point, apparently only after she found out he was having simultaneous affairs with other students/former students. He sued her for defamation. I believe she helped get this law passed.

Some poster on here was criticizing the lawyer, claiming she didn’t seem like a true victim, blah blah. It seemed to be primarily one poster, but the pro BL duo/trio are trying to use it to paint a picture of anyone pro Baldoni as a perverted woman hater who shits on all victims of SH. (And of course BL is a victim).

Personally I think it’s potentially a pro BL poster trying another angle to make Baldoni look bad.. one BL poster even keeps acting as if Baldoni orchestrated these random posts on DCUM- bizarre unless you consider, of course, that these PR shills might assume three are others like them. [/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