Fame Under Fire – "Blake V Justin: Slow dancing, circumcision and famous pals"

Host: Anoushka Mutanda-Dougherty | Guest: Dr. Sean Kent
Date: December 11, 2025 | Platform: BBC Sounds

Main Theme

This episode takes an in-depth look at the escalating legal battle between actors Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, co-stars of the film It Ends With Us. The central focus is on allegations of sexual harassment, hostile work environment, and retaliation made by Lively against Baldoni and others behind the movie. Host Anoushka Mutanda-Dougherty, joined by trial attorney Dr. Sean Kent, unpacks depositions, responses, the intersection of PR management and legal claims, and the wider implications such celebrity cases may hold.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Case Overview and Current State

• Background: Blake Lively accuses Justin Baldoni (co-star and producer) and Jamie Heath (Wayfarer Studios CEO) of sexual harassment and orchestrating a smear campaign. The defendants deny all charges.
• Recent Developments:
  • Defendants have motioned for summary judgment (i.e., end the case without a full jury trial).
  • Lively’s side has responded, and excerpts from Baldoni’s deposition are now public.
• Central Questions: Is there enough factual dispute for the case to proceed to a jury trial? How does the same piece of evidence (e.g., film scene footage) serve both parties’ arguments?

2. Allegations of Harassment on Set

• Montage/Slow Dance Scene:

  • Lively claims Baldoni improvised physical intimacy—unscripted touches and remarks—making her uncomfortable.
  • Both parties cite the same behind-the-scenes footage to support their argument (professionalism vs. visible discomfort).
  • Quote:
    "Both people are looking at the exact same piece of evidence and they both can look at it differently... If it is subject to interpretation by two different people, then one person, a judge, should not make the decision and it should go forth to a jury." — Dr. Sean Kent (05:16)

• Legal Interpretation:

  • Dr. Kent notes the difference between clear-cut evidence and matters open to interpretation.
  • The civil bar is “preponderance of the evidence”—simply “more likely than not.”
  • Quote:
    "He is saying she's loving it. And she's like, no, no, I am not... If they can prove that more likely than not Blake's beliefs were reasonable, then they've got a real chance." — Dr. Sean Kent (06:30)

3. Depositions, Redactions & Transparency

• Redacted Transcripts: Much of Baldoni’s deposition remains blacked-out; portions of Lively’s response are, too.

  • This is frustrating for both journalists and legal professionals.
  • Quote:
    "If you choose to file a lawsuit, everything comes in with you... And so when we are blacking things out...you better have a good reason." — Dr. Sean Kent (08:08)

• Example of Alleged Inappropriate Conversation:

  • Lively alleges Baldoni discussed personal sexual matters without her consent.
  • Baldoni claims such a discussion was contextually connected to acting and story authenticity.

4. Circumcision Conversation and Broader Work Culture Claims

• Lively’s Account: Baldoni allegedly volunteered personal information (circumcision status) unsolicited when they first met.
• Baldoni’s Response: Context was a broader conversation about children and families, with multiple people around.
• Hostile work environment vs. isolated comments:
  • Dr. Kent explains that claims rest on illustration of a pervasive pattern, not a single incident.
  • Quote:
    "The argument from her is going to be by itself. I can see why somebody would say that. But...because of the way that this atmosphere was, that was not an innocuous comment. It added to the pervasiveness of the hostile work environment." — Dr. Sean Kent (12:40)

5. Set Culture: Hugging, Gender, and Addressing Concerns

• Concerns about Baldoni’s “daily hugging”: Both Lively and actress Jenny Slate reportedly raised culture issues on set.
• Baldoni admits he addressed concerns, but didn’t escalate formally (e.g., to HR), as policy would require.
• Whether this helps/hurts his defense:
  • Dr. Kent argues it strengthens Lively’s claims:
    "I think it hurts his claim. I think it shows that he acknowledges that there are stuff that was wrong there...” (14:15)

6. Retaliation and Crisis PR Management

• Lively’s Claim: After she raised issues and made demands (including anti-retaliation provisions), she alleges a coordinated PR campaign targeted her online, escalating harassment.

• Baldoni’s Defense:

  • They hired a crisis PR firm—standard practice, not illegal, and in response to Lively’s public stance and her “famous husband” (Ryan Reynolds).
  • Quote:
    "There's nothing wrong with it. If he would have come to us, we would encourage him to do the same." — Dr. Sean Kent (16:39)

• Organic vs. Engineered Backlash:

  • The host presents the idea of online negativity growing beyond initial seeds planted by interested parties.
  • Quote:
    "Baldoni and the defendants might have planted the seed, but it was the Internet that watered the garden." — Anoushka (18:48)
  • Dr. Kent views the retaliation claim as the weakest:
    "It's gonna be almost impossible to prove unless you actually have a whistleblower to get on the stand and say, ‘this was our actual intent.’ ...I think this is her worst claim, and it's not even close." (18:58)

7. Reputation, Past Controversies, and Legal Risk

• Historical Context:

  • Negative press for Lively existed before these allegations (e.g., marriage at Boone Hall, a plantation [19:48]).
  • Viral “bump” interview clip (2016) recirculated during the controversy.

• Trial Impact:

  • Old controversies could become fair game if Lively claims reputational damage.
  • Quote:
    "If a jury hates you, you lose. If they like you, they'll try to find a way to help you win." — Dr. Sean Kent (22:42)

8. Power Dynamics: Who Holds Real-World Influence?

• Traditional View: Boss/employee relationships define power dynamics in harassment cases.

• Hollywood Nuance:

  • Baldoni points to Lively’s famous friends and celebrity status (“a titan...some of the most powerful people in the world”) giving her unusual de facto power.
  • Lively points to production hierarchy, where Baldoni and Heath were her employers.

• Jury’s Role:

  • The jury decides how power dynamics affected behavior and credibility, guided but not prescribed by the judge.
  • Quote:
    "He explains to them what power dynamics are...then he says it's up to you to make the determination on if the power dynamic made any effect..." — Dr. Sean Kent (26:28)

• Dr. Kent’s Defense Strategy (if representing Baldoni):

  • Stress Lively’s A-list status, suggest Baldoni is the “small guy.”
  • Subpoena famous friends as witnesses “or have them visible in the courtroom” to highlight the star-studded nature of Lively’s support network.

9. Wider Implications and Precedent

• If Lively wins on the retaliation claim (proving PR management crossed a legal line), high-profile cases could reshape how celebrity PR is handled in legal disputes.

10. Comparisons to Other Cases

• Reference to precedents in other high-profile celebrity cases (Amber Heard/Johnny Depp, Rebel Wilson).
• Discussion about jury bias and the impossibility of perfect impartiality—paralleling questions about juror conduct in the unrelated Diddy trial.

Memorable Quotes and Moments

• On evidence and interpretation:

  • "If it is subject to interpretation by two different people, then one person, a judge, should not make the decision..." — Dr. Sean Kent (05:16)

• On the civil legal bar:

  • "Is it more likely than not that this happened?" — Dr. Sean Kent (06:30)

• On redactions:

  • "If you choose to file a lawsuit, everything comes in with you...when we are blacking things out...you better have a good reason." — Dr. Sean Kent (08:08)

• On the weakness of retaliation claims:

  • "I think this is her worst claim, and it's not even close." — Dr. Sean Kent (18:58)

• On reputational risk:

  • "If a jury hates you, you lose. If they like you, they'll try to find a way to help you win." — Dr. Sean Kent (22:42)

• On trial strategy:

  • "I would make him [Baldoni] the smallest individual they have ever seen. I'd make him a nobody..." — Dr. Sean Kent (27:47)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 01:16 – Case Introduction
• 03:21 – Specific Harassment Allegations and Montage Scene
• 05:16 – Why the Judge May Have to Let a Jury Decide
• 08:08 – Redactions in Legal Filings
• 10:10 – Sexual Comments and Power Dynamics
• 12:11 – Circumcision Conversation – Inappropriate or Not?
• 13:23 – Set Culture and Daily Hugging
• 14:58 – Retaliation & PR Management
• 19:48 – Historic Reputation Issues (i.e., Plantation Wedding)
• 20:22 – Viral Pregnancy "Bump" Interview
• 23:48 – Risks of Retaliation Claims at Trial
• 24:46 – Precedent and PR Teams in High-profile Lawsuits
• 25:40 – Baldoni on Feeling "Small" vs. Lively's Power
• 26:28 – Jury Instructions on Power Dynamics
• 27:47 – Defense Strategies for Baldoni
• 29:17 – Brief Diddy Jury Question (parallels)
• 30:54 – How Jury Bias Might Enter Lively v. Baldoni

Conclusion

This episode brings clarity and sharp analysis to a complex, headline-dominating legal case with layered allegations, legal maneuvering, and cultural context. Through candid commentary and real-world legal insight, Anoushka and Dr. Kent illuminate the intricacies of celebrity lawsuits and the shifting lines between PR, harassment, and reputation in the age of social media and “newsfluencers.” The episode poses unresolved questions about power, the meaning of harassment, and the unpredictability of jury perception, setting the stage for what may be a closely watched trial with wider repercussions across Hollywood and beyond.