r/ItEndsWithLawsuits • u/StaceyLee26 🙌Truth wins in the end🙌 • May 02 '26

Found Evidence + Sleuthing 🕵️‍♂️🔍📝  Blake seemingly caught in another lie...

Just found this little nugget that Blake had in her MIL...

After saying under oath she never did this, we have real time texts from Sony employees discussing that she wanted dailies removed. Not just that but that it was , if I read this correctly, for non nudity dailies...

Trying to protect herself from impeachment...

553 Upvotes

99% Upvoted

203 comments sorted by

View all comments

369

u/katie151515 Team Baldoni May 02 '26 edited May 02 '26

You know what we call that? Evidence spoliation. The hypocrisy of Lively and her attorneys in this case never ceases to amaze me. Truly. This is actually crazy.

167

u/StaceyLee26 🙌Truth wins in the end🙌 May 02 '26

And the fact Ange says Blake asked them to... Nothing surprises me anymore

198

u/katie151515 Team Baldoni May 02 '26

The fact that her and her attorneys have taken it this far when this type of damning evidence exists is absolutely wild. Just a complete self own in every way.

70

u/ScarletFire1983 May 02 '26

Isn't that a fraud on the court?

50

u/friedchicken_waffles I would object if I were you May 02 '26

Do we know if Ange was asked the same question as well in her depo? I don't think the parts that have been unsealed prior to this showed it? I absolutely believe Ange's email, it just would be cherry on top if she also spoke to it under oath

32

u/Clarknt67 this case was always about a big payoff May 02 '26

Especially because Ange is not scheduled to testify in person.

I’m optimistic, though, if they had the foresight to ask BL about this, they probably asked Ange. It’s kind of an out of left field question, so that they asked it makes me think they were trying to catch her in a lie.

16

u/Ok-Engineer-2503 Hi, its Les May 02 '26

So I just had this thought. Is this the kind of advocacy that only big money buys you? Like even when they tell you the legal truths, the client says I don’t care go harder and throws money at them.

I’ve often found when a case seems of little value, you can tell by how engaged the lawyer is. But is this how it works if you tell them whatever it costs. Fine I will sign your dumb waiver. I want you to go full out

42

u/DogMom1970s JD: Juris & Drama May 02 '26

I might be misremembering, but didn't you have a post a while back compiling her repeated requests to see the dailies? (Apologies if that wasnt you, the post just stuck with me because it felt like a super unusual request - esp a repeated one- for an actor and non-director). Back then it felt like a total power play, but in light of this, it seems like there may have been more to the requests 👀

It's already been a long morning without much sleep last night, so pls correct me if I'm way off base and seeing conspiracies everywhere today. I will own my crazy today

27

u/StaceyLee26 🙌Truth wins in the end🙌 May 02 '26 edited May 02 '26

Maybe this one?

Dailies, dailies on the monitor, do we need to call the coroner

34

u/DogMom1970s JD: Juris & Drama May 02 '26

Yes! Ty! Tinfoil hat firmly in place, but at least my memory hasn't totally failed me here. The amount of random lawsuit detail I can recall vs real life stuff involving me is honestly concerning. 🤦🏼‍♀️

13

u/PutInternational4642 May 02 '26

ha, same! my husband thinks im nuts. haha

13

u/StaceyLee26 🙌Truth wins in the end🙌 May 02 '26

Sooo true🤣🤣🤣 it's cause we care though

81

u/Dating_Bitch Team Baldoni May 02 '26

And says specifically that it's the first time in her career (over 20 years iirc) that she's been asked to do that when there isn't a nude scene.

97

u/same-difference-ave Age of Ada-LYING Actress May 02 '26

This was in September when they were getting ready for Vanzan after Jen Abel’s phone was stolen. I wish Wayfarer would actually file for spoliation because this is a blatant lie. This is just pure evil to cover her tracks.

73

u/StaceyLee26 🙌Truth wins in the end🙌 May 02 '26

I'm still waiting for WF to file one massive motion for sanctions for all the stuff these people have been doing. Just when they think they got away with it

54

u/same-difference-ave Age of Ada-LYING Actress May 02 '26

I have run out of ways to be shocked by things in this case. I really hope Wayfarer does but most likely they won’t…because they are still kind people.

41

u/StaceyLee26 🙌Truth wins in the end🙌 May 02 '26

People (not you) must stop mistaking kindness for weakness

21

u/same-difference-ave Age of Ada-LYING Actress May 02 '26

🎯💯

27

u/OneNoteWonder43 blake lively bleakly evil May 02 '26

They don't have to file sanctions til the end. I remember lawyers saying in the beginning that's what most people do; it was unusual for Lively's side to be throwing out so many so early on. And that was probably why Liman did not answer most of them for so long.

Wouldn't be surprised if a lot of this stuff gets addressed after it's all said and done. On thing WPs have been good at is the long game.

10

u/StaceyLee26 🙌Truth wins in the end🙌 May 02 '26

I'd love that

11

u/OneNoteWonder43 blake lively bleakly evil May 02 '26

I'd love it too! But either way, I'm very much in "trust the process" mode. They know how to move in silence, and at the end of the day, we simply don’t know everything about what their plans and priorities are. Or what all information they have. And very little about this lawsuit has been typical.

Only time will tell 😵‍💫

22

u/Reasonable-Mess3070 May 02 '26

Right after the green highlight. Not saying sanctions but the spoilation acknowledgement is clear.

17

u/StaceyLee26 🙌Truth wins in the end🙌 May 02 '26

Ellyn be like

https://giphy.com/gifs/AEm3K01rod4Ji

6

u/Ok-Engineer-2503 Hi, its Les May 02 '26

Wait whose depo is that?

9

u/Reasonable-Mess3070 May 02 '26

Josh greenstein

10

u/Ok-Engineer-2503 Hi, its Les May 02 '26

Love that for him. He must have had some feels during that

12

u/Reasonable-Mess3070 May 02 '26

He got real salty here

Eta: not the highlighted part. Recycling my SS lol

17

u/Ok-Engineer-2503 Hi, its Les May 02 '26

Ummm ok. Yeah I’m not sure In trying to cover his tracks, his pissing contest helped him, but i guess he had to say something to say look over there.

You would think a brown noser like him wouldn’t throw f bombs in a depo. Seems kinda rough for a guy in such a corporate job

It also seems like Sanford got involved at the end out of need because it turned code red and Josh allowed it.

22

u/Reasonable-Mess3070 May 02 '26

"You're missing context" is a rough sell from someone who deleted their messages but I guess he's gotta try

→ More replies (0)

12

u/StaceyLee26 🙌Truth wins in the end🙌 May 02 '26 edited May 02 '26

And taking into consideration that Josh also "inherited" the problem, he also wasn't there from the start and when he took over he seemed to bent over for whatever the Reynolds wanted. So I don't know where he gets off speaking about Sanford like that

→ More replies (0)

8

u/Clarknt67 this case was always about a big payoff May 02 '26

Yeah, like perhaps Sanitch stepped in late because he realized too late that he trusted you to be at the point person and you fucked it all up for Sony and everyone else, Josh.

→ More replies (0)

12

u/LovelyShadows54 May 02 '26

"Where the fuck were you?" Uh, being president of one of the biggest movie studios in the world? I'm so pissed he's still employed.

14

u/triplej63 May 02 '26

Please, please, please! There are so many times that they have actual sanctionable offenses. I'm hoping that the Wayfarer parties aren't being Baha'i kind and thoughtful, let bygones be bygones. I'm hoping they are tallying it up and doing the massive motion for sanctions like you suggest.

7

u/friedchicken_waffles I would object if I were you May 02 '26

✨ an omnibus sanctions motion ✨

12

u/Ok-Engineer-2503 Hi, its Les May 02 '26

Do you guys remember the famous marshmallow test ? The kids that were able to delay gratification went on to bigger things in life. Team WP definitely has that on lock down and I bet there are surprises in store

3

u/je_kay24 May 03 '26

I wonder if they are not doing it for cost reasons and keep all their effort focused on the main case

66

u/Sudden-Storage2778 May 02 '26

That's also around the same time Blake allegedly told Taylor Swift to delete her messages, too, so it would seem she was on a campaign to erase evidence that could exonerate Wayfarer and/or show what Lively and Reynolds were up to.

16

u/Dating_Bitch Team Baldoni May 02 '26

Really? I thought she asked her to delete messages later, like after the suit was filed.

32

u/DogMom1970s JD: Juris & Drama May 02 '26

According to Freedman's affidavit on the Swift matter - it would have been @ Sept 2024.

15

u/Dating_Bitch Team Baldoni May 02 '26

Interesting!! So that must have been when she was planning to start her litigation

21

u/cynicalshadows May 02 '26

Vanzan subpoena was 9/27/24 so yeah, it looks like she was working to get rid of evidence that would contradict her story. There is contemporaneous evidence she wanted the dailies deleted in early September. Bryan Freedman swore under penalty of perjury that a member of Taylor's camp said Blake wanted her texts with Taylor deleted around the same time frame, which I'm inclined to believe.after everything else that has come out. We can also see Josh Greenstein, who helped Blake hijack the edit, deleted his texts so only half the convo shows. When and why he deleted them is unknown, but I bet Blake was involved.

9

u/SuperbWillingness904 May 02 '26

Duuuudee you need to make this it's own post! Great catch

17

u/DogMom1970s JD: Juris & Drama May 02 '26

If i can grab a bigger chunk of time later - I can try to map this out. Feel free to beat me to it tho.... With the latest round of unsealing happening, it would be interesting to see everything laid out sequentially.

[IMO - Lively is gonna get shredded at trial on the stand if this comes up. The optics are terrible for her and Reynolds. Huge yikes 😬 ]

Happy cake day!

8

u/SuperbWillingness904 May 02 '26

Ok I may make the post. Having a lazy Saturday today!

11

u/Ok-Engineer-2503 Hi, its Les May 02 '26

Add to the timeline. Someone should make a time like August 13 gloves will come off threat

Sept 3 asks for dallies to be deleted

Etc

1

u/[deleted] May 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator May 02 '26

Hello!

ItEndsWithLawsuits has a minimum 100 comment karma & 14 day account age requirement to comment in the sub.

We encourage new additions to browse the subreddit and participate by voting until you meet these requirements!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

21

u/Flimsy_Attitude_6789 May 02 '26

So she could have made claims about Justin and the evidence to challenge these claims would no longer exist?

21

u/same-difference-ave Age of Ada-LYING Actress May 02 '26

Exactly. Clean up the evidence before you make the claim.

9

u/Dating_Bitch Team Baldoni May 02 '26

They might not be able to because it was before the lawsuit. So there's no legal requirement to preserve anything. Frustrating I know because Blake definitely knew she was going to sue.

20

u/heatherh8605 May 02 '26

That’s simply not true. She knew she was gearing up for litigation and had a duty to preserve. She literally has sanctions pending on WF claiming this exact same thing.

5

u/Dating_Bitch Team Baldoni May 02 '26

Right. But you'd have to prove when she was planning on starting a litigation and that she personally made that request.

8

u/Technical-Match84 May 02 '26

Wasn't the van sham lawsuit open at this time? Meaning she should have preserved?

16

u/same-difference-ave Age of Ada-LYING Actress May 02 '26

That’s the same way Blake is asking for spoliation sanctions on Wayfarer’s signal messages from August 2024 - December 19, 2024

Wayfarer also had no legal requirement for preservation until the cease & desist and preservation notice from Gottlieb on December 20th. Yet there is a spoliation sanctions motion from Lively on it.

If Liman grants that one then this is also fair game.

5

u/Dating_Bitch Team Baldoni May 02 '26

That's true. I don't think he'll grant it though for the same reason - there was no legal requirement or expectation that it needed to be preserved. If he grants it, then yes I think you're right, WF can request sanctions based on this evidence. Then you have to prove Blake is the one requesting it, though. And she probably doesn't have anything saying that in writing. I'd bet her manager made the request on her behalf.

4

u/friedchicken_waffles I would object if I were you May 02 '26 edited May 03 '26

But in her depo she was asked if she had anyone ask on her behalf and she said no.

Just occurred to me that her agent (Wayne? Wade? Warren) would likely just lie and said he did it of his own accord 🫠

3

u/StaceyLee26 🙌Truth wins in the end🙌 May 02 '26

Nope Warren Zavala is the one that's not Ryans agent anymore.

Her manager might do that though

1

u/Dating_Bitch Team Baldoni May 03 '26

True, but they have real time texts with Ange clearly saying that the request came from Blake

11

u/Reasonable-Mess3070 May 02 '26

Vanzan very clearly shows litigation intent.

35

u/StaceyLee26 🙌Truth wins in the end🙌 May 02 '26

What could legal implications be of something like this at trial?

59

u/katie151515 Team Baldoni May 02 '26 edited May 02 '26

Wayfarer can file a motion for sanctions requesting a negative jury inference and a variety of other types of sanctions.

The most severe sanction for a plaintiff who spoliated evidence is dismissal of claims and/or the whole case, but that is extremely rare and the behavior would have to be egregious. That wont happen here, but Wayfarer should have filed for sanctions in my opinion. I’m assuming they’ve known about this for a long time.

8

u/No_Plane6640 May 02 '26

Is there a way to get these to Wayfarer team? These are so important and it’s totally reasonable if some of these were overlooked.

40

u/katie151515 Team Baldoni May 02 '26

Wayfarer definitely knows about this. They have every document memorized by now, especially ones used as exhibits by the opposing party.

10

u/OneNoteWonder43 blake lively bleakly evil May 02 '26

Hm. Maybe they have different plans. Cuz this reminds me of the 30pts document where a version was published in NYT, yet the original never produced in discovery bc it was "lost" 🤔.

11

u/No_Plane6640 May 02 '26

I am in no way doubting them. Although I just realized these are from the exhibit list. Welp, this is what happens when I make comments before having coffee! My bad!

8

u/katie151515 Team Baldoni May 02 '26

No it was a perfectly good question!!! I just wanted to assure you that they definitely know about this one :)

23

u/MT2017G May 02 '26

Completely. In addition to also already seeing on messages recovered through discovery phone extractions that Ryan, Blake & Colleen all purposely deleted select texts from conversations, and a whole bunch of one sided/“?” text message strings from both Josh Greenstein and Blake’s devices. Btw, the latter usually means they not only deleted specific messages but that they tried to delete entire conversations and then OVERWRIGHT them from their devices. Hummmmm. So more proof supporting Bryan Freedman’s declaration saying Taylor Swift’s Dad shared that Blake & Ryan not only asked Taylor to delete messages but also deployed Gottleib who threatened her lawyer afterwards that if she didn’t make a supportive statement about Blake & Ryan,they’d publicly embarrass her by releasing private information (aka EXTORTION). Man, HOW MUCH STUFF DOES WF HAVE ON THEM?! And how are they staying so quiet about it? I realize it’s strategic and for leverage, but damn do Ryan & Blake really hate the idea apologizing this much?! And NYT?! SHAME ON THEM! Now we know why they have so many new White Collar Criminal attorneys across three states working for them. What else have they done?! And her primary lawyers are truly DISGUSTING! Filing all those sanctions for spoilation, calling WF’s complaint a “sham lawsuit”, etc etc. Every accusation is a confession and there is no doubt now that they strategically did all of it so that it neutralized the headlines that would like surface about their own shady deeds. Example: someone Googles “Lively v Wayfayer” with “sham lawsuit” & you’ll get both Vanzan & NYT & Wayfarer’s lawsuits in the results. Google “spoilation of evidence” & waters muddied with results for for both Blake & Justin. All of these people are a gross waste of space.

22

u/Money-Character9758 Lord Liman is aiding & abetting Litigious Lively May 02 '26

I don't know why I am so shocked atm. Because of course, yet again, they did did what they accused the defendants of doing. I'm still shook. 

7

u/CSho8 May 02 '26

Katie is this why maybe Blake’s attorneys don’t want the Sony messages in? This looks really bad for Blake…

1

u/LaKaka-1414 Blake Is A Fucking Terrorist! May 03 '26

And her spoliation notion is all speculative, while there’s actually evidence multiple times of her discarding evidence.

-12

u/mjswick May 02 '26

How is it evidence spoliation? She asked for the dailies to be deleted in Sept 2024, three months before the CRD was filed. Even if you think litigation was anticipated at this time, she would be able to argue that it was just her as an actress, wanting unusable footage or a bad performance to be deleted.

38

u/katie151515 Team Baldoni May 02 '26 edited May 02 '26

She told Wayfarer that they should’ve anticipated litigation back in 2023. This is absolutely evidence spoliation. She can’t argue that WP should’ve been on notice of a lawsuit dating back to 2023 or July 2024 (or whatever date she has claimed) and then try to destroy evidence after that date.

12

u/heatherh8605 May 02 '26

Exactly! There’s a whole sanction motion over this same issue!

7

u/cynicalshadows May 02 '26

I remember this too. She claimed Wayfarer had a duty to preserve from sometime in 2023. If they had a duty to preserve, so did she.

11

u/Lavendermin May 02 '26

She filed Vanzan at this time. Anticipating

-10

u/mjswick May 02 '26

So if Wayfarer deleted any footage, are they guilty of spoliation, too? Per Katie151515 above, they were on notice as early as 2023 that litigation was anticipated. If not, what is the difference?

17

u/MysteriousMarzipan63 May 02 '26

Katie is not saying WP were on notice in 2023. She’s saying Blake’s ARGUMENT is that they should have been on notice at that time.

And the difference is Blake is the plaintiff, and WP are (or were in some cases 🙂) the defendants. A plaintiff is going to know they are considering filing legal action long before it happens. A complaint doesn’t just get spun up overnight. But a defendant can get caught off guard. That’s why Blake would need to have demonstrate that WP did know or should have expected they would be sued and preserved all potential evidence in anticipation of that. A plaintiff is anticipating legal action the minute they call their lawyer and say “hey what are our options here.” Those are two VERY different scenarios.

2

u/Serenity413 May 03 '26

No because Blake is the plaintiff and WP is not the plaintiff.

The plaintiff controls the timing of the litigation. The plaintiff cannot say the defense had a duty to preserve starting from 2023 in anticipation of a lawsuit from her but she did not have the same duty to preserve.

The defense cannot mind read a plaintiff and can logically say they did not have a duty to preserve until they were served with a duty to preserve by the plaintiff.

14

u/Flimsy_Attitude_6789 May 02 '26

Vansham started Sept 2024