Reply to Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The funniest part of yesterday’s hearing was Blake trying to seal the birthing video, and WF saying no need.  It obviously looks nothing like porn and she’s afraid her lying self will be further exposed.[/quote]

That is funny. I think at some point Blake tried to make it sound like some gross privacy violation of the mom's that she was faux outraged over when it is clear these are the crunchy types who hit my Instagram algorithm with their home water births. Not at all surprised they were like, "nah. Show it to anyone who wants to see see it." I think Blake has a pretty warped sexuality, personally. She jumps between pushing boundaries that would make a lot of people uncomfortable and are pretty crass to being a scandalized 18th century nun real quick. [/quote]

It’s my understanding that she was not concerned about Jamie Heath‘s wife’s privacy at all. She accused him of trying to show her p-rn. And it is very clear from the video that no one seeing any second of it would think it was p-rn. It’s very clearly just a water birth, and like some of us have predicted there are no shots of V because everything is happening in the water and there is not a camera underwater.

Before my first baby was born, I did all the hospital classes and some of the moms and I giving birth around the same time became friends and exchanged emails. Some of them were pretty crunchy and shared a lot of their birth stories and videos and photos of them full right after the birth with boobs hanging out every where as they did chest to chest. it was fine, but it was clearly a birth story and not anything sexual. A lot of us have seen or experienced that ourselves and so there’s no one in the jury that’s going to be fooled by her thinking it was anything sexual. [/quote]

I don't agree with this. I would be very pissed if a coworker tried to show me a video of his wife's water birth. I don't want to look at that and I shouldn't be forced to without being explicitly told what it is in advance. I don't care if you can see actual genitalia or not -- it's too personal and there's still nudity involved.

I think some juror might feel the way I do. I know, for instance, my husband feels the same, as do my two closest friends and their husbands. Were more reserved people and find it really obnoxious and inappropriate when people over share like that.

Lively doesn't have to prove it's porn, everyone knows it's not at this point. She only has to show that incidents like this led her to believe she was being harassed. That's it. So there's no reason to show the video (totally unnecessary and if I was a juror, I'd be like why tf am I having to watch this?). She only has to present evidence that she was shown the video, objected to it, and later complained about the incident. The content if the video no longer matters because the SH claims are dismissed.[/quote]

I would be pissed too. What I wouldn’t do is run to the New York Times and get involved in a two-year lawsuit that cost me $50 million and tanks my reputation in the industry, and you wouldn’t either.

Anyone pretending lively is not absolutely insane at this point is just not paying attention or being deliberately obtuse.

Justin and Jamie sound difficult to work with, but it was absolutely not worth all of this. At this point, people are just doubling down.[/quote]

I mean, that's not what happened. She complained multiple times about a bunch of behavior, most of which I think is pretty bad. And then they hired Johnny Depp's crisis team who took down Amber Heard and The Shadiest Man In The World, Jed Wallace, to sway public opinion against Lively right as their movie opened. And Lively became aware of text messages saying exactly that via Taylor Swift's publicist friend, thanks to Jen Abel's hamfisted effort to steal clients and files from her employer (NOT because Lively was in some secret cabal with Stephanie Jones). Based on all that, it doesn't strike me as weird or "insane" that she chose to file a lawsuit and then discussed her lawsuit with the NYT.

And now multiple women, including other actresses on this film, a director who worked with Wayfarer previously, a producer Justin hired for the film, and Justin's own co-host from his podcast, have either come forward with their own complaints about Justin or backed Lively. Why is it insane for Lively to pursue this case? I agree it's ultimately harmed her rep but I also think that's unfair and has a lot to do with Bryan Freedman's "trial by misleading publicity" campaign. I think Freedman is the devil incarnate at this point and really question why he was hired if Wayfarer is so innocent. His whole strategy has been to perpetuate the smear campaign Wayfarer started in August 2024 in the hopes he can humiliate Lively into settling ir dropping the case. Seems bad?

I would never have pursued this lawsuit, but that's because I'm a lawyer and I know this is what often happens in litigation. My experience as a litigator has turned me into the kind of person who suggest mediation or just lets even really awful things go because I don't want to pay lawyers thousands of dollars so I can be abused and investigated by the person who harmed me. Because I've seen it up close and it sucks.

But maybe by pursuing this case, Lively can make a difference not only for herself but for other victims of publicity smear campaigns. I really think she's seeking justice for everyone who just gets trashed online by aholes like Melissa Nathan and Jed Wallace, and makes it harder for the bottom dwellers who do that work, and the sketchy unaccountable deep pockets who pay for it, to think twice before they decide "her we have a personnel dispute with this woman who makes a living off her name and celebrity, less bury her in online $hit until she has nothing left, cool?"[/quote]

I see Lively as a villain. She was called a bully for her Kate Middleton posts and she apologized b/c Kate is A list. Lively could’ve minimized some of the fallout around the premiere had she apologized to the “little bump” journalist, just like Anne Hathaway did, and just like Sony said she should. But she didn’t b/c she’s elitist and chose to play the victim instead. She comes off as a horrible person. [/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