Anonymous wrote:You can’t post the same thing day after day and convince people it’s not you. There are various things in your writing style that make it obvious. It’s also getting tiresome as you post endlessly on this thread, and as another poster mentioned above, your posts often contain misinformation.

Ask Jeff! I haven't been here in days and days. Sometimes multiple people have the same opinion about something! I know its crazy!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What was her actual request? I've read mixed reports on this thread and elsewhere.

Was it "I don't want to be deposed by Freedman at this time" or "I don't want to be deposed by Freedman ever"?

Both. The judge agreed to the first but not the second.

Not a win for her in the slightest.

I know it's very important for you to believe that.

DP. Lol how is this a win for her? her motions were denied.

Her protective order was denied. Baldoni's request to have Lively deposed immediately was denied.

Even though her protective order was denied, the judge invoked the ethics rules on extrajudicial statements and threatened to move up the date of the trial if the lawyers attempt to try it in the press.

Notice that Freedman has been very quiet since the hearing yesterday. I don't think I even saw a statement from him after the hearing. If he made one, he didn't say anything of note. Lively's lawyers have successfully gotten him to quiet down.

Stop lying. He talked to the press on the court house steps about how happy he was with how the hearing went.

After the hearing, Freedman told an array of cameras outside the courthouse that he was pleased with the outcome.

“Our clients are devastated and want to move the case along as quickly as possible,” he said. “We just couldn’t be more pleased with how the case was handled today, how it was managed. We’re going to move as quickly as we possibly can and prove our innocence, in a world where sometimes people judge you before they give you a chance. And we’re going to change that.”

https://variety.com/2025/film/news/blake-lively-justin-baldoni-lawsuit-hearing-1236295247/

That's a very toned down statement when you look at the stuff he was saying just last week in the press. Not a single comment about Lively herself, for instance.

My thought is this: Baldoni will win. No matter what front BL and RR are putting on, they don’t stand a chance for SH. The facts don’t fit the narrative that she’s painted.

Glad the judge said ‘proceed’ with media but time it down. He’s allowing both sides to continue as is, but to keep ot more respectful. So Freedman can continue, but more respectfully.

He didn’t ban the website nor issue a gag order. Win for Baldoni.

You have no idea about this. Baldoni hasn't addressed the really serious stuff like barging into the trailer and the birth scene having an unexpected stranger show up. He's posting clips of their dance and inviting speculation. He really has not addressed the more substantive charges. Which is great for the court of public opinion but less so in the court of actual law

He addressed it.

Not substantively IMO. Just fluff.

The finance guy not on set during birthing scene is fluff.? Yup, seems consistent with your usual level of logic.

Not PP but I agree with them. Here are questions about the birthing scene that Baldoni hasn't addressed at all:

- Did they pressure Lively to do the scene fully nude or to simulate nudity the day of the shoot. This is relevant even if ultimately she wound up more clothed -- an actress should not have to fight for the right wear clothes in a scene that wasn't scripted or choreographed as a nude scene.
- Who was on the set during the shoot. Baldoni has produced a call sheet stating that the set was closed but it is not yet clear if that was enforced and if there were unnecessary personnel on set. Related is whether unnecessary personnel had access to monitors during the scene that would enable them watch as Lively performed in this pretty intimate scene, and who had access to dailies from the shoot.
- Lively claims she had to ask several times for something with which to cover herself up between takes and that these requests were ignored for some period of time before she was given something. Is this true? If so why did it take so long to provide a cover, that seems like an easy thing to do to make an actor in an uncomfortable position wearing nothing but some kind of thin covering on her bottom (dispute as to what the covering was).
- Was an intimacy coordinator on set that day? Was the IC involved in the discussion about what Lively would wear in the scene? If nudity was proposed, it seems like having the IC there would make sense. Having seen the scene in question, Lively is pretty exposed. I can see an argument that if an IC was requested for that scene, it should have been accommodated. Simulating childbirth is a fairly intimate thing.

Baldoni's complaint kind of talks around these allegations. He says she was "fully clothed" because she had some kind of underwear on (as a woman who has given birth I dispute the idea that wearing a pair of underwear while your feet are in stirrups should count as "fully clothed" -- that's a very exposed situation). He claims the set was closed but doesn't say exactly who was there. And he also talks past the allegation about the actor hired as the doctor, saying the guy was fully qualified. That wasn't the issue. The issue was that Lively alleges they pressured her to do nudity in the scene and then were like "hey this is my buddy, he's going to be hanging out between your legs for this scene." She is alleging that an intimate scene was handled in an unprofessional way without the input of an intimacy coordinator, that she had to fight off pressure to do the scene naked, that Baldoni used it as an opportunity for his friends to be in close physical proximity to Lively when she was in an exposed and vulnerable position, and that when she asked repeatedly for a drape or something to cover herself between takes, she was ignored or denied.

So no, he has not addressed it.

You can’t post the same thing day after day and convince people it’s not you. There are various things in your writing style that make it obvious. It’s also getting tiresome as you post endlessly on this thread, and as another poster mentioned above, your posts often contain misinformation.

Anonymous wrote:Blake has got to be the most arrogant dummy in Hollywood. And that says a lot. She seems high on her own supply, while she is devoid of talent. She hasn't earned anything. And here she is scheming to steal movies, credits, and future projects. Delusions of grandeur to put it mildly. These dummies surround themselves with sycophants and don't understand the real world. They think they can bully and browbeat the masses into loving them.

Tell me you've never been to LA without saying you've never been to LA

Anonymous wrote:Let’s just ignore the daily but he didn’t prove no sh post. Obviously this particular poster will never be convinced so don’t bother wasting your time responding.

It's not just one poster! You guys are so crazy hahaha. I am the 'i posted on page 14 that this was going to turn into a hundred page sh*tshow trashing the woman with no hint of evenhandedness.'

Never said I was a lawyer. Am not a lawyer. Not even a Blake Lively fan. I AM a feminist who is sick of seeing women torn apart in the news to protect the feelings of a wittle white man though.

Blake has got to be the most arrogant dummy in Hollywood. And that says a lot. She seems high on her own supply, while she is devoid of talent. She hasn't earned anything. And here she is scheming to steal movies, credits, and future projects. Delusions of grandeur to put it mildly. These dummies surround themselves with sycophants and don't understand the real world. They think they can bully and browbeat the masses into loving them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What was her actual request? I've read mixed reports on this thread and elsewhere.

Was it "I don't want to be deposed by Freedman at this time" or "I don't want to be deposed by Freedman ever"?

Both. The judge agreed to the first but not the second.

Not a win for her in the slightest.

I know it's very important for you to believe that.

DP. Lol how is this a win for her? her motions were denied.

Her protective order was denied. Baldoni's request to have Lively deposed immediately was denied.

Even though her protective order was denied, the judge invoked the ethics rules on extrajudicial statements and threatened to move up the date of the trial if the lawyers attempt to try it in the press.

Notice that Freedman has been very quiet since the hearing yesterday. I don't think I even saw a statement from him after the hearing. If he made one, he didn't say anything of note. Lively's lawyers have successfully gotten him to quiet down.

Stop lying. He talked to the press on the court house steps about how happy he was with how the hearing went.

After the hearing, Freedman told an array of cameras outside the courthouse that he was pleased with the outcome.

“Our clients are devastated and want to move the case along as quickly as possible,” he said. “We just couldn’t be more pleased with how the case was handled today, how it was managed. We’re going to move as quickly as we possibly can and prove our innocence, in a world where sometimes people judge you before they give you a chance. And we’re going to change that.”

https://variety.com/2025/film/news/blake-lively-justin-baldoni-lawsuit-hearing-1236295247/

That's a very toned down statement when you look at the stuff he was saying just last week in the press. Not a single comment about Lively herself, for instance.

My thought is this: Baldoni will win. No matter what front BL and RR are putting on, they don’t stand a chance for SH. The facts don’t fit the narrative that she’s painted.

Glad the judge said ‘proceed’ with media but time it down. He’s allowing both sides to continue as is, but to keep ot more respectful. So Freedman can continue, but more respectfully.

He didn’t ban the website nor issue a gag order. Win for Baldoni.

You have no idea about this. Baldoni hasn't addressed the really serious stuff like barging into the trailer and the birth scene having an unexpected stranger show up. He's posting clips of their dance and inviting speculation. He really has not addressed the more substantive charges. Which is great for the court of public opinion but less so in the court of actual law

He addressed it.

Not substantively IMO. Just fluff.

The finance guy not on set during birthing scene is fluff.? Yup, seems consistent with your usual level of logic.

No your redirection seems consistent with your level of logic. I'm not going to use the word usual because I don't know if I've been corresponding with one or multiple posters.

This is the substance of the complaint:

Lively’s character gives birth in the film. On the day of shooting, both Baldoni and Heath are accused of having “suddenly pressured Ms. Lively to simulate full nudity, despite no mention of nudity for this scene in the script, her contract, or in previous creative discussions.” Baldoni told Lively — a mother of four — women “give birth naked” and that his own wife “ripped her clothes off during labor.” He also said “it was ‘not normal’ for women to remain in their hospital gowns while giving birth.” Lively disagreed, but ultimately said she would be naked from below her chest.

The day the birth scene was filmed was allegedly “chaotic, crowded and utterly lacking in standard industry protections for filming nude scenes — such as choreographing the scene with an intimacy coordinator, having a signed nudity rider, or simply turning off the monitors so the scene was not broadcast to all crew on set (and on their personal phones and iPad).”

Baldoni and Heath allegedly did not close the set, which meant nonessential members of the crew were allowed to pass through freely while “Ms. Lively was mostly nude with her legs spread wide in stirrups and only a small piece of fabric covering her genitalia.”

That group also allegedly included Wayfarer co-chairman Mr. Sarowitz, who flew in for one of his few set visits. “Ms. Lively was not provided with anything to cover herself with between takes until after she had made multiple requests,” the complaint reads. “Ms. Lively became even more alarmed when Mr. Baldoni introduced his ‘best friend’ to play the role of the OBGYN when ordinarily, a small role of this nature would be filled by a local actor. Ms. Lively felt that the selection of Mr. Baldoni’s friend for this intimate role, in which the actor’s face and hands were in close proximity to her nearly nude genitalia for a birth scene, was invasive and humiliating.”

Now perhaps you are right about Mr. Sarowitz, I haven't heard that. But clearing that one man from being on set hardly addresses the substance of this claim. And Adam Mondschein, Justin Baldoni's friend, is credited as a doctor acting in the movie on IMDB so he certainly WAS there.

But you picking one weird fact to dismiss and using that to conclude that the whole thing is 'addressed' is interesting. You don't need to be a lawyer to have critical thinking skills.

Anonymous wrote:What bothers me is that this poster is trying to act like he/she is a lawyer and keeps misstating the law. She/he is also repeatedly intentionally leaving out facts. This behavior is just straight up wrong.

I agree with you.

Separate from the above, I do think both sides feel they cannot settle. Yet the BL/RR side is the only side that can lose the further this goes. Their lawyers at Boies and all their other power players aren’t going to be straight with them, and even the rich can have their pockets run by long-term litigation.

Baldoni doesn't even have to prove no SA; it's Lively's burden to prove it happened and time will tell, but based on what we've seen so far I don't think she'll be able to accomplish that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a tale as old as time. A he said she said, the he is a prominent hollywood player who hires a vicious PR firm, the internet rips the woman apart. Zero attempts to look at the situation from both sides. Please provide a single example where in a contentious dispute between a man and a woman in hollywood the woman is believed and the man is injured.

It only happens when someone is SUCH a predator that they assault SO many women that it can't be explained away (weinstein/cosby). And even then they end up getting out of jail!

Prediction: this turns into a 150 page thread talking about what a see you next tuesday you all think she is. Just like all the other multi hundred long page threads in this forum. There isn't one about a man though! It's ALWAYS about the woman. Examine your ingrained misogyny people.

Second prediction: I get a bunch of people replying to me yelling about Blake being awful and Baldoni being her victim and I just blindly take the woman's side.

I'll just get in front of all of those and tell you what I would say in response. These situations are almost always complex with different levels of power at play (in this case, while Lively and Reynolds have significantly higher household name recognition, Baldoni has extremely powerful industry connections, so is not the david to their goliath). And I believe that almost every celebrity is somewhat egotistical/narcissistic almost by the nature of the gig. Therefore it is my belief that there is almost NEVER a party completely innocent here. There is always blame to be found on both sides because it is almost always giant egos fighting with each other. But here, there is never nuance, it is always the woman sucks and the poor man we had a crush on 10 years ago because he was hot in that movie that one time is innocent.

I wrote this on page 14 a few days ago. All the way up to 75 page long thread now huh? Prophecy coming true!

Prophecy coming true? All this demonstrates is you're equally deluded on page 75 as you were on page 14.

Quoted for truth.

What bothers me is that this poster is trying to act like he/she is a lawyer and keeps misstating the law. She/he is also repeatedly intentionally leaving out facts. This behavior is just straight up wrong.

Let’s just ignore the daily but he didn’t prove no sh post. Obviously this particular poster will never be convinced so don’t bother wasting your time responding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What was her actual request? I've read mixed reports on this thread and elsewhere.

Was it "I don't want to be deposed by Freedman at this time" or "I don't want to be deposed by Freedman ever"?

Both. The judge agreed to the first but not the second.

Not a win for her in the slightest.

I know it's very important for you to believe that.

DP. Lol how is this a win for her? her motions were denied.

Her protective order was denied. Baldoni's request to have Lively deposed immediately was denied.

Even though her protective order was denied, the judge invoked the ethics rules on extrajudicial statements and threatened to move up the date of the trial if the lawyers attempt to try it in the press.

Notice that Freedman has been very quiet since the hearing yesterday. I don't think I even saw a statement from him after the hearing. If he made one, he didn't say anything of note. Lively's lawyers have successfully gotten him to quiet down.

Stop lying. He talked to the press on the court house steps about how happy he was with how the hearing went.

After the hearing, Freedman told an array of cameras outside the courthouse that he was pleased with the outcome.

“Our clients are devastated and want to move the case along as quickly as possible,” he said. “We just couldn’t be more pleased with how the case was handled today, how it was managed. We’re going to move as quickly as we possibly can and prove our innocence, in a world where sometimes people judge you before they give you a chance. And we’re going to change that.”

https://variety.com/2025/film/news/blake-lively-justin-baldoni-lawsuit-hearing-1236295247/

That's a very toned down statement when you look at the stuff he was saying just last week in the press. Not a single comment about Lively herself, for instance.

My thought is this: Baldoni will win. No matter what front BL and RR are putting on, they don’t stand a chance for SH. The facts don’t fit the narrative that she’s painted.

Glad the judge said ‘proceed’ with media but time it down. He’s allowing both sides to continue as is, but to keep ot more respectful. So Freedman can continue, but more respectfully.

He didn’t ban the website nor issue a gag order. Win for Baldoni.

You have no idea about this. Baldoni hasn't addressed the really serious stuff like barging into the trailer and the birth scene having an unexpected stranger show up. He's posting clips of their dance and inviting speculation. He really has not addressed the more substantive charges. Which is great for the court of public opinion but less so in the court of actual law

He addressed it.

Not substantively IMO. Just fluff.

Right right right. How many times have you been passed over for partner?

Not once!

Because she isn’t even a lawyer. That much is obvious.

I never said I was, you guys are cuckoo

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What was her actual request? I've read mixed reports on this thread and elsewhere.

Was it "I don't want to be deposed by Freedman at this time" or "I don't want to be deposed by Freedman ever"?

Both. The judge agreed to the first but not the second.

Not a win for her in the slightest.

I know it's very important for you to believe that.

DP. Lol how is this a win for her? her motions were denied.

Her protective order was denied. Baldoni's request to have Lively deposed immediately was denied.

Even though her protective order was denied, the judge invoked the ethics rules on extrajudicial statements and threatened to move up the date of the trial if the lawyers attempt to try it in the press.

Notice that Freedman has been very quiet since the hearing yesterday. I don't think I even saw a statement from him after the hearing. If he made one, he didn't say anything of note. Lively's lawyers have successfully gotten him to quiet down.

Stop lying. He talked to the press on the court house steps about how happy he was with how the hearing went.

After the hearing, Freedman told an array of cameras outside the courthouse that he was pleased with the outcome.

“Our clients are devastated and want to move the case along as quickly as possible,” he said. “We just couldn’t be more pleased with how the case was handled today, how it was managed. We’re going to move as quickly as we possibly can and prove our innocence, in a world where sometimes people judge you before they give you a chance. And we’re going to change that.”

https://variety.com/2025/film/news/blake-lively-justin-baldoni-lawsuit-hearing-1236295247/

That's a very toned down statement when you look at the stuff he was saying just last week in the press. Not a single comment about Lively herself, for instance.

My thought is this: Baldoni will win. No matter what front BL and RR are putting on, they don’t stand a chance for SH. The facts don’t fit the narrative that she’s painted.

Glad the judge said ‘proceed’ with media but time it down. He’s allowing both sides to continue as is, but to keep ot more respectful. So Freedman can continue, but more respectfully.

He didn’t ban the website nor issue a gag order. Win for Baldoni.

You have no idea about this. Baldoni hasn't addressed the really serious stuff like barging into the trailer and the birth scene having an unexpected stranger show up. He's posting clips of their dance and inviting speculation. He really has not addressed the more substantive charges. Which is great for the court of public opinion but less so in the court of actual law

He addressed it.

Not substantively IMO. Just fluff.

Right right right. How many times have you been passed over for partner?

Not once!

Because she isn’t even a lawyer. That much is obvious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What was her actual request? I've read mixed reports on this thread and elsewhere.

Was it "I don't want to be deposed by Freedman at this time" or "I don't want to be deposed by Freedman ever"?

Both. The judge agreed to the first but not the second.

Not a win for her in the slightest.

I know it's very important for you to believe that.

DP. Lol how is this a win for her? her motions were denied.

Her protective order was denied. Baldoni's request to have Lively deposed immediately was denied.

Even though her protective order was denied, the judge invoked the ethics rules on extrajudicial statements and threatened to move up the date of the trial if the lawyers attempt to try it in the press.

Notice that Freedman has been very quiet since the hearing yesterday. I don't think I even saw a statement from him after the hearing. If he made one, he didn't say anything of note. Lively's lawyers have successfully gotten him to quiet down.

Stop lying. He talked to the press on the court house steps about how happy he was with how the hearing went.

After the hearing, Freedman told an array of cameras outside the courthouse that he was pleased with the outcome.

“Our clients are devastated and want to move the case along as quickly as possible,” he said. “We just couldn’t be more pleased with how the case was handled today, how it was managed. We’re going to move as quickly as we possibly can and prove our innocence, in a world where sometimes people judge you before they give you a chance. And we’re going to change that.”

https://variety.com/2025/film/news/blake-lively-justin-baldoni-lawsuit-hearing-1236295247/

That's a very toned down statement when you look at the stuff he was saying just last week in the press. Not a single comment about Lively herself, for instance.

My thought is this: Baldoni will win. No matter what front BL and RR are putting on, they don’t stand a chance for SH. The facts don’t fit the narrative that she’s painted.

Glad the judge said ‘proceed’ with media but time it down. He’s allowing both sides to continue as is, but to keep ot more respectful. So Freedman can continue, but more respectfully.

He didn’t ban the website nor issue a gag order. Win for Baldoni.

You have no idea about this. Baldoni hasn't addressed the really serious stuff like barging into the trailer and the birth scene having an unexpected stranger show up. He's posting clips of their dance and inviting speculation. He really has not addressed the more substantive charges. Which is great for the court of public opinion but less so in the court of actual law

He addressed it.

Not substantively IMO. Just fluff.

The finance guy not on set during birthing scene is fluff.? Yup, seems consistent with your usual level of logic.