Blake Lively’s shocking Justin Baldoni claims as she sues him for sexual harassment

Blake Lively has alleged that Justin Baldoni, her former co-star and director in , allowed “friends” to witness the filming of her sex scene, as part of her explosive lawsuit for sexual harassment and defamation.Lively, 37, collaborated with Baldoni, 40, on the adaptation of , where they portrayed the toxic relationship between Lily Bloom and Ryle Kincaid. However, their press tour was overshadowed by whispers of a feud between the pair. Blake has now accused Baldoni of a co-ordinated effort to destroy her reputation, in legal papers seen by US outlet TMZ.The publication claims that to address the situation, Lively’s lawyers orchestrated a meeting with Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios’ CEO Jamey Heath, and an It Ends With Us producer to establish some ground rules. Lively’s demands were reportedly compiled in an 80-page document.Among the agreed-upon points was a clause stating: “No more entering, attempting to enter, interrupting, pressuring or asking BL to enter her trailer or the makeup trailer by Mr Heath or Mr Baldoni while she is nude, for any reason.”Another key stipulation read: “All actors participating with BL in intimate scenes involving her being in any state of nudity or simulated nudity must be classified as active, working actors, not “friends” of the director or producers, and must be pre-approved by BL,” reports the Mirror.

Lively’s lawsuit also alleges unacceptable inquiries by Baldoni about Lively’s intimate life with husband Ryan Reynolds, including whether they “climax simultaneously during intercourse, which Ms. Lively found invasive and refused to discuss” an invasion of privacy that Lively declined to address.Allegations extend to inappropriate comments on her physique and pressure to lose weight rapidly, bringing in a “weight loss specialist” for the task. The legal document, in possession of the New York Times, also highlights Lively’s stance, which aimed to defend not just herself but fellow female crew members from such conduct.In a robust refutation, Baldoni’s team condemned Lively’s accusations as “false, outrageous and intentionally salacious with an intent to publicly hurt.”They argue that Lively engaged in “multiple demands and threats” designed to undermine the film’s success.Their counterstatement asserts: “It is shameful that Ms. Lively and her representatives would make such serious and categorically false accusations against Mr. Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios and its representatives, as yet another desperate attempt to ‘fix’ her negative reputation which was garnered from her own remarks and actions during the campaign for the film; interviews and press activities that were observed publicly, in real time and unedited, which allowed for the internet to generate their own views and opinions.”

“These claims are completely false, outrageous and intentionally salacious with an intent to publicly hurt and rehash a narrative in the media. Wayfarer Studios made the decision to proactively hire a crisis manager prior to the marketing campaign of the film, to work alongside their own representative with Jonesworks employed by Stephanie Jones, due to the multiple demands and threats made by Ms. Lively during production which included her threatening to not showing up to set, threatening to not promote the film, ultimately leading to its demise during release, if her demands were not met.””It was also discovered that Ms. Lively enlisted her own representative, Leslie Sloan with Vision PR, who also represents Mr. Reynolds, to plant negative and completely fabricated and false stories with media, even prior to any marketing had commenced for the film, which was another reason why Wayfarer Studios made the decision to hire a crisis professional to commence internal scenario planning in the case they needed to address.””The representatives of Wayfarer Studios still did nothing proactive nor retaliated, and only responded to incoming media inquiries to ensure balanced and factual reporting and monitored social activity. What is pointedly missing from the cherry-picked correspondence is the evidence that there were no proactive measures taken with media or otherwise; just internal scenario planning and private correspondence to strategize which is standard operating procedure with public relations professionals.”