GIANT SCANDAL: Blake Lively’s Case COLLAPSING? Sworn Affidavit May Be WITHDRAWN, Shocking New Report Says – Baldoni Legal Team in Total UPROAR as Fallout Begins

From Dismissed to Disrupted: The Affidavit That Could Undo It All

On June 6, 2025, actress Blake Lively and her publicist Leslie Sloan seemed to score a major legal win. A sworn affidavit by Daily Mail journalist James Vatusa was submitted to court, claiming Sloan never told him Baldoni sexually assaulted Blake Lively—key testimony that helped dismiss multiple defamation claims.

Just three days later, the judge threw out the entire lawsuit.

Sloan, riding high on this legal victory, then used the same affidavit to request $1.3 million in attorney’s fees from Baldoni.

But now, shockwaves are tearing through the case again: multiple sources—including high-profile legal bloggers and Without A Crystal Ball—report that James Vatusa is attempting to withdraw that very affidavit, claiming it was signed under duress, coercion, and threats from his employer, the Daily Mail.

If that’s true, it not only undermines the dismissal ruling—it could ignite a new round of litigation and appeals.

A Timeline of Implosion: What Happened and When

June 6: Sloan submits the affidavit from Vatusa, which plays a pivotal role in getting the lawsuit dismissed.

June 9: The court officially dismisses the Baldoni defamation claims, citing the affidavit across 10–15 pages.

Later in June: Vatusa parts ways with Daily Mail’s legal counsel and hires powerhouse attorney Mark Geragos.

Now: Rumors are confirmed that Vatusa seeks to formally retract the affidavit, claiming it was false and signed under threats.

If Vatusa’s claim holds up, it could be devastating for Lively’s team. The affidavit was the linchpin in dismissing allegations against Sloan and played a major role in neutralizing the entire defamation case.

The Fallout: Could This Reopen the Entire Lawsuit?

The legal implications are enormous.

If the affidavit is withdrawn, Baldoni’s team could file a motion to vacate the dismissal, arguing that the court’s decision was based on manipulated evidence.

Appeal grounds are strengthened. Even though Baldoni’s team chose not to amend or refile after the dismissal, the reversal of key evidence could empower an appeal.

Ethical questions could now surround not only the affidavit but also how it was obtained and used by Sloan and her legal team.

Daily Mail’s role is now under scrutiny—did they force their reporter to sign something untrue to protect a media relationship or legal ally?

As the dust kicks up, Baldoni’s lawyer Brian Freriedman has issued subpoenas and set up depositions targeting Vatusa and Sloan. A legal storm is brewing, and it’s not one the Lively team expected to weather again.

The Vanzan Shell Game: Another Explosive Thread

Adding gasoline to the fire is the return of the Vanzan lawsuit.

This “mystery company,” alleged to be controlled by Lively and Reynolds, was used to subpoena Stephanie Jones and obtain sensitive texts from Jennifer Abel—texts that formed the basis of Lively’s harassment claims.

Now, Baldoni’s team says the Vanzan action was a sham designed to gain access to Abel’s confidential data without her knowledge, violating due process and privacy norms.

The new motion to compel documents related to the Vanzan subpoena includes:

The original subpoena text

All documents obtained

Internal communications between Jones and Vanzan

Proof of Vanzan’s corporate ownership

If the dots connect to Lively and Reynolds directly, it would reinforce claims of misconduct and intentional backdoor tactics to gain strategic advantage in litigation.

The Public Clash: Statements from Both Sides

Brian Freriedman, speaking to TMZ, downplayed the dismissal of the original case, calling it “procedural” and claiming they are moving forward with discovery in the harassment claims.

“The motion to dismiss has no bearing on the facts. We are confident we will prevail.”

On the other hand, Lively’s camp gloated:

“The frivolous $400 million lawsuit was tossed out in its entirety. The judge’s dismissal is a total victory.”

But if the affidavit truly unravels, it’s no longer a victory—it’s a ticking time bomb.

Online Reaction: Shock, Speculation, and Subreddit Firestorms

Reddit and TikTok legal sleuths are ablaze with debate:

“If that affidavit goes, the whole dismissal goes with it.”

“Why would Vatusa switch legal teams if there wasn’t more to the story?”

“This sounds insane—but it also sounds very, very real.”

Speculation is wild, but there’s a growing consensus that this case is far from over. The newly hired legal teams, court filings, and mounting subpoenas are not the signs of a dead legal dispute.

Meanwhile… Love Island and Taylor Swift Taxes?

While the Baldoni-Lively chaos explodes, other headlines try to compete:

A potential herpes outbreak on Love Island raises health and liability questions.

Rhode Island’s “Taylor Swift tax” proposes a massive increase in property taxes on luxury second homes, targeting celebrity real estate holdings.

Liver King arrested after threatening Joe Rogan on Instagram. Yes, seriously.

But let’s be honest—nothing’s topping the Baldoni-Lively firestorm right now.

Conclusion: Is This a Comeback or a Catastrophe?

What looked like a closed case is now cracking open at the seams. A reporter’s coerced affidavit, a potential sham lawsuit via a shell company, and renewed energy from Baldoni’s legal team point to major litigation on the horizon.

We could see:

Motions to reverse dismissal

New lawsuits

Potential sanctions or ethics investigations

And maybe, just maybe, actual trial proceedings

One thing’s certain: it’s not over. Not even close.

Stay tuned. Buckle in. And maybe text your lawyer friend—because this one’s going down in the books.