#Hollywood defamation case

[latestnews-now]

Justin Baldoni has filed a $400 million lawsuit against Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds, and their publicist Leslie Sloane, alleging defamation, extortion, and more. In this video, we break down the heated legal battle behind 'It Ends With Us.' Learn about the claims, counterclaims, and what this means for Hollywood. Subscribe for more updates on this unfolding drama!

[chaifootsteps]

I had a weird daydream where the American Dad Twitter account made a tweet that was a jab at Viv's version of Stolas. She then retaliated by saying awful things about American Dad's creator and how their show was nothing but a Family Guy ripoff, forgetting that Seth is the creator of both.

She then liked a bunch of tweets that dragged and harassed the American Dad Twitter account, someone even telling Seth to khs. Eventually, this led to a huge lawsuit where Seth sued Viv for harassment and defamation. Viv, after realizing Seth also created American Dad, soon backtracked and even scolded her stans for not "fact checking", but it was too late.

Seth took her to court and won, and the stans who defended her turned on her for throwing them under the bus. The case resulted in Viv being blacklisted in Hollywood, her animators quitting, and her Broadway actors quitting both shows. Seth even got Spindlehorse and the rights to HH and HB after the case ended, rebooting them both.

(Not the same dream anon from before. I'm a different one.)

If only. Sometimes you just wish other creators Viv crosses were as unprofessional and petty as Viv herself.

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

by Dion J. Pierre

Herman’s legal counsel soon realized during its investigation of the case that something else was at play. On the night Muhammad posted her video, the student’s mother, Cassandra Wyatt — who also knew Muhammad personally — told everyone she could on social media that her perception of the classroom incident changed upon her learning that Herman was Jewish.

Given the rhetoric of the mother — as well as that of the father, Joseph Wyatt, who once allegedly said, “The Jews, the Semitics, they run Hollywood — Muhammad should have declined to promote a severely biased narrative to her thousands of followers, according to Herman’s lawyers. They added that the Olympian has refused to retract any of the claims she made.

“The malicious defamation campaign against Ms. Herman was a calculated, antisemitic effort to harm a respected member of the community, motivated by her Jewish identity,” The Lawfare Project’s chief operating officer, Benjamin Cyber, said in a press release. “Ms. Muhammad must be held accountable for the significant trauma she has inflicted. The Lawfare Project commends Bochner PLLC for their exceptional legal work and collaboration with us to pursue justice for Ms. Herman.”

With last month’s ruling, the case can now proceed to discovery.

[queenilyrian]

“Legitimate criticism” like she is a wh*** he lost his career, they child should not exist ,his family is payed to promote PR,writing petitions for both of them to be fired from their jobs respectively ,calling out even her dead mother , not spearing even her dead dog… is “legitimate criticism”.

Honey, did I even mention that? I never excused any of that. And “because you can’t hate in peace” you take every tiny criticism of Natalie as hate. Every bit. If your life revolved around her women’s unemployment- I mean employment- we wouldn’t be having this conversation. I never said I was even a hater. Just an observer that’s read both sides. Touch some grass if you feel the need to defend someone who again, will never know you, 24/7. And like in your reply, you’re arguing with just emotion. Not logic. You clearly don’t have a professional life of your own especially with the way you rant and type. And people have tried to give you receipts of many things about her that are inarguable… like the fact the US courts couldn’t verify her place of work. Or the fact that she has produced nothing at Vertigo. You can’t name one project she’s produced in the last three years. But when someone states the facts… you lash out at anyone who dares to say anything. People see right through you. Save yourself some time and try spending time with friends and loved ones instead of obsessing over this. Have a good day.

I’m gonna address two things about this rambling Jane, the rest you can cry together with the other trolls that got rekt by me.

First of all “in the court case she…” put the fries in the bag Jane . You’re holding on to a straw that’s imaginary. Fact number 1: she was a witness in this defamation case (wow what a surprise someone is Hollywood is suing someone else for millions - shocking ) we don’t have a time stamp on when she testified. Fact number 2: she moved from Legendary to Vertigo sometimes from a date we don’t know to May 2022. Was this time 3 days ,2 weeks or 4 months that she could have testified WE DO NOT KNOW. What we do know is that we have a confirmation she is working for Vertigo. No Jane she didn’t buy an article in the Deadline to promote herself as VP. It was a business news being shared. Yes Jane people who have business read business news. No Jane you can’t pay an article that will say Riot will take over MMF! Cuz there are legal consequences Jane. There would be legal consequences for Henry Cavill claiming that his pregnant girlfriend is working for Vertigo Jane. Let it go.

Second for a self proclaimed scientist you’re insanely stupid. It pains ME to having to google the difference between VP of a production company and a producer. As you can see Natalie’s job isn’t to produce a movie or a Tv series ( but Miri Yoon does it- YES AS A P R O D U C E R) . Natalie’s job is in “overseeing the creation and execution of various projects”. Furthermore “VP of a production company works closely with the producers, directors, and other key stakeholders to ensure that the project is completed on time, within budget, and meets the creative vision.”

Lists of things VP of a production company does:

-Budgeting and financial managing

-Scheduling and logistics

-Hiring and managing the production Team

- Risk management

Notice how her job is not to P R O D U C E a Tv show/ movie Jane. Notice how her job is much more complex and serious. “But I work in the industry and no VP works from home”. Notice how all she needs is a cool boss and access to the internet. The job is planning organising and keeping everyone in check. This is why Matthew Miller (the creator behind new NbC show that’s produced by Vertigo) mentioned

N A T A L I E and her T E A M.

Film producer on the other hand is a person who oversees film production. Either employed by a production company or working independently, producers plan and coordinate various aspects of film production, such as selecting the script, coordinating writing, directing, editing, and arranging financing.

“We only care about facts and critical thinking” and the reality is that you all will read this and continue with hateful narrative because you can’t admit that you lied to slander her. These facts don’t fit in your hateful narrative. Don’t worry I will be here to keep reminding all of you over and over again.

[youngtreetheorist]

Here are a few high-profile cases where celebrities in Hollywood were falsely accused and later found innocent or had allegations debunked:

Johnny Depp - Cleared of domestic abuse claims in the U.S. defamation case against Amber Heard in 2022.

Michael Jackson - Multiple child molestation allegations; in 2005, a jury acquitted him of all charges.

Chris Brown - Falsely accused of rape in Paris in 2019, later cleared by authorities.

Justin Bieber - Cleared of sexual assault allegations from 2020 after providing evidence disproving the claims.

·  Brendan Fraser – Wrongly accused of assault by a journalist; later proven innocent.

·  Chris Hardwick – Cleared of abuse allegations after an investigation by AMC.

Drake Bell - Falsely accused of sexual misconduct, with key allegations disproven during investigations. Wrongly listed as a registered sex offender by The New York Times, despite not being one.

Predators Hollywood protects

Brian Peck – Convicted of molesting a child actor but returned to work in Hollywood after his sentence, showing industry protection.

Kevin Spacey – Faced multiple accusations but was acquitted in 2023.

Roman Polanski – Fled the U.S. after pleading guilty to statutory rape.

Woody Allen – Accused of abuse, though no charges were filed.

Victor Salva – Convicted of child molestation but continued working on films.

Jeffrey Jones – Convicted of possession of child pornography but continued acting.

President Donald Trump: Despite facing multiple indictments and convictions related to his business practices and personal conduct, he remains a public figure and was President of the United States.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Stephen Robinson at Public Notice (05.10.2024):

Not so long ago, the Sunday morning news shows were a vital part of the political ecosphere. Politicians and government officials clamored for the mainstream platform provided by ABC’s This Week, NBC’s Meet the Press, CBS’s Face the Nation, and to a lesser extent, CNN’s State of the Union and Fox News Sunday. This is where presidential campaigns were launched and political agendas defined. Regular viewers have probably noticed, however, that elected Republicans increasingly don’t perform that well outside the safe spaces of Fox and Newsmax. There’s a simple reason for that.

Last Sunday was a case in point. Trump’s vice presidential hopefuls fanned across the Sunday shows and made fools of themselves. North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum spent the evening prior at a Mar-a-Lago donor event where Trump ranted about special prosecutor Jack Smith, spread his usual lies about the 2020 election, and compared President Biden’s administration to the Gestapo. On CNN, State of the Union host Jake Tapper asked Burgum if he was comfortable with this rhetoric, and the governor simply changed the topic. ”Yesterday, we had an opportunity to listen to the president talk for 90 minutes without a teleprompter, covering a wide range of topics, and largely very upbeat, because, if the election was held today, Trump would be winning,” he said.

Burgum downplayed the criminal charges Trump faces and insisted it would be a “travesty of justice” if he was convicted at the end of his New York trial. When Tapper asked him about the recent Time magazine interview where Trump seemingly supported political violence if he lost the election, Burgum could only ramble nonsensically about the 2000 and 2016 elections, neither of which ended in violent coup attempts. Yet Burgum condemned the January 6 attack on the Capitol as it happened, so he should understand the difference. Even worse was Sen. Tim Scott’s appearance on Meet the Press. On January 6, Scott voted to certify Biden’s win. But when host Kristin Welker asked him if he’d commit to accepting the 2024 election results, Scott wouldn’t say “yes.” Instead, he kept reiterating that “at the end of the day, the 47th president will be Donald Trump.”

[...]

These shameless displays generated bad press for Burgum and Scott, which helps explain why some elected Republicans are choosing to stay away from mainstream interviews entirely. Notably, on April 28, not a single elected Republican appeared on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos. This came weeks after GOP Rep. Nancy Mace called for a boycott of the show over Stephanopoulos’s grilling of her. But there’s something deeper going on — Republicans simply can’t defend their ongoing support of Trump.

Mace’s This Week interview on March 10 was a complete disaster. She’s spoken publicly about her own experience as a rape victim, and Stephanopoulos asked how she squares that with her current support for Trump, who has been found liable for defaming a woman he sexually abused. Mace had no real defense, so she lashed out at Stephanopoulos. She argued that Trump wasn’t found guilty in a criminal court (neither was Mace’s rapist). She later accused Stephanopoulos of “mansplaining” rape and shaming her on national TV, when in reality she shamed herself.

[...]

There’s no escaping January 6

Republicans who condemned Trump in 2016 mostly did so on character grounds. He was vulgar and sexist, hardly a “role model” for Americans. Haley said Trump was "everything we teach our kids not to do in kindergarten.” Rep. Elise Stefanik called out Trump’s “inappropriate, offensive comments” on the Access Hollywood tape. Then-GOP Sen. Kelly Ayotte said she couldn’t bring herself to vote for Trump because he’d talked “about assault of women.” Now, after a jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse, Ayotte says “there's no question [Trump’s] the right choice for the White House.”

It was much easier to walk back expressed reservations about Trump and simply focus on right-wing policy wins when he was in the office. Republicans could just pretend they never read his tweets. However, the last traces of plausible deniability went up in smoke on January 6. We all lived through Trump’s coup attempt. We witnessed his refusal to disavow the violence and his continued promise to pardon the convicted insurrectionists, who he calls “January 6 hostages.” Republicans who stuck with Trump after January 6 either minimize the Capitol attack or outright embrace it. When Sununu called out Trump’s election lies and his starring role in January 6, he sounded like Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, but his shameless attempt to remain in MAGA’s good graces tars him as the worst kind of phony. Chris Christie and even Trump’s former vice president, Mike Pence, understand that rejecting Trump’s anti-democratic actions requires withdrawing even tacit support for his current candidacy. Of course, Cheney and Kinzinger are no longer in Congress and neither Christie nor Pence have realistic political aspirations.

Former AG Bill Barr has roundly repudiated Trump. He said Trump “will always put his own interests, and gratifying his own ego, ahead of everything else, including the country’s interest, there’s no question about it.” Nonetheless, he recently told CNN’s Kaitlin Collins that he’ll vote for him anyway because “I think Trump would do less damage than Biden, and I think all this stuff about a threat to democracy — I think the real threat to democracy is the progressive movement and the Biden administration.”

[...] These train wreck interviews make for entertaining clips on social media, but you’d think Republicans would like to avoid starring in a comic farce. Republicans with an agenda other than slavish devotion to Trump would prefer to hammer Biden and Democrats about the border or campus protests, but their presidential nominee is a criminal defendant charged with serious felonies who actively promotes political violence. They can’t escape their support for someone so unfit for office.

Trump has turned the search for his next top running mate into its own reality show, and the contenders like Vance, Cotton, Burgum, Scott, and confessed puppy killer Kristi Noem (who had her own Sunday show disaster on Face the Nation last weekend) will probably keep coming back for more. They have their “audience of one” to please. It’s unclear if Trump watches anything but Fox News and Newsmax, but it’s obvious from his social media feed that he’s aware if any Republican dares speak heresy against him. The mainstream TV interviews are humiliating for Republicans — but maybe that’s the point. Right-wing media outlets are less likely to challenge Republicans about January 6 or accepting the 2024 election results, so the true loyalty test is on the major network shows. Unfortunately, there’s no limit to the moral depths that elected Republicans will sink to remain in good standing with their orange king.

Republicans’ appearances on Sunday morning talk shows (and any outlet outside the right-wing echo chamber) have been nothing short of disasters.

[warningsine]

Just over a year ago, a woman told a crowded room that her ex-husband had kicked and slapped her. She described him throwing a phone at her face. She described him penetrating her with a wine bottle. “I remember not wanting to move because I didn’t know if it was broken,” she said. “I didn’t know if the bottle that he had inside me was broken.” While she said all these things, people laughed. People called her a whore and a liar. People cheered for her ex-husband, and made posters and T-shirts emblazoned with his face.

Only about 14 months have passed since Amber Heard was mocked and shamed on a global stage. But, apparently, that means it’s now high time to relive it. This week, a new three-part series from director Emma Cooper drops on Netflix (UK viewers can also watch via Channel 4 on demand). That’s right folks, we’re back in the hellscape that is Depp v Heard.

There are certain legal cases that transcend courtroom drama to become full-blown ‘where were you when’ cultural moments. Usually, these ‘trials of the century’ are criminal trials. Charles Manson in 1970; OJ Simpson in 1995. But, occasionally, a different calibre of case will grip the public consciousness – one that spins around sex and humiliation; one that strikes to the heart of how contemporary culture understands gender and power. In 1991, attorney Anita Hill testified that Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas had sexually harassed her while she worked as an adviser to him. The Senate ultimately confirmed Thomas’ nomination, while Hill received death threats. Just a few years later, as the new millennium swam into view, another sex scandal rocked American society. This time, the main characters were President Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. Despite Clinton eventually admitting to having had an affair with Lewinsky, for many years the court of public opinion was clear in its verdict: Monica Lewinsky was either a whore, or a liar, or both.

In a sense, the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard defamation trial, which took place from April 11 to June 1 2022, in Fairfax County, Virginia, combined elements of all of these previous ‘trials of the century’. As with Clinton and Lewinsky, a relationship between a younger woman and an older, more famous and more powerful man was under the microscope. In an echo of Hill v Thomas, during which lawmakers accused Anita Hill of suffering from a ‘delusional disorder’, a psychologist hired by Depp’s legal team ‘diagnosed’ Heard with borderline personality disorder and histrionic personality disorder. Like Charles Manson, the man at the centre of proceedings was also the figurehead of an obsessive fan club. And if that fan club grew to resemble a cult, in its slavish devotion to Depp against all reason, it’s largely because, like Simpson’s trial, the whole thing was televised.

However, one key difference between Depp v Heard and these other previous high-profile trials, is the influence of social media on public opinion. The trial was not only ‘televised’ but also TikToked, live-streamed and memed. The tagline for Cooper’s three-parter Depp v Heard even bills the trial as ‘the first trial by TikTok’.

The show opens with the Hollywood sign flickering into Amber Heard’s face on a red carpet. There’s old footage of Depp and Heard on the Hollywood walk of fame, at a dinner, and stepping off a boat in Venice glitch and distort into shots of Los Angeles freeways. News anchors read headlines about the couple, and about the trial. The screen glitches again, into a tree lined highway in Virginia. More clipped footage, more contextualising news clips. Then one anchor raises an important issue – a crucial factor in the trial proceedings that, a year on, often gets lost in the heady internet fog of misinformation, conspiracy, clout-chasing and PR campaigns. Why was the whole sorry spectacle staged in Virginia, when neither Heard nor Depp live or work there?

Well, the ‘official’ reason Depp was allowed to sue in the state is because the news outlet that ran Heard’s article, The Washington Post, “houses its printing press and online server in Fairfax County.” Yet, it’s also because, under Virginia law, the trial judge can decide whether to allow cameras in the courtroom.

Heard’s team tried to exclude the cameras from the trial. At a pre-trial hearing in February, attorney Elaine Bredehoft noted there was already a huge amount of media attention on the trial, as well as scrutiny from what she described as “fearful anti-Amber networks”. “What they’ll do is take anything that’s unfavourable,” Bredehoft said, “they’ll take out of context a statement, and play it over and over and over and over again.” Depp’s team, on the other hand, wanted the trial televised. “Mr. Depp believes in transparency,” his lawyer, Ben Chew declared. It should have been a sign of what was to come that the judge sided with Depp. “I don’t see any good cause not to do it,” Penney Azcarate, the chief judge of Fairfax County, announced. Others saw it differently. “Allowing this trial to be televised is the single worst decision I can think of in the context of intimate partner violence and sexual violence in recent history,” Michele Dauber, a professor at Stanford Law School said in May 2022. “It has ramifications way beyond this case.”

One of the ramifications of Judge Azcarate’s decision is that Depp v Heard is now on our screens. But, none of those quotes from various legal professionals are taken from the series. Indeed, there are no expert voices at all. There is no narration. No one who was involved in the trial is involved in this directly. There is no ‘broad view’, or ‘behind the scenes’, or ‘recontextualising with the benefit of hindsight’. This is a documentary in the loosest of senses. Early takes from the other side of the pond have been split – some critics have suggested it “casts the trial of the decade in a new light”, while others have deemed it “nothing more than a tactless win for pro-Johnny fans”. Perhaps this shouldn’t come as a surprise, given that the trial itself was so notoriously divisive. Personally, I’m inclined to agree with Audra Heinrichs of Jezebel, who described the docuseries as playing “like a highlight reel from hell”. 

If Depp v Heard suggests anything, it’s that people consuming the trial were biased. Well, that’s hardly a scoop, and to my mind, it’s certainly not worth the full, three-hour docuseries treatment. The series doesn’t dig into the motivations of the anti-Amber content creators or their backgrounds. For example, one prolific poster and top Depp stan who is featured extensively but anonymously in Cooper’s three-parter is Andy Signore. Not long before the Depp v Heard trial began, Signore had been fired from Screen Junkies, the YouTube-focused company he founded, for a variety of sexual misconduct allegations. Having set up his channel Popcorned Planet after being dismissed, Signore now posts livestreams about ‘daily news’ and ‘pop culture justice.’ Mainly, he covers what he characterises as the injustice of the #MeToo movement. Signore more than doubled the following of his YouTube channel during Depp v Heard. He made more than 300 videos about the trial, ratcheting up millions of views as he built a new reputation as a crusader for ‘justice’ and, crucially, making money in the process.

All the content creators immortalised in this series, and many more besides, were making money – but this also isn’t discussed or made explicit in Depp v Heard. Cooper presumably believes this allows the content to speak for itself, and lets the viewer weigh up their own thoughts, becoming another member of the public jury. But the true effect is just blur – an endless stream of stuff. Just how much money were all these #JusticeForJohnny content creators making? Was there a coordinated and well funded online PR campaign for Depp throughout the trial, fuelled by bots, as many alleged post-trial? Depp v Heard has no answers, just more clips. He said, she said. No thoughts, just vibes.

I wrote about Depp v Heard last year as the trial was ongoing. Then, I felt like I had to maintain some semblance of neutrality in my discussion of the ‘facts’ of the case itself. The piece wasn’t about who was ‘right’, or who was telling ‘the truth’ – it was about how strange the spectacle of the case had become, and how dangerous a precedent it seemed to set, if trials about intimate partner violence could be spun into comic TikTok clips. I didn’t want to come down on one ‘side’. I wrote that “treating an ongoing defamation trial, featuring graphic and distressing testimony about physical violence, coercive control, and sexual assault, like […] Netflix’s latest true crime documentary series is, at best, distasteful and, at worst, actively dangerous.” Now, as Netflix’s latest documentary series opens up the can of worms again, the only true takeaway is how little we’ve learnt since then.

[notafunkiller]

it's insane to think people like you obsessed with celeb are still a thing, the human evolution stopped with some of y'all damn

Have you tried taking a look in the mirror anon? You say mod is obsessed with a celebrity but what obsession is being displayed? What so called lies is she spreading? By posting others opinions and having multiple respectful conversations? If any of you get this worked up by someone speaking about what others bring to them or that is put out TO SPEAK ABOUT and can’t handle different opinions there’s a block button. Use it. I’ve said this repeatedly but this hasn’t gotten passed crazy. I can’t speak for every anon but for me it’s just talking about a celebrity which has been a thing since Hollywood popped up. No there has been no defamation and I’ve had to had this talk repeatedly for defamation case their has to be proof of suffered damages because of lies and Sebastian’s career is doing just fine. I won’t deny Annabelle has gotten hate she has but she is still working to she’s working now. This is the same cycle I’ve seen repeatedly escalating. It is not this serious. If you like Annabelle and Sebastian’s relationship with her then interact with those accounts you don’t like her interact with accounts that do no post her don’t go to blogs peoples instagram pages or Twitter and constantly screenshot things then try to ignite hate at someone. None of this affects any of our daily lives. I do think some of you need to take a step back because obviously there is quite a few who few seem to take things personally. NONE OF US KNOW HIM!!! And if your gonna come at mod and others for thinking it was weird he didn’t speak in his native tongue and try and say that is hate you need to pick up a book. Thats not hate. I believe mod is from Romania. (Please correct me if I’m wrong) and if I were from Romania after seeing him have no problem speak it on a press run and talking about his roots and telling his mother he loved her and thanked her in Romanian id see it as weird too. She didn’t speak down on him. The minute those of you who run to accounts that you don’t like realize your doing nothing but doing the very thing you come at people so hard for is the day that the fandom will be at peace but I don’t see that happening especially if there’s so much time between content people find ways to entertain themselves 🙄 any way spread love not hatred there’s enough of it going around and it’s not worth putting hate out into the world over someone you don’t know ❤️

SUCH A BEAUTIFUL MESSAGE! Thank you for taking time to write it

And yes, I am from Romania.

Your points >>>

I hope you have a wonderful morning/day/evening/night

[sarahivi]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=253284880916586&id=100087052269925&mibextid=Nif5oz

@observers-journal @luzsp9-1981 @soledadmiranda @talokanda-forever @cantstayawaycani @oakzap425 @cutelatinagirl @love-too-believe

Elena Ríos continues collecting from the public treasury.

According to official reports, it is confirmed that the saxophonist Maria Elena Ríos Ortiz will continue to receive "support" with public money from taxpayers for "the damage" suffered to her person, despite the fact that last week it was announced publicly the opinions of the National Rehabilitation Institute in which it is reported that; the saxophonist "Maria Elena Rios does not present any damage, therefore she does not require any surgery or recovery treatment", she quotes verbatim from the document issued since 2019!.

Despite these and other irregularities, such as their statements that do not coincide with the event of the facts, about dates and the narrative of the alleged acid attack that constantly changes in each hearing, it has been determined that they will continue with the legal process as well as with the "supports" that he receives monthly, which exceed $150,000.

There are many articles where the large amounts of money they receive together with their family are cited, whom they have registered as "indirect victims" to have a protection mechanism that translates into $50,000 per month. Said payments and agreements were made during the administration of the previous government that preceded former Governor Alejandro Murat Hinojosa. There are receipts signed by the former administrative director of the administration secretariat, Mr. Manuel Estrada Montaño, as well as Jose Germán Espinoza Santibañez, who was the titular Secretary of Administration. Likewise, the person who served as director of Human Resources of said secretariat is the Public Accountant José de Jesús Cisneros Pérez.

It should be noted that the saxophonist is currently promoting a media campaign against Hollywood actors, as well as against other public figures, actions that have been counterproductive in her efforts to star as an "activist and defender of human rights", contrary to this, complaints have been exhibited criminal proceedings against him for extortion and defamation, not to mention the other lawsuits that exist against his family for various crimes ranging from falsifying official documents to murder, robbery and drug trafficking.

What do you think about this case?

[whatiwillsay]

that’s what all the gossip mags are saying// yeah no shit. “He made Blake uncomfortable” girl, please. How, when, and where. They say shit like that but give no details about it so they can’t get sued for defamation. It’s plain and simple

Every single PR crisis management firm has had some very problematic clients. It’s business, and the world of Hollywood is very small. So far, the firm hasn’t done anything to make the public cast any judgment in this particular case. Maybe they’ve learned their lesson from the Depp vs. Heard trial, or maybe they haven’t . It’s also possible that other people are involved in this case. Only time will tell. I hope they go about this incident wisely and push back without attacking the other party

how are you doubting a man who’s happy to work with depp’s people made a woman uncomfortable when said man ADMITTED to having to isolate to lose the character because he method acted too much. blake and ryan are the popular kids in high school and probs are obnoxious and annoying and made some typical hollywood missteps. i get it. i don’t stan them. but until proven otherwise when several women distance themselves from a man and reports of him being an ass on set come out i’m trusting the women. jenny slate didn’t even want to say his name.

how and when and where did he make blake uncomfortable? well on set where they worked together, during the filming for the movie, he was difficult to work with and specifically made her feel uncomfortable about her postpartum body. i’m happy to wait more and see what happens but riding this hard for a man who saw what depp’s team did to an innocent dv victim (putting her life in extreme danger) and said “oh yes i’d like to work with them” ain’t it!!!

[sidewayspeace444]

I’m seeing people on other blogs make accusations regarding chris and drugs. I understand theories and speculation over this shitshow, but unless people have hard cold evidence other than “he looked like he was on drugs”, don’t catch a defamation case.

Chris nose has ALWAYS been crooked. I get people being in their feelings about this mess, but let’s stay in reality because accusing someone of being a coke head based on projection ain’t it.

Don’t let this internet screw yall up. Coke heads are VERY noticeable and yes one can hide but eventually it comes to the surface, trust more people would have said something about him looking or acting abnormal if he were on anything at con or if anything were legit off.

Many who actually went to con said he looked and acted fine, so let’s stop the drug bullshit.

One blog claims he has “coke nose”, you mean the same crooked nose he’s has since before he stepped foot in Hollywood.

Don’t get me wrong I’m sure Chris has dabbled in shit in the past, but unless he’s pictured with coke in his nose or he’s publicly acting irate, there’s nothing to prove anything. 🤷🏻‍♀️

What folks think he must be on drugs if he married her…..maybe he just likes making bad decisions. We don’t know this man and mess like this proves it.

I think he’s been on drugs long before alba came into the picture, and he’ll be snorting coke long after she’s gone. He’s surrounded by people who clearly don’t give a shit about him.

[latestnews-now]

Chris Brown has filed a $500 million lawsuit against Warner Bros. and the producers of Chris Brown: A History of Violence. In this video, we break down the defamation claims, accusations against the documentary, and what Brown’s legal team is saying. Learn about the alleged inaccuracies, media ethics concerns, and more.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Ed Hall

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

May 28, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

MAY 29, 2024

The defense and the prosecution today made their closing statements in the New York criminal case against Trump for falsifying business records to hide a $130,000 payment to adult film actress Stephanie Clifford, also known as Stormy Daniels. The payment was intended to stop her account of her sexual encounter with Trump from becoming public in the days before the 2016 election, when the Trump campaign was already reeling from the Access Hollywood tape showing Trump boasting of sexual assault.  

The Biden-Harris campaign showed up at the trial today with veteran actor Robert DeNiro and former police officers Michael Fanone and Harry Dunn, who protected the U.S. Capitol and members of Congress from rioters on January 6, 2021. In words seemingly calculated to get under Trump’s skin, DeNiro said, “We New Yorkers used to tolerate him when he was just another grubby real estate hustler masquerading as a big shot,” and called him a coward. 

When Robert Costa of CBS News asked campaign spokesperson Michael Tyler why they had shown up at the trial, Tyler answered: “Because you all are here. You’ve been incessantly covering this day in and day out, and we want to remind the American people ahead of the…first debate on June 27 of the unique, persistent, and growing threat that Donald Trump poses to the American people and to our democracy. So since you all are here, we’re here communicating that message.” 

Yesterday, in remarks at Arlington National Cemetery in observance of Memorial Day, President Joe Biden honored “the sacrifice of the hundreds of thousands of women and men who’ve given their lives for this nation. Each one…a link in the chain of honor stretching back to our founding days. Each one bound by common commitment—not to a place, not to a person, not to a President, but to an idea unlike any idea in human history: the idea of the United States of America.”

“[F]reedom has never been guaranteed,” Biden said. “Every generation has to earn it; fight for it; defend it in battle between autocracy and democracy, between the greed of a few and the rights of many…. And just as our fallen heroes have kept the ultimate faith with our country and our democracy, we must keep faith with them,” he said. 

His speech at Arlington echoed the message he delivered to this year’s graduating class at the United States Military Academy at West Point, where he urged the graduates to hold fast to their oaths. “On your very first day at West Point, you raised your right hands and took an oath—not to a political party, not to a president, but to the Constitution of the United States of America—against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” he said to applause. Soldiers “have given their lives for that Constitution. They have fought to defend the freedoms that it protects: the right to vote, the right to worship, the right to raise your voice in protest. They have saved and sacrificed to ensure, as President Lincoln said, a ‘government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the Earth.’”

“[N]othing is guaranteed about our democracy in America. Every generation has an obligation to defend it, to protect it, to preserve it, to choose it,” he said. “Now, it’s your turn.” Biden spent more than an hour saluting and shaking the hand of each graduate. 

In contrast, Trump ushered in Memorial Day with a post on his social media company, saying: “Happy Memorial Day to All, including the Human Scum that is working so hard to destroy our Once Great Country, & to the Radical Left, Trump Hating Federal Judge in New York that presided over, get this, TWO separate trials, that awarded a woman, who I never met before (a quick handshake at a celebrity event, 25 years ago, doesn’t count!), 91 MILLION DOLLARS for “DEFAMATION.” He then continued to attack E. Jean Carroll, the writer who successfully sued him for defamation, before turning to attack Judge Arthur Engoron, who presided over the civil case of Trump and the Trump Organization falsifying documents, and Judge Juan Merchan, who is presiding over the current criminal case in New York. 

The message behind this extraordinary post was twofold: Trump can think of nothing but himself…and he appears to be terrified. 

On Saturday, May 25, Trump had an experience quite different from his usual reception at rallies of hand-picked supporters. He was resoundingly booed at the national convention of the Libertarian Party in Washington, D.C., where Secret Service agents confiscated squeaky rubber chickens before his speech. Attendees jeered Trump’s order, “You have to combine with us,” even when he reminded them of his libertarian credentials—tax cuts and defunding of federal equality programs—and promised to pardon the January 6 rioters who attacked the U.S. Capitol. 

Trump also promised to pardon Ross Ulbricht, who founded and from January 2011 to October 2013 ran an online criminal marketplace called Silk Road, where more than $200 million in illegal drugs and other illicit goods and services, such as computer hacking, were bought and sold. Most of the sales were of drugs, with the Silk Road home page listing nearly 13,000 options, including heroin, cocaine, ecstasy, and LSD. The wares were linked to at least six deaths from overdose around the world. In May 2015, Ulbricht was sentenced to life in prison and was ordered to forfeit more than $180 million. 

Libertarians want Ulbricht released because they support drug legalization on the grounds that people should be able to make their own choices and they see Ulbricht’s sentence as government overreach. Trump has repeatedly called for the death penalty for drug dealers, making his promise to pardon Ulbricht an illustration of just how badly he thinks he needs the support of Libertarian voters. But they refused to endorse him. 

Trump appeared angry, and on Sunday, as Greg Sargent reported in The New Republic, he reposted a video of a man raging at MSNBC host Joe Scarborough. In it, the man says that when Trump is reelected: “He’ll get rid of all you f*cking liberals. You liberals are gone when he f*cking wins. You f*cking blowjob liberals are done. Uncle Donnie’s gonna take this election—landslide. Landslide, you f*cking half a blowjob. Landslide. Get the f*ck out of here, you scumbag.” 

Trump’s elevation of this video, Sargent notes, is a dangerous escalation of his already violent rhetoric, and yet it has gotten very little media attention. 

Last November, Matt Gertz of Media Matters reported that ABC News, CBS News, and NBC News provided 18 times more coverage of 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s comment at a fundraising event that “you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables” who are “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic,” than they provided of Trump’s November 2023 promise to “root out the communist, Marxist, fascist and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country.” 

CNN, the Fox News Channel, and MSNBC mentioned the “deplorables” comment nearly 9 times more than Trump’s “vermin” language. The ratio for the five highest-circulating U.S. newspapers was 29:1. 

Clinton’s statement was consistent with polling, and she added that the rest of Trump’s supporters were “people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they’re just desperate for change.” She said: “Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.”

Sargent noted that news stories require context and that Trump’s elevation of the violent video should be placed alongside his many threats to prosecute his enemies. While there is often concern over disrespect toward right-wing voters, Sargent writes, there has been very little attention to the presumptive Republican presidential nominee’s posting of “a video that declares a large ideological subgroup of Americans ‘done’ and ‘gone’ if he is elected.”

Scott MacFarlane of CBS News reported yesterday that Republicans have ignored a law passed in March 2022 requiring the placement of a small plaque honoring police officers who protected the U.S. Capitol and the lawmakers and staffers there on January 6, 2021. It was supposed to be in place by March 2023 but has not gone up. A spokesperson for House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) says his office is working on it. Kayla Tausche of CNN reported today that three of the police officers at the Capitol that day—Sergeant Aquilino Gonell and Officer Harry Dunn, both retired, and Officer Daniel Hodges, who is still with the Washington, D.C., metropolitan police—will be traveling to swing states for the Biden campaign to tell voters that Trump threatens Americans’ fundamental rights. 

Finally, today, Melinda French Gates, co-founder of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, announced $1 billion in new spending over the next two years “for people and organizations working on behalf of women and families around the world, including on reproductive rights in the United States.” Only 2% of charitable giving in the U.S. goes to these organizations, she wrote the New York Times, and “[f]or too long, a lack of money has forced organizations fighting for women's rights into a defensive posture while the enemies of progress play offense. I want to help even the match.”

—

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[ausetkmt]

Tiffany Haddish's Ex-Friend Defends Serving Her Legal Papers Outside Comedy Club, Says Actress 'Refuses' to Apologize for Extortion Allegations

Trizah Morris explained why Tiffany Haddish was served outside of the Laugh Factory.

Tiffany Haddish's former friend defended serving the actress with legal papers outside of the Laugh Factory in Hollywood, telling RadarOnline.comexclusively that Haddish has yet to apologize for accusing her of extortion.

RadarOnline.com told you first that Trizah Morris had filed a defamation lawsuit one year after her children sued the comedian.

Haddish was served around 6:45 PM on August 28, 2023, allowing Morris' $1 million lawsuit to move forward in court.

"Tiffany Haddish was dodging service at her residence, so we had to serve her at the Laugh Factory," Morris told RadarOnline.com in a statement on Thursday.

Morris is suing Haddish and fellow stand-up comic Aries Spears, detailing in court docs how she was close with the Girls Trip star from 2011 to 2020 but was not friends with Spears despite meeting him in 2014.

She accused Haddish of grooming her kids and having them perform sexually inappropriate skits in 2014.

Morris is the mother of two adults who sued Haddish and Spears for child sexual abuse over sketches they filmed with the comedians while they were minors.

Jane Doe alleged Haddish had her film a scene where she simulated oral sex and also claimed her brother was used for a skit with Spears about a pedophile's fantasy.

Haddish's attorney, Andrew Brettler, previously told TMZ the lawsuit was an extortion attempt last fall, claiming, "Plaintiff's mother, Trizah Morris, has been trying to assert these bogus claims against Ms. Haddish for several years."

The comedians denied all allegations of wrongdoing and labeled the lawsuit a shakedown for money.

"While this sketch was intended to be comedic, it wasn't funny at all – and I deeply regret having agreed to act in it," Haddish also said. "I really look forward to being able to share a lot more about this situation as soon as I can."

As we reported at the time, the plaintiffs dismissed the case in September 2022.

Morris filed her lawsuit over statements Haddish and Spears made after her children sued.

Morris later filed her lawsuit over statements the comedians made, labeling her an extortionist.

The court docs stated she claimed to have called Haddish's lawyer in February to ask the actress to release a statement clearing her from the extortion claims.

Morris said she got a call from Haddish in March and was told by Haddish that she would address it if the question was brought up, alleging the actress instead spoke negatively about her in a press tour interview weeks later.

"Haddish refuses to apologize to me for lying about being extorted," Morris alleged to RadarOnline.com on Thursday. "Tiffany Haddish thinks this is a joke and she [allegedly said in April 2023] that Hollywood is going to protect her, that's why she became Jewish."

Morris claimed that Haddish made the last remark when she asked Haddish about clearing the extortion claims.

[arpov-blog-blog]

..."One lawsuit never got enough attention and was quickly dropped since the alleged victim was a 13-year-old virgin.

The charges were dropped in 2016, and the woman remained Jane Doe or Katie Johnson, likely her real name. However, the severity of this case was never truly examined since the elections occupied the media.

The initial allegations, brought by attorney Lisa Bloom claimed Johnson was violently raped in 1994. The assault allegedly happened when the 13-year-old attended org..s organized by Jeffrey Epstein.

Epstein allegedly lured Johnson by promising her a modeling career. In the withdrawn lawsuit, Johnson claimed she met Trump four times.

One encounter was described as a “savage sexual attack.” Allegedly, Johnson “loudly pleaded” for the former president to stop when he started “violently striking Plaintiff in the face with his open hand and screaming that he would do whatever he wanted.”

In the allegations, Jane Doe said she was not allowed to tell anyone or would disappear like Maria. She explained that Maria was a 12-year-old girl also allegedly violated by Trump, never to be seen again.

It is well known that Trump was on friendly terms with Epstein. In the Access Hollywood tape used in the defamation trial, he infamously said, “Grab them by the pu…y.”

Trump called it “locker-room talk.”

Radar Online alleges that Epstein’s brother said that Epstein wanted to distance himself from Trump. The reason was that Epstein thought Trump was a “crook.”

The former president and Epstein, convicted of soliciting minors, started hanging out in the late 80s or early 90s. They ran in the same social circles, and Trump infamously told New York magazine, “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it-Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”

Other allegations of abusing minors showed during Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial."

[trascapades]

⚖️#ArtIsAWeapon

I hope Megan @theestallion feels some sense of peace and can one day fully heal from the physical, mental and emotional trauma inflicted on her.

I hope Lanez is also deported after serving his 10 year sentence. I hate prison, but I don't see any other way to hold him accountable for shooting her and prevent him from harming anyone else.

I hope all those dusty rappers, bloggers, gossip sites and podcasters who harassed, defamed and antagonized #MeganTheeStallion while spreading lies to the public lose their platforms, fanbase and coins.

Story from @apnews -

A judge sentenced rapper Tory Lanez to 10 years in prison Tuesday for shooting and wounding hip-hop superstar Megan Thee Stallion.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge David Herriford handed down the sentence to the 31-year-old Lanez, who was convicted in December of three felonies: assault with a semiautomatic firearm; having a loaded, unregistered firearm in a vehicle and discharging a firearm with gross negligence.

The sentence brings an end to a dramatic trial that created a cultural firestorm in the hip-hop community, churning up issues including the reluctance of Black victims to speak to police, gender politics in hip-hop, online toxicity, protecting Black women and the ramifications of #misogynoir, a particular brand of misogyny Black women experience.

Herriford said it was “difficult to reconcile” the kind, charitable person and good father many people described Lanez as being during the sentencing hearing with the person who fired the gun at Megan. “Sometimes good people do bad things,” Herriford said. “Actions have consequences, and there are no winners in this case.”

Megan testified that Lanez fired the gun at the back of her feet and shouted for her to dance as she walked away from an SUV in which they had been riding in July 2020, after leaving a pool party at Kylie Jenner’s Hollywood Hills home. She had to have surgery to remove bullet fragments.

“Since I was viciously shot by the defendant, I have not experienced a single day of peace,” Megan said in a statement read by a prosecutor on Monday. “Slowly but surely, I’m healing and coming back, but I will never be the same.”

▪︎▪︎▪︎

Reposted from @candicebenbow I wrote about Tory’s sentencing and how, in light of Hip Hop’s 50th anniversary, there must be a reckoning with its treatment of women.

#MeganTheeStallion #IStandWithMegan #BelieveBlackWomen #ToryLanez #DeportToryLanez