← The Megyn Kelly Show
The Megyn Kelly Show
Justin Baldoni's Lawyer Says He Won't Settle with Blake Lively, and What Comes Next in the Case, with Bryan Freedman | Ep. 1092
00:48:21
Megyn is joined by attorney Bryan Freedman, who is representing Justin Baldoni, to discuss a federal judge's decision to dismiss his client's defamation lawsuit against Blake Lively, the legal grounds for the ruling, what parts of the case remain, how Baldoni feels about the judge's decision, how the legal battle has impacted his career, what comes next in the fight, when Lively could be deposed, whether Ryan Reynolds will also have to sit for a deposition, Taylor Swift's role in the case, why Baldoni is prepared to go to trial, and more. Lumen: Visit https://lumen.me/MEGYN for 10% Off Tax Network USA: Call 1-800-958-1000 or visit https://TNUSA.com/MEGYN to speak with a strategist for FREE today Done with Debt: https://www.DoneWithDebt.com
Loading summary
Transcript77 lines
- [00:00]
Oregon Lottery Representative
In the summer. All of Oregon is our playground thanks to our incredible park system. That's why it's so cool that Oregon Lottery gameplay like video lottery or cash pop helps support tons of parks projects statewide like accessible trails at Silver Falls State park or upgrades to your favorite dog park in Newburgh. It's just one way a little lottery play for many Oregonians can add up to a lot of good the Oregon Lottery Together we do good things. Lottery games are based on chance and should be played for entertainment only. Must be 18 or older to play.
- [00:31]
Thrive Market Representative
Worried about what ingredients are hiding in your groceries? Let us take the guesswork out. We're Thrive Market, the online grocery store with the highest quality standards in the industry. We restrict 1000 plus ingredients so you can trust that you'll only find the best high quality, organic and sustainable brands all free of the junk. With savings up to 30% off and fast carbon neutral shipping. You get top trusted groceries at your door and you can stop worrying about what your kids get their hands on. Start shopping@thrivemarket.com podcast for 30% off your first order and a free gift.
- [01:03]
Megyn Kelly
Welcome to the Megyn Kelly show live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at Noon East.
- [01:15]
Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to the Megyn Kelly Show. Well, no sooner did we wrap our individual take on what happened in Baldoni versus Lively than my friend and lawyer Brian Friedman and I managed to connect and he's got all sorts of thoughts on what actually went down with this judge dismissing part of his counterclaims and agreed to come on the show. So here I am live from my European Vacation Back with Brian Friedman to bring you the story straight from the source's mouth. There's no one better to talk to about what actually happened here than the man who represents Justin Baldoni and who's been out there fiercely defending him and waging war against Blake Lively, who he believes is is not a good person and does not believe her claims.
- [02:04]
When your metabolism works perfectly, you feel the benefits in so many aspects of life. And that's why I want to tell you about Lumen. Lumen is the world's first handheld metabolic coach. It's a device that measures your metabolism through your breath. The app lets you know if you are burning fat or carbs and gives tailored guidance to improve nutrition, workout, sleep, and even stress management. Just breathe into your Lumen first thing in the morning and you will know if you are burning fat or carbs and more. You even get a personalized nutrition plan after Your daily measurements breathe into it before and after workouts and meals. For even more tips to stay on top of your health game. Your metabolism is how your body turns the food you eat into fuel that keeps you going. And optimal metabolic health translates to easier weight management, improved energy levels, better sleep and more. The warmer months are here. Prioritize your health and fitness with Lumen. Go to Lumen Megan to get 10% off your lumen. That's L U M E n Megan for 10% off your purchase. Thank you, Lumen, for sponsoring this episode.
- [03:09]
Brian, great to see you. Thanks for doing this. All right, so give us your overall take on this Federal District Court judge dismissing large portions of your counterclaims against Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds, the New York Times, and this PR agent who represented the couple.
- [03:26]
Brian Friedman
Sure. First of all, great to see you and sorry to interrupt your, your, your vacation. We hope, I hope you're having a great time.
- [03:35]
Megyn Kelly
So far, so good.
- [03:36]
Brian Friedman
Last time I. Thanks. The last time I was with you actually was the last kind of disaster in LA, which were the LA fires. I think it was March 7th and we were on together. Yet another crisis in LA. And I'm here, I don't think there's any coincidence, but my take on what the judge did was the judge simplified things. And while we're not pleased that he got rid of the defamation causes of action, the truth was the case was never really about defamation. And while it's our response and while it's a portion of our claims, from the very start, this case was about somebody being wrongfully accused, and that's Justin. And it's also been about Melissa Nathan and her team at TAG and about Jen Abel and herself and about her being wrongfully accused about a smear campaign. And the reality is, what I believe is going on is that the judge is getting through all of this and saying, hey, we're going to parrot this down to really what the issues are in the case. And I don't want collateral stuff going on. I just want answers to the key questions. Was there sexual harassment? You know, clearly no. And you know, was there a smear campaign? And that's no also. So that's what I really think. When you pare it down, the law and all of that to what the judge is trying to do here?
- [05:21]
Megyn Kelly
What do you make of the victory lap she and her lawyers are taking, claiming absolute vindication, calling the counterclaims basically a sham, saying the judge saw right through them. And Blake Lively out there thanking the 19 organizations who filed briefs on her behalf?
- [05:40]
Brian Friedman
Right well, you know, without getting into detail on that, I mean, first of all, the judge made clear that he didn't read the briefs. The judge made clear that he didn't rule on 47.1, which she's going around and celebrating a victory.
- [05:55]
Megyn Kelly
Let's explain what that is.
- [05:58]
Brian Friedman
471 was the California statute that is a new statute that she took the position that you couldn't defend yourself by filing a claim against an accuser concerning sexual harassment or sexual assault, which in most cases is a really important law, in most cases is a really important conceptual case, and it really protects the victims. But you gotta ask yourself here, who's the real victim? The real victim is Justin and the others, and it's because they've been wrongfully accused. And ask yourself, when you've been in a situation where you've been wrongfully accused, how do you defend yourself? Are you allowed to defend yourself? Are you allowed to lead with truth? Because that's all that's been done here is putting everything out on a website, putting everything out for the public, not hiding anything, and saying, here it is. Was there sexual harassment? Was there a Smear campaign?
- [07:05]
Megyn Kelly
And 47.1 seems to say this new California law, if you're an alleged sexual harassment or sexual assault or hostile work environment plaintiff, and somebody who you've accused comes back at you saying, I didn't do it, and what you're alleging is defamatory of me. Thanks to this statute, that person defending themselves saying, I didn't, and what you say is defamation can get in a lot of trouble. Potentially could have to pay that person's legal fees if the counterclaim gets dismissed. Could have to pay triple the legal fees, potentially, and punitive damages. So the. The California statute almost makes it, like, extremely dangerous for someone in Justin Baldoni's position to. To actually defend himself against a sexual harassment complaint.
- [07:58]
Brian Friedman
Well, it's not dangerous if you know you're right. So this case has always been about facts. It hasn't been about victory laps. It hasn't been about Saturday Night Live tours. It hasn't been about the people 100 or the time 100. It hasn't been about the show, and it hasn't been about, you know, the misrepresentations. It's been about the facts. You know, we've been in this case for a while now. You know, have we seen, you know, text messages? Have we seen evidence? Have we seen receipts? No, you know, you've only seen them from one side, and it's been out there. And what We've seen from Blake Lively is her showing, you know, who she really is. And the truth is, you know that there's a famous quote that says when people show you who they are, believe them.
- [08:57]
Megyn Kelly
Maya Angelou. Yeah. So what did you make of the judge? Because you say it's clear he didn't read the briefs. I have to say, I was surprised at some of the sweeping language in there. For example, him saying, well, Justin Baldoni, you can't really sue. He can't sue Ryan Reynolds for defamation. Because when you sue a public figure, when you are a public figure suing for defamation, you have to meet the New York Times vs. Sullivan Standard showing that the person who defamed you did it with actual malice, meaning they knew it was false when they said it. This would be Ryan Reynolds saying false things to wme, the agency that he got to break up with Justin so he knew the things were false or he behaved with reckless disregard for their falsity. The judge seemed to say anything he heard was from his wife, so he couldn't have known it was false. Worst case scenario, he was mistaken. And therefore your claims against Justin need to be dismissed. Though a couple of those have been granted leave to refile. I, I just don't understand that because there, there is evidence that, that Ryan Reynolds had direct interactions with Justin, with Blake, with Taylor Swift. I don't get that part, Brian.
- [10:08]
Brian Friedman
Yeah, well, I, you know, I think it's a nuance in the law that, that, that you're aware of. But, you know, public figures who sue for defamation have to prove malice. What the judge essentially said, as you, as you read the order, is that, you know, there can be no malice here because the allegations arose from the CRD complaint, which is a protected, you know, document as a legally filed document.
- [10:38]
Megyn Kelly
The civil rights complaint that she filed to kick this whole thing off and then leaked to the New York Times.
- [10:42]
Thrive Market Representative
Clearly.
- [10:42]
Megyn Kelly
Go ahead.
- [10:43]
Brian Friedman
That's right. And we don't agree with that at all. We think there's so much collateral action that happened here factually that is outside of the scope of that document itself. For example, the New York Times said that they reviewed thousands of text messages and made their own determination based on that. They had a video that they put together. These things are not directly taken from the CRD complaint. And the court addressed that in its own way. And the court was very matter of fact about that. I don't think generally judges or courts like when media is sued. They certainly don't like when public figures sue for defamation. The standard Is higher. It does require malice. I think in this case, there's a lot of arguments on why there is malice. But again, I get back to why are we here and what are we really proving here? And the truth is, it's two things. Did he sexually harass her, and was there a smear campaign? And again, it's a bummer. And I feel really upset about the fact that compensation in the form of damages as a result of defamation is not possible at the moment for him. I'm sure they will both say things in the future that will bring this back to life. I have no doubt.
- [12:21]
Megyn Kelly
Right. Can I ask you about. You mentioned 47.1, this law in California that kind of protects someone even alleging sexual harassment from getting sued for defamation. In other words, if the defamation case is dismissed, it gives them potentially triple their attorney's fees and costs. That could be millions and millions of dollars if the judge says it applies and Justin has to pay before we ever even get to discovery in this case. Brian, does he have that kind of money, and what are the odds that the judge is going to impose that hefty a penalty on him?
- [13:02]
Brian Friedman
Well, you know, I'm not at liberty to talk about his finances, but suffice it to say that I doubt many people have that kind of money. But I think the distinction in this case is that sometimes the law does not take into account morality. And while this particular statute is a good statute, in cases where it's important and it matters, and where there's someone who's bullying the victim, and I want to take that really seriously because I think it's really important, and Justin feels it's really important. But where it doesn't apply is a case where somebody has created allegations that do not rise to the level of sexual harassment. And we now know exactly what those allegations are. We have a specific understanding of what those allegations are. We've seen video that shows exactly what happened in the scene that she said was so inappropriate. And we've seen the text messages about coming to my trailer. We've seen the evidence that directly refutes the allegations of sexual harassment. So in this case, from our perspective, there's not nearly the risk that there would be in a case where it was used for bullying. In this case, it's truly about trying to prove that you didn't sexually harass someone. And why, with his career destroyed at the moment, why is he not allowed that right to defend himself? And to be able to say this is not okay.
- [14:51]
Megyn Kelly
Does the judge get to take any of that into account because she's moving. Her team has made clear they're going to move to get all of her fees behind this motion to dismiss recovered from Justin. And I'm sure they're going to ask for them to be trebled or tripled and, and possibly punitive damages, which just seems insane to me. But will the judge be able to consider what we know to be the evidence in the case? Just from all you've done, even pre discovery, to put together what really happened here? Does he get to even consider any of that, or do you actually think there's a real shot Justin could be on the hook for this woman's attorney's fees times three?
- [15:26]
Brian Friedman
Well, I think the judge has to look at this statute, which is a brand new statute, which there's absolutely no case law on, which hasn't been challenged at all. And the judge is either going to or not going to make a determination as to whether it applied or not. So far in the ruling, the judge specifically said that he did not take that statute into consideration, but he did welcome the parties to file briefs on trying to recover their attorneys FEES, including using 47.1 as an argument, I believe, because the ruling wasn't a part of that and the judge didn't rule on it, it's moot and it doesn't apply. But there's a chance that the judge could consider that. I think it's also a statute that's completely untested and we have to ask ourselves, were there good laws that help to protect good people? When does it go too far that your constitutional rights are taken away? And when does it go too far that they're taken away in a way that punishes you so severely for trying to defend yourself and saying, this is not okay, and this defames me.
- [16:40]
Megyn Kelly
Can you just speak to what you think her strategy was here? I mean, was it, I'll file this Civil Rights Division complaint and then my allegations will be protected, undermining any attempt to sue me for potentially defamatory statements. And then I will leak it to the New York Times so it will get out there and then everyone will know that I'm the victim here. As opposed to the narrative that existed prior to her filing that complaint, which was she seems like a real bitch and she is tone deaf on domestic violence and she seems to have blown up her movie for no apparent reason. Those were the buzz. That was part of the buzz going around about her. She bullies reporters. That was also part of it. So is that your theory of the case, Brian, that she launched this whole thing in her own effort at PR spin and control.
- [17:34]
Brian Friedman
I believe what happened in the case, and it's pretty clear, right, is that press came out which was negative toward her. There was press that came out that was negative toward Justin. But whether it's Internet sleuths who are amazing or whether it's, you know, amazing, reporters went back in time and pulled videos and pulled, you know, information. And, you know, generally, videos don't lie, right, about how you've behaved in the past. And they pulled that information. They put that information out, whether it was the Christy flaw, you know, video, video, or whether it was other videos, whether it was the videos where she said, here's what I do. I just, you know, misrepresent what I'm, you know, I'm trying to get a role, and then I take over the film and, you know, or any of that stuff. I think that reporters and other people in the media played that for people, and people had a reaction to it, and there was an organic response as a result of that. I think that was too much for her. It was too much for her to believe that somebody could actually not like her based on her own belief, her own conduct. I think that was something that she couldn't handle. Whether that's a, you know, whether that's an interesting narcissism quality or otherwise, I don't know. Not a doctor, but I can tell you this. The result of it was her scurrying around trying to blame someone else for why her own behavior seemed to be the cause of people not liking her. And that spiraled into something that, you know, is, you know, was completely out of control. I mean, whenever do you see someone make a red carpet walk and go out in the press and bring all of their friends into this and make this situation bigger than what it is. Is this good for her? Is this good for her career? Is this good for her children? Is this good for her family? You have to ask yourself, at some point, everybody has a part in everything. Is she capable of taking responsibility for her part in this and owning that? We haven't seen that yet. And that's why many people out there are finding evidence about how she's behaved, how she's treated reporters, how she's treated people, how she's treated individuals, how she treated waiting staff and others, and saying, it's not okay. We don't like you.
- [20:10]
Megyn Kelly
She's a bully. That's my own conclusion. She's an obvious bully who can't take any rounds of negative press, which is so absurd. You and I both know that public figures, many of whom you've defended, including yours truly, have to take tons of negative press. And it's just part of being a public figure. It's not pleasant. But to to try to ruin a man's life over one mild round that she had to suffer when this movie came out is just insane. That's to me clear. Clearly what she's doing. Can I ask you about what remains? Because my own take was so the civil extortion claim is gone. The defamation claim is gone. The false light invasion of privacy claim counterclaims, I should say, by Justin against her and the related parties are gone. But what's. What's left? Because I heard you say it's four claims. I thought it was just the tortoise interference and the breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Insofar as he's alleging that Ryan Reynolds messed with his relationship with AR Emanuel over at wme. Like if, if that happened and they interfered with Justin's agency relationship, you still have a claim. Where am I wrong? How is it bigger?
- [21:20]
Brian Friedman
Well, it's bigger because there's an intentional interference with contract which is against Blake and Ryan that the judge gave us a roadmap to replead. There's intentional interference with prospective economic advantage. And that goes beyond just a contract. It goes to the heart of, you know, are you going to be able to work again? There's negligent in negligent interference with prospective economic advantage against Blake and Ryan. And there's something called breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing against Blake only. And those claims are being replayed. The judge again gave us a roadmap on how to replete those and what the judge would like to see. We are doing that now and working through that. And those are significant claims, but nothing is as significant as taking her deposition, going through that process, getting the witness testimony and the witnesses deposed and going into the courtroom and showing the truth to show that there was no sexual harassment. Nothing is more important than that.
- [22:31]
Megyn Kelly
And you think that deposition could take place as early as when it's been noticed, in June.
- [22:38]
Brian Friedman
We'll see when she actually decides to appear. But I assume that it will take place before August 15th because that's the close of discovery of that type.
- [22:53]
Megyn Kelly
Are you going to get Ryan as well, Ryan Reynolds?
- [22:57]
Brian Friedman
We'll see. I mean, obviously he's defendant in the case, so of course we're going to notice his deposition. The judge clearly indicated that the judge would like to limit discovery and limit the collateral issues in the case. We think there's really important issues that there needs to be discovery on. And those will be some of the battles along the way that we will have. But there's no substitute for the truth. And from the beginning this has been about facts, facts, facts. Right? Put them out there, where is the evidence, where are the receipts? Put them out there so that people can see the truth. This is about someone who's had their career destroyed and trying to build that back.
- [23:46]
Megyn Kelly
How did Justin take the news, Brian? It's a. Having practiced law, I know it's never great when you get a decision like this one. How's he feeling?
- [23:56]
Brian Friedman
I think that injustice is a word. I think I can best describe it. A lack of understanding. If she said these things about me that were untrue, how come I don't have a legal redress in terms of defamation? If this, you know, it's clear, you know, the evidence is clear that they secreted to get the information on this Van Zam subpoena and created this whole Doe lawsuit and got that information so that no one could see it and then use that information so that they could put together this hit piece in the New York Times. And that was devastating for Justin. It was. If anybody remembers what December 21st was like for him, there was 100% of the people saying he's a horrible person and 0%. Well, except for me who actually saw him on a day to day basis and his family who really were on his side until we put out the facts, until we put out the receipts, until we put out the documents. Because this has always been about facts and truth. And it's frustrating for him who knows exactly what he did and didn't do. Did he acquiesce too much to her demands? Absolutely, because he was afraid. But that's very different than whether he sexually harassed her.
- [25:34]
Megyn Kelly
Is his career in ruins? Are people not offering him jobs? Is he not able to get funding for an additional picture?
- [25:43]
Brian Friedman
You know, he's lost jobs. It has affected his career at the moment. It's obviously affected him emotionally and his self esteem and he's putting up the best face he can for his family and whatnot. But all he wants is truly a chance and a courtroom and a jury to be able to tell his story to. He's not going around on red carcass. He's not going around with interviews. He's not going around on some victory tour. Even when she dropped her emotional distress claims or we're in the process of dropping her emotional distress claims. And you know, they, they have an interesting ability to go on victory tours whether they win or lose. So it doesn't, doesn't even matter. I could see her losing the case and going on a victory tour, but that's, you know, that's what we're dealing with. Right? When people show you who they are, believe them. And when she plays what plays.
- [26:43]
Megyn Kelly
Well, she was. She's being forced to drop her claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress because she refused to fork over her medical records when you rightfully asked for them. Any defense lawyer would. If you're getting sued for that claim, you say, okay, show me all your mental distress evidence, including your psychiatric records and any, anything else that would support this claim. And as soon as you guys did that, she said, nevermind, I'll withdraw the claims, but I want them withdrawn without prejudice so I can file them at any point in the future if I change my mind. What did you make of how the judge handled that? Because he seemed to say, you're not getting away with that, sister. That's not happening. He seemed to say, you guys come up with an agreement on how this is going to get disposed of. That is not going to let her get away with keeping that sword hanging over Justin the whole time and also maintaining the position of. You don't get to see a single record of me with my therapist.
- [27:40]
Brian Friedman
Well, the great thing about the law is when you're the plaintiff, you have a burden to prove your claims and to prove your damages. And as part of that, any, anyone that claims emotional distress is required to provide evidence of that emotional distress. Apparently, you know, she didn't think the law applied to her, so she decided that she was not going to provide that information. And whether it existed or not, she wasn't going to comply with that rule. And I think things are still being worked out amongst it. But when she makes a decision like that, there are consequences that attach to it. You can't just decide that you're going to refile at a later time. You can't just decide that. Let me get through this discovery phase and then I'll put this back on. Right. The law is supposed to apply to everyone equally. But, you know, some people, some people believe that it should not.
- [28:37]
Megyn Kelly
What's happening to the extent you can tell us with Taylor Swift, because there was some reporting that you wanted to get the text messages between Blake Lively and Taylor and that there was a potential for subpoenaing Taylor Swift in this case via document subpoena, to get her texts and possibly even a deposition. And then that her father allegedly came to you and said, I will tell you what's in the text. And the reason I'll tell you is because Blake Lively's threatening my daughter, Taylor Swift, that if she doesn't speak out on Blake Lively's behalf, that Blake Lively is going to retaliate in some way. So tell us what you can.
- [29:20]
Brian Friedman
Sure. Just out of respect for people that aren't parties to the lawsuit, there's not a whole lot that I can get into. But I think that people who are relevant to the case and people who have otherwise been with people from the beginning of the case, side by side, shoulder by shoulder, you know, are potentially witnesses in the case. And so, you know, those are things that we need to look into. Those are things to see. You know, what. In addition to what we know already, we need, and then to move forward and obtain that discovery. There's a short leash on how far we can go with discovery. I think the judge has made it very clear that, you know, third parties need to be directly relevant to claims, and we think certain third parties are directly relevant. But it's just. Whether or not you need that evidence, in addition to what you have already.
- [30:25]
Megyn Kelly
Are you able to say whether you believe or have reason to allege that Blake Lively threatened Taylor Swift if she did not come out and speak on Blake's behalf?
- [30:36]
Brian Friedman
The truth is, I don't think I should speak on it. I think we should wait and see how the evidence ferrets out on that. I think. Look, I think we've all those who have looked at the timeline, those who have looked at all of the documents that have been put forth, there's more video evidence. There's video of this whole. This is a film shoot. There's filming of the film shooting. I mean, Megan, you saw the scene where they're dancing, and everyone can judge for themselves. Again, dealing with. We're dealing with people who look at a scene and say, the sky is not blue. What do you mean? That blue is not blue? And I think that will forever be the case. But fortunately, she doesn't get to be a juror along with being, you know, the plaintiff. So we'll. We'll have different people that will be the jurors, and hopefully they'll be able to see the sky's blue.
- [31:45]
Megyn Kelly
Well, how do you like your chances at trial? This case? Put the counterclaims to the side for the moment that you guys have against Blake. You will go to trial on her claims against Justin if you guys don't settle. So how do you like your chances of prevailing in front of a jury.
- [32:02]
Brian Friedman
On those truth facts, both on our side? I mean, I love our case of prevailing on the truth and the real facts of what happened. I mean, there's real time evidence in this case. You heard Justin on the voice note. You heard what he was going through. You know, we've seen the birthing video, right? The screenshot that Jamie showed to Blake and didn't even play the video. I mean, it's there. That's not pornography. When you famous supreme court justice said you'll know pornography when you see it, I don't think a birthing scene where no one is unclothed is pornography. I mean, you've seen her say that she, you know, had, you know, was unclothed in, you know, with barely a patch on her. And we know there are, you know, that she was wearing those shorts, you know, you know, this stuff is not new. We've gone through the facts and truth is on our side. The facts are on our side. I love, not like love our chances.
- [33:18]
Megyn Kelly
What are the chances now, Brian, of a settlement in light of the ruling on her emotional distress claims and the ruling on your defamation and related counterclaims?
- [33:30]
Brian Friedman
Look, from the beginning, you know, the chances of settlement were next to zero. When you add the parties that are involved in this, Justin, while he would have liked to get millions of dollars to compensate him for his damages as a result of the defamation, that that was always secondary to showing that there was no sexual harassment. That's it. When you're accused of something wrongfully, when you have to prove your innocence in order to continue to work, there are very little choices here. So he is going to go all the way and get that adjudication and fight this fight forever. And whether that means appeals or anything else, he's gonna make sure that the world knows that he did not engage in sexual harassment, Period. End of story.
- [34:32]
Megyn Kelly
Can you say that you're already there? I mean, I think there's a very strong argument to be made that he's already won that battle. He's. She's. Amber heard. In the eyes of at least half, if not more of the country, this has been an interesting case because it didn't divide along left, right lines. This is much like Meghan Markle. Blake Lively has managed to unite the right and the left against her. Trust me, I know because I hear from them. And I wonder to myself, Brian, whether Justin's already won that victory and whether, as a result, he's interested, if the opportunity's there anyway, in making the litigation just go away now.
- [35:13]
Brian Friedman
Right. Well, I don't think he's won that battle yet. I think what he's done is he's put evidence out and he's put truth out, and people have made their own determinations, which seemingly have only one determination that you can make if you've actually looked at the facts and the evidence. But I don't think he's gotten that moment where, you know, where a court and a jury of his peers say, no, no, no, this is not sexual harassment. And I don't think, Look, I don't think. Tag the PR team with Melissa Nathan and her team, her team of people that literally have nothing to do with this. They're just individuals. And Jen Abel, who's been just trashed after taking her phone. And I think these people want to be absolved on a public level from a jury of their peers. I think it's really important that that happen, especially when someone goes around making victory tours without regard to whatever the real result is. I mean, you saw victory tours when they lost the emotional distress claims. Right. Like, you saw a victory tour then. So, you know, again, people are showing you who they are. Believe them.
- [36:36]
Megyn Kelly
So you. You say he's in it to the jury verdict?
- [36:40]
Brian Friedman
Yes.
- [36:42]
Megyn Kelly
Well, wow, that's not good for her. She's not going to want that. I think she already likely regrets having started this hornet's nest as much as she wants to play the victim at the time, 100 and everywhere else. Let me, if I. If you don't mind, can I just ask you, because you're like the Waldo of litigation, Brian. Your name comes up in cases I didn't even know you had a hand in. I'm just covering them as a reporter. I'm like, he's there, too. Like the Diddy trial where I think you were representing Capricorn Clark, one of the witnesses for the prosecution who took the stand. And I just wonder. And maybe you can't say anything, but any thoughts on how that trial is going to.
- [37:26]
Brian Friedman
You know, I have a lot of thoughts. It's interesting how the case is going. And look, I think a lot of things are really interesting. We're moving into a world of AI where you're going to look at a video, you could do it now, and you're not going to know what's real or what's not real. I mean, some of the news feeds that I see are. Are inaccurate. And not real. And sometimes people do apologize for things. I think I was surprised that Diddy came out and apologized nationally for the video in the hotel where he was brutally beating Cassie. And I think that changed the nature of the case. The case then became about, okay, I can be an abuser, I can deal with domestic violence and getting into fights like that, but that's where I draw the line. I don't drug or rape people and do those, and I'm not involved in an organized crime unit and things like that. And it'll be interesting to see where that case ends up. But Capricorn Clark is an incredible person, really truthful, really interesting. And, you know, and look, I, you know, all someone can ask for is a real jury of their peers to make a decision. And he's got an. He's got an opportunity to do that. He's got great lawyers and he's got, you know, a good team. And the jury will make a decision based on what's happened in the courtroom. And I don't know exactly what's happened. So I just read the papers like everyone else or hear from. From friends that are lawyers or involved in the case, but I don't. I don't know. I don't know per se.
- [39:18]
Megyn Kelly
Capricorn did a good job, in my opinion, on the stand. And she was important because she was his assistant for years and testified that he brought her with him over to Kid Cudi's house when he allegedly burgled it and then later is accused of having launched a Molotov cocktail into it. And she, she provided a lot of the details that I'm sure it was scary to get up there and talk about. All right, last one. Menendez, you're in that, too. Our friend Mark Garagos comes on and talks to me about it from time to time. And you're on the side of representing, I think, some family members of Jose Menendez who would like to see the. The boys released. And it looks like things are. They took one step closer to potentially getting them out. But what's happening with the Menendez brothers? And do you think that they will be released early?
- [40:10]
Brian Friedman
What's happening is that they have been re sentenced, which is phenomenal. I mean, rarely do you see 27 family members who are all on the side of enough is enough. They should be released. Rarely do you see that. Remember, the family members aren't just family members of Lyle and Eric. They're family members of Jose and Kitty. So they are victims. And as victims, they say enough is enough. It's time to release them. The Judge Jessup, who is an incredible judge, and he saw right through all of this and resentenced them. They have an opportunity now to go in front of the parole board, which is going to happen in August, and then we'll see what happens from there. But I'm really optimistic for the family that they're going to have a chance to have, you know, holiday meals, you know, maybe even spend, you know, you know, New Year's Day and New Year's Eve with their family and be together for the first time in over 35 years. And. And I'm really hopeful that they have that opportunity.
- [41:23]
Megyn Kelly
All right, what is more likely to happen? Sean Combs gets acquitted, the Menendez brothers are home in time for New Year's Eve, or Justin is found not liable in her case in chief against him for alleged sexual harassment.
- [41:42]
Brian Friedman
Well, beyond question, Justin's going to be found not liable. So that's, you know, that's going to happen at some point. You didn't put a timetable on that one. But. But they. They. I truly believe that the Menendez brothers could and will be out by January 1st, and I'm hopeful of that. I'm hopeful for the family members. I really believe that they're going to get their wish and that this family can start on a course of repair.
- [42:16]
Megyn Kelly
Wow. You're a busy man. I love watching you. I love seeing you so successful, Brian. And I think Justin Baldoni has been very well served. I look forward to you continuing to do exactly that. Thanks for coming on.
- [42:31]
Brian Friedman
You know, Megan, I am so happy with where you are in your career and where you are personally right now. It's one of the most special things I've ever been a part of in my entire career. And I'm just like, I am so grateful to be in a position to be able to help people who have suffered injustice. And that's really important to me. And you. You just. You're a star. And. And I love you truly.
- [42:59]
Megyn Kelly
Oh, thank you, Brian. And, you know, it's mutual. I love you. Doug loves you. Denise, too. We all love you guys. And it's. It's one of those things where not only did you help me out of the most challenging and awful chapter of my career, but. And I've talked to so many of your other clients who say the same thing. You helped me believe in myself again. You actually helped me believe there was a way back, that this lowest moment would not define me, that we were not gonna let these bastards ruin everything. And I'VE seen you do that for so many others, including Sage Steele and Mike Davis, and the list goes on and on. And to watch you now doing it for Justin is so heartening. And it's one of the reasons why I believe. I believe it will happen for him, too. I don't think he's a wrongdoer. I don't think he's some evil person. I think she. She has serious problems. That's my own opinion. She's got some real problems, and she's working them out on him publicly. So thank God he has you. Hey, so I do want to tell you, Doug says hi and was thrilled that we were doing that. We're doing this. And just again, thanks for doing. I know you're not giving a lot of these, and I'm always grateful.
- [44:06]
Brian Friedman
Well, you know what? Doug's phenomenal. You know, Doug is my role model as a husband, so that's why I love him.
- [44:15]
Megyn Kelly
He's still crushing it. In fact, just over my laptop computer, I was watching Doug go into the ocean with Yates. Doug's living his best life right now, Brian. He's not dealing with 12v6 motions. He's having a great time.
- [44:26]
Brian Friedman
No, but he's a talented author, and that's. You know, that can be just as hard as 12v6 motions.
- [44:33]
Megyn Kelly
True, true. Next one's coming out soon. All right. Much love. See you soon, I hope.
- [44:37]
Brian Friedman
Thank you.
- [44:39]
Megyn Kelly
Brian Friedman, everyone. The one and only man. If you get in a jam, that's the man to call for all sorts of reasons. Incredible lawyer. Even better man. Just an honor to have him on and to know him. Okay, I made it 24 hours into my vacation. Not even without having to come back on. It's always a possibility. And I bring this whole setup with me. I mean, right now, I'm in, like, our little hotel bedroom. I've got my mic, which I travel with. I've got my little computer. I've got my laptop, and I don't know, whatever Radar is, my tech guy, he sends me with a bunch of stuff just in case. Just in case. Then I talked to Brian, and he said he'd do it. And he, you know, he hasn't talked to anybody about this. He gave, like, one paper statement to a couple media outlets, and I've been dying to hear his thoughts. So, anyway, thank you for coming back with us. You heard my legal analysis of this case, my own personal legal analysis earlier, and on a separate program that we dropped right before this one in our feedback. And now you heard Brian's take on it and also his plans. I mean, really, there was a lot of news in there, full steam ahead, right to verdict, no settlement discussions. They're not interested in settling and that Blake Lively could be getting deposed as soon as June and he left the door open for Ryan Reynolds. And if you listen carefully, potentially a Taylor Swift deposition there too. So it's not over, not by a long shot. He does not think that Justin Baldoni has been served the righteous verdict in the public opinion that he deserves. Nor have the other defendants. You know, there are, he was mentioning the PR people who were helping Justin when this was bubbling up into a PR crisis and they were still shooting the movie. And those two have been very attacked, very much attacked by Blake Lively and her team and the Times for that matter. And I'm sure they would like their day in court. So in any event, this thing will keep going. And right now they have a trial date. I believe It's March of 26. So we shall see. We'll see if, if it's going to settle before that. I don't know how I, I don't think Justin Baldon will be paying any money to her and I don't think she wants to walk away because that telegraphs the wrong thing. So stay tuned. Okay, I'm going back to vacay. I don't think I'll be seeing you immediately. Let's hope. Cuz I, I actually would like to do some swimming and see the fam. So lots of love to you guys too. And I'll see you soon. Bye. Thanks for listening to the Megan Kelly Show. No bs, no agenda and no fear.
- [47:25]
Tax Network USA is ready to proudly celebrate our nation's birthday. Honoring freedom, resilience and financial independence. To mark the occasion, they're offering 10% off all services through July 4th. If you are dealing with back taxes or you missed the April 15th tax deadline, don't wait. Because the IRS is rapidly stepping up, enforcement penalties can add up quickly up to 5% per month, maxing out at 25% of your total tax bill. Just for filing, for not filing. That's on top of what you already owe. It's stressful, but there's good news. Tax Network USA can still help you turn things around.
- [47:59]
It's not too late for you.
- [48:00]
Whether you are self employed, run a business, or your books are just a complete mess, their team knows how to cut through the chaos and find solutions that work. Your consultation is always free. And getting ahead of the problem now could help you avoid harsh penalties, wage garnishments or surprise bank levies. Call 800-958-1000 or visit tnusa.com Megan that's 10% off all services through July 4th as part of their celebration of our nation's birthday. Regain control of your finances with expert help from Tax Network usa. You were on top of your bills.
- [48:34]
And then inflation hit. Groceries, gas, everything shot up.
- [48:39]
Prices are up 26% from just a few years ago. 26%. Let me share a smarter, faster, far.
- [48:46]
Easier way out of debt.
- [48:48]
It's called Done With Debt. And they're not like other debt relief companies. They don't push loans or bankruptcy on you.
- [48:54]
Done with Debt.
- [48:55]
They have negotiators who go head to head with your credit card and load companies. They have one goal to drastically reduce or eliminate your debt altogether. And unlike others, Done With Debt can move lightning fast. Most clients need more money in their pocket. Month one. But a word to the wise hurry, because some of their brilliant debt erasing strategies are time sensitive. Do not make another bill payment until you speak with a Done With Debt strategist.
- [49:18]
It's free.
- [49:19]
Visit donewithdebt.com that's donewithdebt.com donewithdebt.com.