Blake Lively sues Justin Baldoni for harassment and reputation destruction

[Bronco 6,372]

7 minutes ago, salty like sodium said:

interesting. From my reading so far my understanding has been that the PR spin campaign is the one that everyone is supporting as real (even her castmates) but so far for the SH allegations it's only been a "she said" (and he didn't say yet but will likely reply at some point in the next few weeks). I feel like the SH allegations are the ones that will be hardest for either side to prove so it really will be down to a jury to decide what the truth is, since I don't see either side moving for a settlement considering the accusations.

See I personally take the view they wouldn't have taken a gamble on such serious allegations given if it were fake/lost it could totally implode the other side of the lawsuit. And also even if she proved the PR campaign side, losing on the sexual harrasment claim would totally destroy any image rehab she wants from the lawsuit. 

Like the sexual harrasment allegations are dangerously specific like accusing him of a **** addiction. You don't go that specific unless you have a way to back it up

But who knows until it goes to court, if it even goes to court lol

[salty like sodium 1,061]

1 hour ago, Bronco said:

See I personally take the view they wouldn't have taken a gamble on such serious allegations given if it were fake/lost it could totally implode the other side of the lawsuit. And also even if she proved the PR campaign side, losing on the sexual harrasment claim would totally destroy any image rehab she wants from the lawsuit. 

Like the sexual harrasment allegations are dangerously specific like accusing him of a **** addiction. You don't go that specific unless you have a way to back it up

But who knows until it goes to court, if it even goes to court lol

This is one thing you need to remember: experience is subjective. (Also he's already admitted to having had a **** addiction in the past so that's not the best example of an "accusation" since there's actual proof of that and it also doesn't really say much about the rest of his behaviour. She just needed to quote his book for that one.) But she can construe him discussing that in a specific instance as a sign of SH when it was perhaps not done with that intent or desire. (For example, perhaps it was a team dinner where people were all sharing intimate details and he spoke about that in that specific context).

The issue is there are very bold claims in the accusation but without any witnesses or any actual filmed evidence it's going to just be a "he said/she said". One of the claims is the team "entered/attempted to enter" her trailer while she was in a "state of undress". If I'm undressed in my trailer and you knock saying "hey are you in there? Can I come in?" That could technically be construed as you "attempting to enter my trailer while I am in a state of undress" and so I could therefore sue you for SH by that logic, even if you were unaware I was even undressed since a trailer has walls that aren't see-through.

So it's all down to subjective experience, his will most definitely differ from hers (and the suit already points to that, since when they agreed to her demands Wayfarer insisted in asserting that their "perspectives differ significantly" or something like that). So ultimately there will be two points of view and the court of public opinion will be making the verdict, both in the courtroom and outside. I do not see a world where this does not move forward to a trial: if she settles it diminishes her claims and makes her seem like she lied. If he settles, it makes him look guilty. Neither are likely to budge and so we will likely see this unravel into a Heard/Depp scenario.

Edited 16 hours ago by salty like sodium