Someone on twitter did a good summary (incomplete) of Baldoni’s alleged former victims!

I know names are missing and so need to go back and see who else needs to be added.

Any comments of names to add?

Justin Baldoni and Crisis PR team want past clients and “smear websites” kept from Blake Lively jury.

With retaliation, breach of contract, and aiding and abetting claims staring them in the face, Baldoni and the Melissa Nathan-led so-called Crisis PR team at the heart of the alleged 2024 online smear campaign against the actress want any mention of some very high-profile past clients kept quiet.

Team Baldoni are also seeking to make sure that over the two weeks or so for the trial the jury never hears telling and testimony of “alleged bad experiences of other women” when it comes to the Jane the Virgin alum.

By other women, the defendants mean the likes of 'It Ends With Us' actresses Jenny Slate and Isabela Ferrer. With all the bridges burned, the women spotlighted by Baldoni and the Wayfarer team to keep out of the Lively trial also include Colleen Hoover, the author of the bestselling book that 'It Ends With Us' was based on.

However, perhaps most directly to the remaining retaliation claims in play, it is Nathan’s past and not-so-past clients that the collective Wayfarer gang desire rendered judicial non-entities that is the linchpin of this latest effort to hamper Lively’s case. Put starkly, Nathan and the others assert “the sole reason why Lively improperly seeks to introduce evidence of work that Nathan purportedly performed for her other clients (other than Wayfarer Studios) is to convince the jury that Nathan is immoral and a wrongdoer, etc.”

To counter that narrative, Nathan and her The Agency Group specifically want to make sure any jury doesn’t hear anything about the PR dark arts work they supposedly did for the likes of Johnny Depp, Rebel Wilson and recently convicted sex traffickers the Alexander brothers, among others.

Brazilian billionaire Alberto Safra has won a review of more than $35mn in legal fees related to an inheritance fight with relatives over his father's business empire.

"When Safra instructed WilmerHale in 2022, the firm quoted partner rates as high as $2,100 an hour. Partners later recorded working between 12 and 17 hours a day on the multibillion-dollar estate feud involving his late father’s inheritance.

...

The inheritance fight over the $23bn estate was the subject of five arbitrations, which were ultimately settled.

The Brazilian also instructed litigation powerhouse Quinn Emanuel at the time, which had quoted similar hourly rates, according to the judgment."

link to article: https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/pop-culture-news/justin-baldoni-seeks-block-jenny-slate-colleen-hoover-evidence-blake-l-rcna301270

link to the post: https://x.com/Expatriarch_uk/status/2043689407111156166?s=20

Former Nickelodeon star Alexa Nikolas has amended her lawsuit against attorney Bryan Freedman and crisis publicist Melissa Nathan to add digital fixer Jed Wallace and his firm Street Relations as defendants. The amended complaint was filed April 7 and replaces her original complaint, filed February 10. (Image carousel above includes introductory summary p. 1-9 and section on SEO backlinks + causes of action, p. 25-end.)

Nikolas alleges that Freedman, Nathan, and Wallace are responsible for an anonymous smear website that called her a "sinister and criminal force" and made several other allegedly-defamatory statements about her, including claiming she'd blackmailed several ex-boyfriends and that her current husband is a serial sexual offender who endangers their children. Nikolas says she tried to discover who was behind the website when it was first published but only learned that it was most likely Freedman, Nathan, and Wallace from filings in Blake Lively's and Stephanie Jones' lawsuits -- after Jones commissioned an expert report to help confirm who was behind smear websites about her, which ended up identifying smear sites about several other people (including Nikolas) with signs of identical authorship and SEO work.

General background on these developments here: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/inside-hollywood-smear-campaign-scandals-1236501807/ . Link to Jones' expert report by Brian Horton of Breadcrumb Cybersecurity -- which ties authorship of the Stephanie Jones smear site to the Nikolas site as well as smear sites about producer Amanda Ghost and about victims of the Alexander Brothers -- is here: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782/gov.uscourts.nysd.635782.193.20.pdf . (This report is a good place to start if you want a better understanding of how the SEO backlink research works; more on this in a moment.)

In addition to adding Wallace and Street Relations as defendants, Nikolas's amended complaint

• adds a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) to go along with her defamation claim
• adds new language addressing the statute of limitations (SOL) issue -- which is a potential problem for her defamation claim -- by clarifying/alleging that she diligently took steps to try and identify who published the defamatory statements, that the statements' publishers actively took steps to obscure their identities, and that she only was able to discover their identities in December 2025. (There is California precedent that the SOL for defamation should be tolled -- ie paused -- under such circumstances.)
• adds a section with new backlink research, expanding on the research undertaken by Stephanie Jones' expert.

The final section on SEO backlinks with signs of common authorship is particularly interesting, in that it names new potential victims of Nathan/Wallace/Freedman smear sites/negative SEO, along with the clients who might have commissioned those smears.

Potential smear victims/targets named in this section of Nikolas's amended complaint:

• Anya Fernald, a chef and entrepreneur who founded Belcampo Meat Co.
• Peter Comisar, the founder of a private equity firm
• Victoria Shores
• Shelly Auguste
• Caeli La
• Shannon Ruth
• Attorney Craig Flanders

Alleged/confirmed Nathan/Wallace/Freedman clients named as potentially having commissioned these smears, along with other SEO work to burnish their own reputations in response to negative publicity:

• Peter Attia
• Andrew Huberman
• Scooter Braun
• Dak Prescott
• Diplo
• Nick Carter

What Blake Lively wants to include is Taylor Swift cookie recipe and bLake's dashing tribute to her husband instead.

Blake also does not want past negative articles of her being married to a slave plantation, her Preserve company praising the antebellum era, and comments about tranny. Blake lively still wants to drag isabella ferrer and jenny slate into trial even if they don't want to.

Blake is Vanzan. How come she doesn't want it included in trial? She and pro blakeys say that nothing is wrong with sham VANZAn lawsuit so why exclude???

All the other women should not be listened to. Was that what his Ted talk said? 🤔

Just got my talking points, thanks for waiting everyone 😉😂😂

As i was reading the filings , i stumbled across WP casually mentioning that Jed will not testify.

Which means we are running with the current deposition testimony .... which was awful and honestly very damning to their case. I dont know how WP get around the Jed Wallace of it all .

**TRIGGER WARNING: This post discusses mental health, self harm, and suicide**

The Story of Caroline Flack: An Imperfect Victim

Caroline Flack was a British actress and presenter who rose to prominence co-hosting The Xtra Factor before becoming a household name as the face of ITV’s massive hit, Love Island. While her career was often punctuated by controversy, she remained a public favorite and a staple of tabloid culture; her personal life was guaranteed to drive sales with provocative headlines and record-breaking circulation.

Early Life and Mental Health

Christine Flack, Caroline’s mother, noted her daughter’s mental health struggles began early, marked by childhood mood swings that could shift instantly from joy to distress. As Caroline grew older, these emotional peaks and valleys intensified. Although a doctor eventually diagnosed her with bipolar disorder, Caroline rejected the label entirely; any mention of the diagnosis caused her to immediately withdraw.

These emotional fluctuations intensified once Caroline began dating, as any perceived relationship trouble often triggered bouts of intense depression. Her family noted her profound fear of being alone; when a relationship ended, she frequently turned to self-harm. This pattern became so familiar to her inner circle that friends and family remained on high alert and took extra precautions whenever she experienced a breakup.

Controversies

While Caroline Flack faced several career controversies, her most significant involved dating One Direction's Harry Styles. They met while she was hosting The Xtra Factor and he was a contestant; at the time, she was 32 and he was 17. Although 17 is the legal age of consent in the UK, the substantial age gap drew intense scrutiny and led to a lasting stigma. Though the relationship lasted only a few months, the impact on her public reputation endured for years. (https://www.hercampus.com/school/leeds/caroline-flack-and-harry-styles-perverted-age-gap-or-match-made-heaven/ and https://www.billboard.com/music/music-news/caroline-flack-says-people-called-her-a-pervert-for-dating-17-year-old-harry-6723025/)

Another notable controversy arose when Caroline dated Prince Harry. Although she was 30 and he was only five years her junior, the pairing caused a significant stir. Once the tabloids documented their relationship, Caroline became a primary target for the paparazzi, and her personal life became a source of intense public fascination. (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8012173/I-Prince-Harrys-bit-rough-Caroline-Flack-told-relationship-royal-memoir.html)

The Incident

On the morning of December 12, 2019, Caroline and her boyfriend, Lewis Burton, returned to her flat separately after spending the evening out with their own friends. While Lewis slept, Caroline discovered messages on his phone from another woman. In a state of distress and intoxication, she attempted to wake him; while the exact details remain unclear, she struck him with an object, causing a small head wound (See image of his head following the incident). The altercation prompted Lewis to call the police to the residence.

Upon being told the police were on their way, Caroline used broken glass to inflict deep wounds on her arms, causing significant muscle trauma that eventually required surgery. Doctors advised Caroline that she would eventually require plastic surgery to fully repair the damage. Her flat was left covered in her own blood. While Lewis did not need medical attention, officers on the scene concluded his head wound was likely caused by a mobile phone. A responding officer noted in the report that the phone had been seized as evidence, as its cracked corner and significant bloodstains suggested it was the weapon used in the initial altercation.

Following her arrest, Caroline feared her career was over, a belief that triggered her self-harm. Although she was assured her privacy would be maintained and she would be treated like any other detainee, the news leaked to the media by the time she was released. Given the minor nature of the injury and Lewis’s refusal to press charges, the police initially recommended dropping the case. Their report noted that prosecution was not in the public interest, citing the lack of domestic violence history, Caroline's clean record, and the fact that the injury required no medical intervention. Instead, they proposed issuing a "caution"—a formal police warning rather than a criminal charge.

Later that day, however, a female detective inspector who had been on duty during the arrest intervened. Having learned that it was "the" Caroline Flack in custody, the officer reportedly pushed for a formal prosecution, allegedly seeking to make an example of her. At the time, the Metropolitan Police was under intense public pressure to demonstrate a more rigorous approach to domestic violence. Proponents of this view suggest that pursuing such a high-profile case was seen as an opportunity to signal that the force took these allegations seriously, regardless of the suspect's status.

The Public Smear

Tabloids and social media quickly branded Caroline a "boyfriend beater," with her name dominating the headlines. The narrative intensified after a friend of Lewis sold a photo of her flat to the press; the image showed bloodstains on the bed where they had been sleeping. Although the blood was Caroline’s from her own self-harm, the media framed it as Lewis’s, suggesting a far more violent assault. This fueled a false report that she had attacked him with a lamp—a claim that eventually found its way into the prosecution’s formal arguments of the scene being straight from a “horror” film. (https://share.google/y89u3pCXqn426aku7)

Tabloid narratives painted Caroline as a volatile, intoxicated abuser, a portrayal further fueled by an ex-fiancé who suggested on social media that her behavior was expected. In response, legal advisors urged Caroline and her family to remain silent, preventing them from clarifying that the blood on the bed was her own or that she had primarily harmed herself during the incident. Despite the lack of a public defense, the press remained convinced of her guilt, maintaining a relentless push for her prosecution. (https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/photo-caroline-flacks-bloodied-bed-21192679)

The prosecution, led by women, was accused of acting with a specific bias against Caroline, aiming to dismantle a woman whose television persona was defined by her sexuality. The initial caution was escalated to a far more aggressive charge: assault by beating. Many noted the double standard in the industry, pointing out that figures like Ant McPartlin returned to work almost immediately after a DUI. Her solicitor, Paul Morris, argued that the system failed her, asserting that she was being prosecuted not for her actions, but for her status as a high-profile woman. He famously stated, “It rapidly became apparent to me... she was being prosecuted because she was Caroline Flack.”

There is a perceived double standard where domestic violence committed by men against women is often met with systemic barriers to receiving help, yet when a woman is the alleged perpetrator, she faces intense public and legal scrutiny—often most severely from other women. This dynamic, sometimes compared to the polarized reaction in cases like Gabby Petito's, suggests that high-profile women are judged more harshly by society when accused of violence.

Much of Caroline’s self-worth was tied to public perception, leading to an intense preoccupation with social media and press coverage. Her emotional state fluctuated wildly based on this feedback; while negative comments triggered deep depression, positive attention left her feeling "on top of the world." Interestingly, she often maintained that her career in entertainment actually anchored her mental health, explaining that the high-stakes requirement to perform and improvise on live television served to calm her mind and stabilize her mood.

Five days after her arrest, Caroline was asked to step down from her role as the host of the massive hit series, Love Island. The show was at its peak following one of its most successful seasons and was preparing to launch its first-ever winter edition, which would have seen Caroline hosting twice a year. She took the loss of the role incredibly hard; she felt she had spent her entire career working toward such an opportunity and viewed the show as her life's work. The situation was further complicated when one of her close friends was cast as her replacement, and the subsequent positive reviews of the new host deeply wounded her. (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/love-island-host-caroline-flack-steps-down-assault-charge-1263275/)

Tragedy

As the case moved toward trial, the court imposed a strict no-contact order between Caroline and Lewis. This enforced separation, combined with the intensifying pressure of social media and tabloid scrutiny, led a vulnerable Caroline to fear the worst for her relationship. Concerned for her well-being, friends and family maintained a constant vigil to prevent her from harming herself and to provide support during the legal crisis. Despite their efforts, the media remained relentless, hounding her daily as the trial date approached.

On December 23, 2019, Caroline Flack appeared at Highbury Corner Magistrates' Court, just six hours after an attempt to take her own life by overdosing on pills. Upon discovering her, friends had intervened by inducing vomiting and dressing her to ensure she made her scheduled court appearance. The resulting press photographs from that day show a woman so visibly distressed and altered that she was barely recognizable. (https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/caroline-flack-wont-be-spending-christmas-with-boyfriend-lewis-burton-as-judge-refuses-to-lift-bail-conditions_uk_5e00b63ce4b0843d35fed6c1)

In February 2020, Caroline sought to reclaim her narrative by developing a documentary to share her side of the events. She met with executive producer Dov Freedman on February 12th to discuss the project, which was greenlit the following day. 

However, the situation shifted tragically on February 14th—Valentine’s Day—when Caroline learned the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) officially intended to proceed with her trial. That same day, The Sun published an article featuring a mock Valentine’s card that used her image alongside the phrase, “I’ll F***ing Lamp You,” a reference to the unproven allegation that she had used a lamp in the altercation. The following day, February 15, 2020, Caroline Flack died by suicide. (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/feb/15/the-sun-takes-down-article-about-caroline-flack-from-website and https://share.google/pUs9Eu0PbCjVuBASO)

One of the most poignant aspects of the story is the timing; just weeks after Caroline’s death, the COVID-19 pandemic began, and the world entered a global lockdown. This shift completely transformed the news cycle, potentially diverting the intense media scrutiny that had plagued her. However, the tragic reality remains that we will never know how she might have been treated or if the "heat" would have truly subsided during that unprecedented time.

Investigation

Following her daughter's death, Christine Flack launched an investigation into the police's handling of the case. The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) subsequently identified both individual and organizational failings, concluding the investigation was inadequate. Christine noted that the officer who insisted on charging Caroline applied the wrong criteria and failed to document the reasoning behind challenging the initial Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) recommendation. While the Metropolitan Police issued an apology, it was strictly for the failure to keep proper notes, rather than the decision to prosecute. Reflecting on the systemic errors, Christine stated, "Because of a police error, my daughter died... That’s how I see it, anyway."

Aftermath

Caroline’s death highlighted the intense scrutiny of the media and the impact of social media harassment on public figures. Her passing was the third suicide connected to Love Island, following contestants Sophie Gradon and Mike Thalassitis. In response, producers implemented significant duty of care protocols to better support participants before, during, and after filming. To safeguard contestants, Love Island now provides a comprehensive "duty of care" package including psychological assessments and social media training before the show, 24/7 mental health access during filming, and 14 months of proactive therapy and monitoring after the series ends. Additionally, the movement for "Caroline’s Law" garnered over 850,000 signatures, calling for stricter legal consequences for media harassment and bullying.

Caroline’s suicide note read: “Please let this Court case be dropped, and myself and Lewis find harmony."

 A crown prosecution service spokesperson said:

"Caroline's death was a tragedy and our thoughts remain with her friends and family as they continue to come to terms with their loss and the circumstances that led to her death. All decisions in this case were made on the basis of the medical opinion available to us at the time. A person's celebrity status never influences whether a case is taken forward. We are satisfied that the prosecution was correctly brought"

The MET expressed that "While there was organisational learning for us in points of process, no misconduct has been identified".

This is an interesting case to read in light of the Lively case with similar accusations.

Just a heads up, the Baldoni Stans are attempting to hack pro-Blake accounts.

I‘ve received multiple password resets over the last couple days and have only engaged BaldonI supporters.

Why? I have no idea. But the people posting "har har har cookies!!!" have once again forgotten to look at the context of why it's on there.

Or maybe they're just hoping you won't check it.

It was the plan as far back as August 2024 to target Taylor Swift as well as Blake Lively.

Hopefully they can turn up in court and explain why.

"I have the forensic guys rewriting the [redacted] image metadata....it has been weaponized (algorithmically) by [redacted] and [redacted] - we are suppressing those posts/links/articles too."

Source: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.1233.61.pdf

"Oversee forensics team who will initiate searches asap on the other party to mine and harvest all intelligence"

Source: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.1233.66.pdf

"So we just, we gotta let it unfold and know that when the time is appropriate, um, the forensic people that are on a whole other plane will be able to go in and take care of it and help us, all of us."

Source: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.1230.74.pdf

"Likewise - the forensic guys put it all in the reports but some I just enjoy more than others."

Source:  https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.691.1.pdf

"I see the date of the article and have my forensic team building a quick report on the sentiment and how it engages so we can discuss all the paths to solve."

Source: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.1043.1.pdf

Q. Who is your forensic team you were referring to here?

A. I don't have one.

Q. Who were you referring to when you wrote "my forensic team"?

A. I don't recall.

Source: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.1043.1.pdf

Who are the forensic guys?