Did Blake Lively Taylor Swift really threaten?

Just when we thought that the legal dispute between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni could not get a more chaotic, a week with headlines with a Taylor Swift civilization, the threat of blackmail and the judgment of a judge on the matter in this matter.

In a minute we discussed what a potential Taylor Swift pre -load would mean in the event, and in the next we digest an affidavit that was submitted by Baldoni's lawyer, who claimed that Lively's team had tried to arm the superstar in the pronouncement.

As details of the legal letter appeared online, together with the allegations that Blake Lively Taylor Swift had recovered It ends with us The co-star Justin Baldoni, Swifties and skeptics had questions.

What exactly is going on between Blake Lively and Taylor Swift and how did we get here? In the following we unpack the latest legal drama for the lawsuit by Justin Baldoni and Blake Lively.

May 14: Baldoni's Lawyer Files in which extortion claims are described

After an attempt by LIVELYS RIGHTE team to pick up the previously submitted Taylor Swift pre -loading, Bryan Freedman, the lawyer of Baldoni, replied with the submission of a letter to the court.

In the letter, Freedman Lively's claim that his summons were submitted under the guise of the guise of demanding “irrelevant information” and accusing LIVELY “Witness Manipulation and Evidence Spoliation”.

In addition, he claimed to have received a tip from “a source that probably had reliable information”, who allegedly had information about Lively's lawyer who turned with Swift's legal team People.

The exchange, the source, said “demanded that Ms. Swift publish a support for Ms. Lively” and “Views that if Ms. Swift refused, private text messages from personal nature were published in Ms. Lively.”

Although there is no evidence of such claims, Freedman said that the summons that Taylor Swift had presented would try to use a message between her and Blake Lively as evidence.

May 14: Blake Lively denies allegations of blackmail

Almost as soon as the bombless claims entered the headlines, Lively's legal team came out with an explanation in which the content of the letter was “categorically false”.

“We clearly deny all of these so -called allegations that cowardly related to supposed anonymous sources and are completely disappointed with reality” People.

“This is what we expected from the lawyers of the Wayfarer parties who at first shoot nothing more than first shoot, without evidence and without concern for the people who harm them in this process,” continued the explanation. “We will submit applications to the court directly to blame these lawyers for their misconduct.”

May 14: Lively's Jural Team application letter, which is to be made from court files

Immediately after the rejection of Freedman's allegations, one of Lively, Esra Hudson's lawyers, submitted an official application to dismiss the letter and its content.

“In this letter, which does not proof of any kind, much less under oath, Ms. LIVELY incorrectly accused Ms. LIVELY, and her lawyer to participate in” witness manipulations and evidence representatives “based on an unknown anonymous source,” surfed the legal request.

“It should be unnecessary to react to anonymous, unfounded and without supporting evidence,” continued the document. “However, it is worth determining the recording that each of the allegations in the Freedman letter is clear and demonstrably wrong.”

In the letter to the US district judge Lewis J. Liman, the lawyers for LIVELY also questioned the intention of Freedman's letter, and accused Baldoni's team to wash “scandalous and defaming allegations” and to abuse the court's court.

May 15: Freedman doubles with the signed affidavit

Accordingly PeopleFreedman shot back with a signed affidavit that the punishments of meinereid had-and claimed that he personally held a one-hour call with a “person who connected very closely with Taylor Swift”.

The anonymous source allegedly said Freedman said that LIVELY's lawyer apparently contacted Taylor Swift's lawyer with the request to submit a social media declaration to support Blake.

Since the affidavit did not do this, the affidavit would lead to the lively “10 years” of private texts with Ms. Swift. Freedman also claimed that the source had informed him that Blake Lively had requested that Taylor Swift present evidence of her earlier text before the process “Four or five months”.

Freedman tried to give credibility and revealed that he was associated with the anonymous source by a “common friend who told me that the person wanted to speak”.

May 15: Richter grants LIVELY's application for strike Freedmans claims

On May 15, judge Liman made the application to remove Freedman's letter And Agfidate explanation from the case.

He called Freedman's experiment “inappropriate” and “irrelevant for every problem before this court” and described the latest update as a practiced that should “promote public scandal”.

The judge also advised Freedman that a future abuse of the court's court damage “could have met sanctions”.

May 15: The LIVELY legal team reacts to the judge's decision

Divided in a statement The cutA spokesman for LIVELY applauded the judge's quick response and wrote: “The Court lasted less than 24 hours to enforce Mr. Freedman's irrelevant, improper and inflammatory allocations, to strike them, to remove them from the court and to warn Mr. Freedman that further misconduct can affect sanctions.”

The latest update is not the first time that the Baldoni legal team was called for experimental to manipulate the court of public opinion with inflammatory claims. According to the news of the edition of the summons, a spokesman for Taylor Swift accused the lawyers of Baldoni to use their names to “draw public interest by creating boulevard clickbait”.

And if we know something about the ongoing It ends with us Legal drama, we got to know the alleged tactics that the Baldoni team used too well.

Related articles: