notactuallygolden
Region: US
Monday 27 January 2025 15:40:40 GMT
8508
530
179
14
Music
Download
Comments
C :
In a sea of Justin baldoni Stans, your content is a life raft of sanity
2025-01-27 16:11:00
32
Root Healing Andrea :
What do you think of the meta stamps on the NYT images being on as early as 12.16.24
2025-01-27 21:50:57
8
jennifer_jen_mom :
This is so interesting. Thank you
2025-01-27 15:51:55
11
zeeen :
Please, does that mean she can’t ask for discovery about anything proving his intention (to SH or specifically to retaliate?)
2025-01-27 17:09:57
2
frankieboy99 :
Also it’s not just what she did it’s also what RR as co-respondent did.
2025-01-28 00:00:04
0
Lauren MacKay :
He also included negligent interference claims too, so if he can’t show intent he can at least fall back on those
2025-01-27 16:09:47
27
shannon :
You do such a good job of explaining the possible strategies and legal landscape to give both sides credit. You make it about the legal side not the interpersonal drama
2025-01-27 18:32:22
12
Caity Calloway :
❤️❤️❤️
2025-01-27 17:10:02
1
Tidge :
@Daily Dose of Dana Podcast
2025-01-31 18:55:35
0
user2401643136907 :
😂😂😂
2025-01-30 18:53:36
0
millie bob thornton :
👍👍👍
2025-01-28 17:58:24
0
❤️ :
Whats the point of her suing him? Is she asking for money or public apology? Like why did she do this to begin with (other than sexual harassment is bad)
2025-01-27 19:34:39
0
Jordana :
She may not have to prove intent but there are already 5 texts or so FROM her that show she invit3d him into her life world space so already she has to explain why she inv if she was scared
2025-01-27 16:27:52
15
sarah siegel 🇨🇦 :
I don’t see how he could ever win “actual malice” against the NYT. Wouldn’t he need to prove that the journalist intended to harm him?
2025-01-27 15:49:36
7
Reese :
I’ve been confused about her claims from the beginning, because she signed on to be in a movie with sexual content in it, and she’s saying he sexually harassed her while they’re filming a scene.
2025-01-27 16:57:58
8
Maggy :
Thank you for such clear information. But I’m confused on one part, when actors are claiming that improv scenes were SH wouldn’t she still have to prove intent considering the nature of their work?…
2025-01-27 16:03:33
9
fahrenam :
Are texts between Ryan and Blake protected because they are married?
2025-01-27 15:50:50
19
DapplegrayManor :
I actually believe there was no intentional SH but it was SH. I also think Wayfarer intentionally fomented a smear campaign as retaliation for the SH claims & general revenge.
2025-01-27 16:00:18
10
mrsjjsylva :
If she suffered emotional damage from SH where is the evidence that she reported this? She said she went to Sony & they ignored her. Everything would be documented
2025-01-27 16:26:47
8
dirtymartini1970 :
i think it’s the severe and pervasive part that she’s not gonna be able to prove
2025-01-27 16:46:37
12
redheada11i :
Could it be argued that any PR retaliation was due to being snubbed at the premiere, unfriendly, etc, rather than in response to the SH claims?
2025-01-27 16:59:50
9
CrawfordTikker :
That’s just so sad that someone can just make up anything and destroy your life.
2025-01-27 19:59:38
14
cristina_heiress_mendez :
While she may not have a lrge burden of evidence/intent, won’t the judge and/or jury take the entire scene of professional actors falling in love per script into inconsideration.
2025-01-27 16:21:22
6
alexandcai :
Good point but for SH - is this a subjective or an objective test? Does she have to prove a reasonable person would come to the same conclusion? Or is it both?
2025-01-27 16:25:52
5
xoxo :
People definitely don’t understand this.
2025-01-27 15:55:38
5
To see more videos from user @notactuallygolden, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
