I'm So Disappointed In You: Celebrity Missteps

[BetterButter]

SEC sues Justin Sun for his crypto schemes, along with Lindsay Lohan, Jake Paul, and Soulja Boy

Quote

The feds claim Sun engaged in selling unregistered securities and market manipulation and lied about paying celebrities for crypto endorsements.

 

[Blergh]

On 3/22/2023 at 7:31 AM, MissAlmond said:

Gwyneth Paltrow's civil trial for allegedly seriously injuring someone in a 2016 ski accident has begun.

https://www.npr.org/2023/03/21/1165094504/gwyneth-paltrow-ski-crash-trial-lawsuit-utah

https://deadline.com/2023/03/gwyneth-paltrow-appears-in-court-over-reckless-2016-ski-accident-begins-1235306672/

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/21/entertainment/gwyneth-paltrow-ski-collision/index.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2023/03/21/gwyneth-paltrow-ski-trial/

So it appears that these two bumped into each other and each of them now believe that they are the victim and the other one did the hit-and-run deal on the slopes. I don't envy the folks on that jury having to go over  everything with a fine toothed candle. ..er comb!

Edited March 24, 2023 by Blergh

[Vermicious Knid]

Nick Lachey ordered to anger management and AA.

Quote

 

The “Love is Blind” co-host was facing a misdemeanor assault and battery charge after a run-in with a photographer in March 2022. He was seen reaching into the photographer’s car in an attempt to grab her phone in footage published by TMZ.

The Los Angeles district attorney’s office said the actor has agreed to a pretrial program that allows him to avoid the charge.

“Mr. Lachey has not been charged with misdemeanor assault and battery,” the DA’s office said in a statement to media outlets on Tuesday. “Instead he is participating in LADA’s Prefiling Diversion program.”

 

I had actually looked this up years ago because I thought ordering someone to attend AA sounded hinky. And it is, not that most people know. If you don't want to bother with the link, federal judges have ruled every time that AA is a faith-based program and as such no one can be forced to attend. But they can be sent to a secular 12-step alternative. 

[Jaded]

I remember watching Nick and Jessica's reality show eons ago thinking even then that there was something off putting about him that I couldn't place at the time. I got the impression he had a pretty bad temper and the show made edits to try to make it seem not so bad. I was happy when those two divorced and glad no kids came out of the marriage. 

Edited March 23, 2023 by Jaded

[merylinkid]

Yes she looks just as gaunt even made up for trial.   I watched opening statements on Emily D. Baker's stream.   Her attorney is terrible.   If you get SUSTAINED objections during your opening, you suck.   All I could think was all her money and the best she could get was this ding dong?

Rumor hath she will be testifying Friday.

[Zella]

11 hours ago, merylinkid said:

All I could think was all her money and the best she could get was this ding dong?

But Gwyneth Paltrow herself is a pretty big ding dong, so that seems about right to me. 

[Blergh]

2 hours ago, Zella said:

But Gwyneth Paltrow herself is a pretty big ding dong, so that seems about right to me. 

So could the legal strategy be that Miss Paltrow is supposedly  not guilty by reason of inanity?

[Zella]

3 minutes ago, Blergh said:

So could the legal strategy be that Miss Paltrow is supposedly  not guilty by reason of inanity?

Maybe the jade vagina eggs inhibited her judgment. 

[DearEvette]

1 hour ago, Zella said:

Maybe the jade vagina eggs inhibited her judgment. 

Maybe she's just hangry?  She did an interview that discussed her wellness routine and she basically intermittently fasts, drinks cofffee, has bone broth for lunch and vegetables for dinner.  Has a favorite IV drip to give her some 6 syllable nutrient that is hard to find (but is apparently found in eggs?) And has ozone rectal therapy.

Honestly, I' d probably have some impaired judgement there too.

[Zella]

37 minutes ago, DearEvette said:

Maybe she's just hangry?  She did an interview that discussed her wellness routine and she basically intermittently fasts, drinks cofffee, has bone broth for lunch and vegetables for dinner.  Has a favorite IV drip to give her some 6 syllable nutrient that is hard to find (but is apparently found in eggs?) And has ozone rectal therapy.

Honestly, I' d probably have some impaired judgement there too.

Yeah I saw that and felt like it was basically just someone describing an advanced eating disorder and pretending it was a diet. 

Edited March 24, 2023 by Zella

[merylinkid]

8 hours ago, Zella said:

Yeah I saw that and felt like it was basically just someone describing an advanced eating disorder and pretending it was a diet. 

You weren't the only one saying that.    She also said in the same interview that she just hopes she has the energy to walk a little.   Hey I got an idea, if you ATE a meal you might have energy.    She needs help, instead of listening to her own goop all the time.

[Ohiopirate02]

3 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

You weren't the only one saying that.    She also said in the same interview that she just hopes she has the energy to walk a little.   Hey I got an idea, if you ATE a meal you might have energy.    She needs help, instead of listening to her own goop all the time.

She did come out and clarify that she does eat "meals," and that she has long covid.  This diet she is on is somehow supposed to help with that.  I am in no way defending Ms. Goop here because this is not the first time she has talked about her disordered eating. Every time some one calls her out on it and for promoting it, she has some sort of explanation and whatever she said was taken out of context.  It's lather, rinse, repeat at this point.  And anytime a celeb says they have a favorite IV, I think he/she/they need to spend some time talking to an eating disorder specialist.  Ditto for those who keep on pushing the need to detox.

[Kel Varnsen]

11 hours ago, Zella said:

Maybe the jade vagina eggs inhibited her judgment. 

It's a skiing accident right? Maybe the eggs threw off her centre of gravity/balance.

[Ohiopirate02]

18 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

It's a skiing accident right? Maybe the eggs threw off her centre of gravity/balance.

I believe the skiing accident happened before Gwyneth discovered jade eggs.  2016 feels like a lifetime ago, so I may be wrong, but I feel like jade eggs were a later phenomenon.  When it comes to Gwyneth and Goop, it's hard to keep track of the timeline of ridiculousness. 

[Zella]

1 hour ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I believe the skiing accident happened before Gwyneth discovered jade eggs.  2016 feels like a lifetime ago, so I may be wrong, but I feel like jade eggs were a later phenomenon.  When it comes to Gwyneth and Goop, it's hard to keep track of the timeline of ridiculousness. 

Yeah I think the jade eggs date back to 2018. At least publicly. But every time I see her name, my mind immediately goes to "The stupid bitch who thinks shoving jade eggs in your vagina is a good idea." 

[Ohiopirate02]

7 minutes ago, Zella said:

Yeah I think the jade eggs date back to 2018. At least publicly. But every time I see her name, my mind immediately goes to "The stupid bitch who thinks shoving jade eggs in your vagina is a good idea." 

Before she learned about jade eggs, there was vaginal steaming.  That's what comes to my mind when I see her name.  That and the candle that will not be named.  Gwyneth definitely has a preoccupation with one specific body part of hers, doesn't she.

[Zella]

1 minute ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Before she learned about jade eggs, there was vaginal steaming.  That's what comes to my mind when I see her name.  That and the candle that will not be named.  Gwyneth definitely has a preoccupation with one specific body part of hers, doesn't she.

I missed the steaming. I don't want to know, do I? 😂🤯

[Ohiopirate02]

40 minutes ago, Zella said:

I missed the steaming. I don't want to know, do I? 😂🤯

It's rather self-explanatory.  

[SunnyBeBe]

I’ve been reading about the Paltrow trial….. from the doctor’s testimony, the only way the Plaintiff could have gotten the injuries was from getting hit from behind.  Maybe, Gwyneth will have a good explanation.  I just don’t understand why she didn’t settle this case.  It seems weird for her to take it to trial.  She’s likely already paid her attorney more that the guy would have settled for.   I hope the proper party prevails.  

[AstridM]

13 hours ago, Zella said:

Yeah I saw that and felt like it was basically just someone describing an advanced eating disorder and pretending it was a diet. 

Very common thing to do, unfortunately.

1 hour ago, Zella said:

Yeah I think the jade eggs date back to 2018. At least publicly. But every time I see her name, my mind immediately goes to "The stupid bitch who thinks shoving jade eggs in your vagina is a good idea." 

I’ve been thinking of her as a stupid bitch for much longer. 

[Mabinogia]

17 hours ago, DearEvette said:

And has ozone rectal therapy.

What the....no, I don't even want to know, and I'm certainly not going to search it on the internet. lol

She is living proof that money can't buy basic common sense. 

[SunnyBeBe]

So, she claims she was the one downhill.  
 

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/gwyneth-paltrow-ski-crash-testimony-1235562572/

 

[Gramto6]

1 hour ago, SunnyBeBe said:

So, she claims she was the one downhill.  
 

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/gwyneth-paltrow-ski-crash-testimony-1235562572/

 

Turning into a "she said, he said" situation. I guess the various injuries will have to be the determining factor in which is actually telling the truth??

[Bethany]

I don't have a dog in this fight but given her countersuit is essentially just to recover the lawyers fees I am inclined to think the good optometrist thought he'd "hit" it lucky on the slopes that day and that she would pay up to make him go away. Assuming he's not being sincere all she wants is her lawyers fees covered, which makes sense to me.  

Edited March 24, 2023 by Elizabeth Anne

[SunnyBeBe]

A witness says she ran into the back of the man.  Of course, I think he is a friend or relative of the Plaintiff.  Still, to give an account under oath just as a favor ,….idk.  Too bad there’s no video of it.  

[Guest]

I haven’t watched any of the trial but from what I’ve read her version doesn’t make a lot of sense. She says he hit her from behind. That his skis went between her legs, she felt a body press against her back, he was making strange noises and for a split second she that it might be an assault. To me that language doesn’t align with being hit from behind with no warning on a slippery surface with enough force to break bones. 

She also said she didn’t know he was injured but that he was on the ground grunting and groaning in a disturbing way. 

But if she did hit him it also doesn’t make any sense that she wouldn’t settle. 

[Zella]

8 minutes ago, Dani said:

But if she did hit him it also doesn’t make any sense that she wouldn’t settle. 

Agreed but I don't think Paltrow is really grounded in reality. So, I could totally see her rejecting advice to settle. 

[Bethany]

5 minutes ago, Zella said:

Agreed but I don't think Paltrow is really grounded in reality. So, I could totally see her rejecting advice to settle. 

I don't know.  She's taking a risk, of course, but since the suit is for 300K and not the original 3 million, it may be worth it.  Especially if this really was an accident with no one being completely at fault and both maybe being somewhat at fault (which is the way it is in most skiing accidents I have personal knowledge of) - hey you strap on two slidey things on your feet and go on a snowy mountain you are already taking your chances IMO - but I digress.  At worst she's out 300k + lawyers fees, at best she owes nothing.  He's taking the bigger chance IMO - which may speak to him being in the right.  

[Zella]

7 minutes ago, Elizabeth Anne said:

I don't know.  She's taking a risk, of course, but since the suit is for 300K and not the original 3 million, it may be worth it.  Especially if this really was an accident with no one being completely at fault and both maybe being somewhat at fault (which is the way it is in most skiing accidents I have personal knowledge of) - hey you strap on two slidey things on your feet and go on a snowy mountain you are already taking your chances IMO - but I digress.  At worst she's out 300k + lawyers fees, at best she owes nothing.  He's taking the bigger chance IMO - which may speak to him being in the right.  

Yes that's all certainly quite possible. I am more basing my opinion on what I know about Paltrow in general. I think she's repeatedly shown herself to be, quite frankly, a brainless moron who is incredibly blasé about other people's safety and completely lacking in any introspection or remorse about it. So, I don't find it hard to believe that she recklessly injured someone and then handles it in the most incompetent way possible. It seems . . . very on brand for her, sadly. 

Edited March 25, 2023 by Zella

[Guest]

I was just reading this article where a lawyer in Utah is speculating that Paltrow’s insurance company is forcing her to fight it in court. There was a CBS story that said ski accidents are actually covered under homeowners general liability insurance. 

That would actually explain a lot for me and make me more inclined to believe her version. She has much less incentive to lie. 

[Quof]

It's absolutely her insurance company defending the action, therefore calling the shots.  

[SunnyBeBe]

If it’s her insurance company’s decision to deny liability, it’s due to their insured telling them that she was not at fault.  The insurance company will do they own investigation, but if she is adamant she wasn’t the one who caused the collision with the man, they likely will support it, absent obvious findings otherwise.  Still, I wonder why Gwyneth wouldn’t have stopped all of this and paid the man out of her own pocket, without insurance money, to settle.   I’ve never known of that happening (I’ve handled personal injury cases for years, but not in Utah) but don’t see why it couldn’t work, unless she has a contractual obligation with her carrier that prevents it.  I’ve seen cases where the at fault driver in a car accident foolishly tells his insurance company that he was not at fault in the car accident, thinking it will be in his favor, but it leads to them denying the claim of the injured person in the other vehicle and later they end up in litigation.  They then must provide discovery information, attend depositions, answer personal questions to strangers, take off time from work, etc. similar to what Gwyneth is doing.  I still don’t get why this didn’t settle in mediation. 
Yesterday, the clip I saw showed Gwyneth’s attorney asking so many leading questions…it was as if she was the one testifying.  It didn’t look good. (Correction:  After looking at the video at length, I think that was Plaintiff’s attorney who was examining her and therefore, leading would be allowed.)
 

 

Edited March 25, 2023 by SunnyBeBe

[SunnyBeBe]

I’m not wild about this link, but it has two diagrams that show the two versions of what happened on the mountain.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11900757/Gwyneth-Paltrow-anxious-wary-tense-court-body-language-expert-claims.html

 

[merylinkid]

Gywneth testified yesterday.   I watched it.   Her attorney is still terrible, but she did well on the stand.   She might be goopy but she testified well.   Her explanation of the accident makes sense to me.

She was skiing, all of sudden someone hit her from behind and was making strange grunting noises.   ONE of the possibilities that went through her mind was is this a sexual assault.   Which yes, you can be sexually assaulted in public with tons of clothes on.   This is a pretty high profile actress, she has probably been accosted in public before and probably does not enjoy it.    His skis went through hers forcing her legs apart.   They veered to the right and then fell over.   So it is possible that she fell on top of him AS they fell.   But he hit her first.   That's when the injuries occurred, from the fall, not the hit.  

HE claims he was unconscious for 5 or 10 minutes.   SHE says, he was talking to the ski instructor who was RIGHT THERE almost immediately after.   He said he was okay.    BTW, he hasn't testified yet.    He also was excused from the courtroom while all his witnesses were testifying because it's too ... upsetting for him.   Except when Gwyneth testified which was the time guaranteed of maximum coverage.  I have NEVER heard of that in a civil trial.   It's your damn case, you have to be there.   He testifies on Monday.

There is missing gopro video.   Which STRONGLY hints at it being hidden or destroyed.  Which is a HUGE deal in civil cases.   The daughter says she clicked the link  in the email that allegedly contained the video but conveniently does not remember seeing it.    Also there are emails were the plaintiff is all "I'm gonna be famous."     

One of the daughters testified that one of her answers in her deposition was WRONG but her dad's lawyers told her not change it because it would look bad.     Unfortunately, Gwyneth's stupid lawyer failed to follow up on that.   Because like the missing go pro video that is HUGE.    You can make corrections to  your depo like a name is misspelled.   But this was a change in the answer itself.   So which is right?   Can this person's testimony be considered accurate.   Also the daughters were NOT there that day.   All they know is what their dad told them.   

TLDR:  I think Gwyneth is fighting this because SHE DID NOT HIT HIM.   Right now, she seems the more credible party.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, merylinkid said:

She was skiing, all of sudden someone hit her from behind and was making strange grunting noises.   ONE of the possibilities that went through her mind was is this a sexual assault.   Which yes, you can be sexually assaulted in public with tons of clothes on.   This is a pretty high profile actress, she has probably been accosted in public before and probably does not enjoy it.    His skis went through hers forcing her legs apart.   They veered to the right and then fell over.   So it is possible that she fell on top of him AS they fell.   But he hit her first.   That's when the injuries occurred, from the fall, not the hit.  

My initial disbelief over the language in her statement is that it feels incongruous with a collision that would happen with any significant speed. Now that I have read more and better understand that one of them is a bold face liar and am no longer trying to reconcile the “facts” of the two different versions, I don’t have that issue. 

2 hours ago, merylinkid said:

He also was excused from the courtroom while all his witnesses were testifying because it's too ... upsetting for him.   Except when Gwyneth testified which was the time guaranteed of maximum coverage.  I have NEVER heard of that in a civil trial.   It's your damn case, you have to be there.

I’ve only been involved with one civil case and the plaintiff didn’t have to be there. I had a family member who sued over medical issues and she could choose whether or not to be in court. She was free to leave in the middle of testimony if it got to be too much. Her lawyer really wanted her there for some parts but was fine with her not being there for others. 

2 hours ago, merylinkid said:

There is missing gopro video.   Which STRONGLY hints at it being hidden or destroyed.  Which is a HUGE deal in civil cases.   The daughter says she clicked the link  in the email that allegedly contained the video but conveniently does not remember seeing it.    Also there are emails were the plaintiff is all "I'm gonna be famous."     

This is such a huge factor for me. In a case with so little evidence the possibility that one side had a recording but is hiding it may very well be what my opinion hinges on. The medical evidence is the other thing that I am very curious about but haven’t looked into yet. 

[Bethany]

What puzzles me is why he is even proceeding with this lawsuit.  Don't get me wrong, 300K is a nice chunk of change but surely in terms of ongoing medical care in the US it's not a significant amount of money?  It made sense to me, whether he was lying or not, that he would try to get 3 million - but the reduced amount makes me wonder.  Not sure if that makes him more believable or less.  

[merylinkid]

He might not have ongoing medical care.  He might have reached maximum medical recovery or what it is.   So its more living with the injuries.   And he was 70 at the time, so they take into account life expectancy.   There is no  lost earning potential because he was already retired.   They also have to take into account he was already blind in one eye and deaf so how much is his CURRENT condition attributable to the accident and how much is just continuing issues with previous condition.  Medical bills would be those also covered by insurance because the insurance company wants reimbursement if you recover.

Also I will let you in a little secret (plaintiff's personal injury paralegal for MANY years before becoming a lawyer).   There is no magic formula for figuring out how much you sue for.   One rule of thumb I used and my bosses agreed was as good as any was 3 times actual.   So what did this actuall cost you -- medical, lost wages, property damage x 3.   This does not include pain and suffering because pain and suffering is not an actual quantifable damage that you pay a bill for.   So I broke it down this way 1/3 actual damages 1/3 pain and suffering and 1/3 attorney's fees.   That gave some wiggle room to settle.

This guy was going for the cash grab.   When Gywneth didn't settle for just nuisance value and actually decided to fight it because HE HIT HER, he lowered it hoping to get at least something out of it.   She just wants her attorney's fees paid because she had to go hire an attorney and deal with it.   (maybe the insurance company is paying for the attorney maybe not).

the only thing I don't like is putting her son on the stand.   This kid doesn't need to go through this.   Of course he is going to back up his mom's version of events.   But the plaintiffs' counsel is going to try to trip him up.   Which he does not need that pressure.  I would have called the ski instructors rather than my own kid.    If Moses were an adult my calculation would be different but he is still a minor.   

[AstridM]

1 hour ago, Elizabeth Anne said:

What puzzles me is why he is even proceeding with this lawsuit.  Don't get me wrong, 300K is a nice chunk of change but surely in terms of ongoing medical care in the US it's not a significant amount of money?  It made sense to me, whether he was lying or not, that he would try to get 3 million - but the reduced amount makes me wonder.  Not sure if that makes him more believable or less.  

300k is still a significant amount of money for many. A huge amount. 

[SunnyBeBe]

It’s likely that the attorney fees for the Plaintiff may be greater than one-third. Often, it increases to 40% after a lawsuit is filed.  Then, the out of pocket costs. Did client pay for the deposition transcripts, medical reports, doctor’s time?  If the attorney advanced it, it comes off the top upon recovery. Then, as Merylinkid said above, there’s the matter of subrogation to those who paid his medical bills.  So, Medicare or the private insurance carrier would likely have a lien on any recovered money for medical bills they paid, although, sometimes they will negotiate for less than dollar for dollar on their reimbursement, but still.  The plaintiff’s share will be reduced quite a bit, though he should be protected to get a minimum of any settlement or award.  
 

Did anyone catch exactly what his medical damages were?  

[Quof]

3 hours ago, Dani said:

I’ve only been involved with one civil case and the plaintiff didn’t have to be there

Defence litigator here, of many decades.   The Plaintiff doesn't have to be present throughout, but the judge certainly notices their absence ("why in the Hell don't they care about their own case?") 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Quof said:

Defence litigator here, of many decades.   The Plaintiff doesn't have to be present throughout, but the judge certainly notices their absence ("why in the Hell don't they care about their own case?") 

Even when there are legitimate medical reasons for them not to be there?

I have my doubts about the guy suing Paltrow but he claims to have injuries that would make it difficult to sit through a trial. In my example the plaintiff had terminal cancer. I certainly hope the judge or the jury wouldn’t have been critical of that. 

[Salacious Kitty]

His attorney explained in his opening statement that the Plaintiff had become a "different person" after the head injury and would miss various testimony. The implication was that he becomes unpleasant/angry/unruly. I haven't followed the trial since the first day, so I don't know how much of testimony he wasn't present for.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

..........

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jonathan-majors-arrest-domestic-violence-charges-new-york-city/

[Spartan Girl]

34 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

..........

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jonathan-majors-arrest-domestic-violence-charges-new-york-city/

Just gonna leave this here

 

[bluegirl147]

11 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Just gonna leave this here

 

I gotta be honest I've always gotten a real uneasy vibe from him.  Like I thought I don't like this guy but I didn't know why.  For what it's worth I had the same vibe about Bill Cosby going back to his Fat Albert days.

[Spartan Girl]

56 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

I gotta be honest I've always gotten a real uneasy vibe from him.  Like I thought I don't like this guy but I didn't know why.  For what it's worth I had the same vibe about Bill Cosby going back to his Fat Albert days.

And there are already people on the internet accusing this of being another conspiracy to take down a Black actor and the height of their success.

You know, Denzel Washington, Michael B Jordan, James Earl Jones, Don Cheadle, Anthony Mackie, Idris Elba and various other men are all successful Black actors, and I never heard ONE WORD of any of them abusing anybody. So those crockpots can shove it.

[Shannon L.]

2 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

For what it's worth I had the same vibe about Bill Cosby going back to his Fat Albert days.

My mom never liked him.  I don't recall why, but I remember that particular fact because, as a young teen when I loved all things Cosby, I was shocked when she told me. 

Edited March 26, 2023 by Shannon L.

[AstridM]

4 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

I gotta be honest I've always gotten a real uneasy vibe from him.  Like I thought I don't like this guy but I didn't know why.  For what it's worth I had the same vibe about Bill Cosby going back to his Fat Albert days.

I’ve never even heard of him before. 

[Zella]

35 minutes ago, AstridM said:

I’ve never even heard of him before. 

I haven't either, but I am pretty out of touch with newer movies/TV shows too. 

[Blergh]

2 minutes ago, Zella said:

I haven't either, but I am pretty out of touch with newer movies/TV shows too. 

The same but if I didn't have YouTube with its zillions  pre-Millenial shows and songs, I'd have probably given up watching much of anything.

BTW, has Mr. Colbert made any statements regretting having this Mr. Majors a platform to spin things? I'm still waiting for Mr. Colbert to express regret over letting Miss Couric's spins all go unchecked and unchallenged even after CBS pulled the plug on her using their platform to pitch said autobio not too long afterwards.