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][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The legal case is interesting, but the PR side is much more fascinating and I vehemently disagree with the poster who said whoever wins the case will win in public opinion. The trial is almost a year away and that ship has sailed for Blake. This latest Taylor news is humiliating for her and there’s simply no way around it.

As another poster said she could’ve easily said she wasn’t at the premier but saying she didn’t see the movie for weeks is a pretty low blow. Saying that she was not involved in casting decisions, that’s going to bite Blake in the ass because now she’s caught in a blatant lie in front of the world. She had young Lily stand on the red carpet and say that Blake told her that Taylor helped cast her. I can pretty much guarantee that’s one of the way she blew smoke up Isabella’s butt - and got her on her side. Lured her in with Taylor.

I’m betting the cast saw through this pretty quickly after Baldoni got his side of the story out and that explains the end of their support. [/quote]

I haven't read this Swift story so I don't know what's going on, but Swift was in the middle of the Eras tour in summer and fall of 2024.  If Taylor Swift didn't watch a movie during her Era's tour for several months, that's probably okay.  Gets a pass.[/quote]

If Team Baldoni thinks Swift is going to be a good witness for Baldoni, they might want to think harder.  Swift sees right through what Freedman is doing and her rep says this:  "This document subpoena is designed to use Taylor Swift's name to draw public interest by creating tabloid clickbait instead of focusing on the facts of the case."  I don't know how Swift feels about Lively, but if Baldoni thinks Swift is going to like him more than she likes Lively, he'd better prepare himself for a cruel summer.[/quote]

It’s not about who she likes. Hearsay is impermissible so even if BL complained about Justin to Taylor, that’s unlikely to come in. What they need from Taylor are things like when Taylor just happened to stop by Blake’s house when Justin was there (it could’ve been the reverse, just don’t remember) was her visit unannounced or did Blake call or text her to come over at that time. Even if Taylor was completely unaware of what Blake was doing, confirming whether or not that was “a coincidence” goes to Blake’s intent. These are the sorts of things Freedman will be looking for from Taylor. [/quote]

Isabel was also on the red carpet saying that Blake told her Taylor had a role in her casting. They might also ask about that. It establishes a pattern of Blake leveraging taylor, her powerful husband, etc. to get what she wants. Legally I’m sure this doesn’t matter but it is certain to make the jury feel something. [/quote]

That's not how trials work though. You don't get to present evidence just because it might "make the jury feel something." It has to be relevant to the questions before the jury. Also, the judge will weight the relevance of a piece of evidence against its likelihood of prejudicing the jury (swaying them unfairly with extraneous and irrelevant detail) and given Taylor's fame level, it's very unlikely that Lively would find anything she has to offer (or even evidence that mentions her) to be relevant enough to overcome the possible prejudice that bringing her into the case could cause.[/quote]

DP. And as to relevance, I think Swift is mainly relevant to the extortion claims, and I personally think those will be dismissed. To start with, there's choice of law issues that may mean the extortion cause of action isn't in play at all. But even if it is, they haven't pled that there was any threat of force or that anything of value was obtained or sought by the defendants. Even if the claims are dismissed without prejudice, I doubt they can find the facts to properly plead because I just don't think that's what happened. Lively leveraged her star power and connections to get credentials and opportunities she didn't earn, which is shitty of her. That's not extortion though, and it's still not extortion if he's worried she might reveal the things that she claimed happened during the first part of filming while she says vague things like "all good will between us would be lost." It's still really all just a defamation claim where he's claiming she lied and he was worried she would continue to lie and publicize her lies about SH, and he caved in to her demands on that basis. I don't see the connection between Swift and his claims that Lively defamed him or breached her contract.[/quote]

Yeah, I agree with this. Even if the extortion claims stay in, I think they'll be narrowed to focus on the thing if actual value Lively allegedly got (the p.g.a. credit). I think it would be hard to link Taylor to that decision, except in ways that actually work against Baldoni (part of Lively's argument for getting the credit was her involvement in post production, in luding getting Taylor to let them use her song in the movie and trailer, which works against the idea that Lively used threats to get it).

I think it's very unlikely that Taylor will feature in the trial in any way.[/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