The Hollywood Evidence Scandal That’s Shaking Blake Lively’s World: Missing Messages, PR Manipulation, and a Town on Edge

Hollywood loves a good plot twist — but this time, the drama isn’t on screen. It’s unfolding in real courtrooms, on encrypted apps, and in whispers across Beverly Hills. What started as a lawsuit has spiraled into one of the industry’s strangest sagas: deleted evidence, warring publicists, and the accusation that “the missing evidence is the real evidence.”

Yes, you read that right.

According to journalist and Hollywood truth-teller Sash Floor on Flossome Talk, Blake Lively’s legal team has filed a new motion that accuses her opponents of deliberately deleting key messages — and now, they’re arguing that those vanished texts are proof of a smear campaign against her. It’s a legal logic straight out of a satire, but it’s also dead serious.

As Sash put it: “They’re trying to say that the evidence they don’t have is the real evidence.”

The filing, which hit the docket this week, is one of the most aggressive moves yet in Blake Lively’s ongoing legal feud with PR consultant Jed Wallace and his associates. It’s not just about gossip anymore — it’s about control, credibility, and the power of narrative in a town built on illusion.

The Case That Ate Hollywood

To understand this scandal, you need to rewind a few months.

Blake Lively, best known for Gossip Girl, A Simple Favor, and her high-profile marriage to Ryan Reynolds, has been locked in a bitter legal dispute with a network of PR and marketing professionals tied to her former collaborators. The lawsuit alleges that she was the target of a smear campaign meant to damage her reputation — a campaign supposedly orchestrated through group chats on Signal, the encrypted messaging app favored by many in Hollywood.

The problem? Those Signal messages are gone.

Wallace’s team reportedly used a feature called “auto-delete,” which wipes messages after they’re read. Lively’s lawyers claim that function was kept active after the lawsuit was filed — a major no-no if those chats contained relevant evidence. Now, her attorneys want the judge to sanction Wallace’s side for “spoliation of evidence” — legal jargon for destroying potential proof.

Their motion requests four key things:

    An “adverse inference” instruction — meaning the jury could be told to assume the missing messages would’ve proven Blake’s claims.

    A ban on denying the smear campaign — preventing Wallace’s team from arguing in court that no campaign existed.

    A jurisdictional penalty — punishing alleged misconduct by PR players involved.

    Reimbursement of legal costs for the motion itself.

In short: Blake’s team wants the court to treat those deleted Signal messages as a smoking gun — even if no one ever reads them.

A Legal Argument Built on Shadows

It’s a bold, almost cinematic strategy. But it’s also risky.

As Sash Floor pointed out, this logic could backfire spectacularly: “They’re basically saying the evidence you can’t see is the proof. So now we just have to hope the judge will do the right thing.”

Wallace’s side, for its part, insists there’s nothing sinister about the deletions. They claim they were using Signal’s auto-delete for privacy — not to hide a conspiracy. In Hollywood’s cutthroat PR world, that explanation isn’t far-fetched. Clients and consultants often exchange brutally candid opinions that, if leaked, could end careers.

As Sash speculated, “I’m sure those texts weren’t flattering toward Blake or Ryan. No one wants their private venting about clients splashed online.”

Still, to Blake’s legal team, this is the perfect narrative: a story of destruction, secrecy, and cover-ups. Even if she loses the case, they can claim the truth was buried — literally deleted.

It’s a move straight out of the House of Cards playbook, and it could shape how Hollywood handles digital evidence for years.

When Everyone’s Suing Everyone

Here’s where it gets even messier.

While Blake’s lawyers were filing their sanctions motion, another Hollywood figure, Stephanie Jones, launched a nearly identical argument in her own lawsuit against Jennifer Ael. Jones, it turns out, is using the same “missing messages” logic — claiming that Signal chats she was not part of would prove she had no role in a supposed smear campaign.

In other words, everyone’s flipping the same narrative weapon against each other.

As Sash quipped on her show, “They’re all saying, ‘The missing evidence proves I’m right.’ It’s madness.”

The irony is unmistakable: Hollywood’s image-makers, who build illusions for a living, are now fighting over invisible proof.

Andy Cohen Enters the Chat

Meanwhile, the public spectacle grows. On Watch What Happens Live, host Andy Cohen couldn’t resist taking a jab. Sitting beside actress Allison Williams — who stars in Regretting You, the new adaptation of a Colleen Hoover novel — Cohen cracked a pointed joke about Blake Lively, who famously starred in another Hoover adaptation (It Ends With Us) but admitted she never read the book before filming.

When Williams mentioned reading the novel multiple times, Cohen smirked, “No one pictured Justin Baldoni and, uh… what’s her name?”

Williams hesitated, then answered: “Blake Lively.”

The exchange lit up social media. It wasn’t just shade — it was a sign that even within Hollywood, Blake’s reputation is under strain.

Cohen’s quip also underscored a key point: the entertainment industry has a short memory and a long appetite for drama. As Sash noted, “If any of them believed Blake’s claims, they wouldn’t joke like that.”

The PR Smokescreen

Adding to the surrealism, Sash revealed a suspiciously timed piece in People magazine — a fluff article about Ryan Reynolds and Hugh Jackman’s friendship, conveniently published right as the Blake controversy resurfaced.

The story, which described the actors celebrating their birthdays together, was dated October 20th — but the event it referenced happened nearly two weeks earlier.

“Why now?” Sash asked rhetorically. “Why post that piece exactly when Blake’s drama reignited? It’s classic distraction PR.”

In Hollywood, when bad press hits, good press mysteriously appears — often planted by powerful teams trying to shift the narrative. For Ryan Reynolds, who’s facing scrutiny for allegedly distancing himself from Blake’s case, the timing feels strategic.

He’s also currently promoting his John Candy documentary, giving his publicists every reason to drown out gossip with cheerful headlines. But behind the smiles, insiders whisper that his support for Blake is waning — a troubling sign for one of Hollywood’s power couples.

Hugh Jackman’s Ex Enters the Scene

As if that weren’t enough, there’s another subplot brewing.

Hugh Jackman’s ex-wife, Deborra-Lee Furness, has reportedly been seen meeting with New York publishers — possibly negotiating a tell-all memoir. According to Flossome Talk, eyewitnesses saw her carrying sample pages and notes, describing the meeting as having “the energy of a book deal negotiation.”

A tell-all from Jackman’s ex could easily touch on A-list relationships — including Hugh’s long friendship with Ryan Reynolds and, by extension, his entanglement with Blake Lively’s drama.

“Maybe there’s even a few chapters about Blake and Ryan,” Sash teased. “Who knows?”

In any other week, that would’ve been front-page gossip. But Hollywood’s attention span is currently stretched between deleted messages, courtroom chaos, and head-shaving moviegoers.

When PR Stunts Go Too Far

Speaking of head-shaving — yes, that’s a real thing.

Emma Stone’s upcoming film Bogonia reportedly held an exclusive screening in Culver City where fans were told they could only enter if they shaved their heads bald.

And they did.

“Women with long, beautiful hair were sitting down, letting someone shave their heads for a free ticket,” Sash said in disbelief.

The event, meant to promote the film’s bold aesthetic (Stone herself appears bald in the role), backfired spectacularly online. Social media erupted with criticism — not just for the bizarre requirement, but because the cut hair wasn’t even donated to charity.

“They just threw it away,” Sash said. “They could’ve made it a fundraiser for cancer patients or wig donations. Instead, they made it a spectacle.”

The backlash underscores a growing theme in Hollywood: PR stunts are getting desperate. Between celebrity court dramas and social media cancel culture, studios are resorting to increasingly extreme tactics to get attention — even if it means asking fans to sacrifice their hair for two hours of cinema.

The Kristen Bell Controversy

Amid all the chaos, another star is facing a PR nightmare of her own.

Kristen Bell recently posted an Instagram tribute to her husband, Dax Shepard, but the language in her caption — which reportedly included triggering phrases related to domestic violence — sparked outrage.

Critics accused Bell of being tone-deaf, especially during Domestic Violence Awareness Month. The backlash was swift and intense, forcing her to limit comments on the post and cancel a scheduled appearance on The Today Show.

Sash defended Bell, saying, “She didn’t do it out of malice. It was tone-deaf, yes, but not hateful. I hope she comes forward, explains, and maybe makes a donation to victims’ groups. That would turn it around.”

It’s a reminder that in modern Hollywood, a single misstep online can eclipse an entire career of goodwill.

The Bigger Picture

From deleted messages to public misfires, what ties these stories together is a pattern of control — over image, narrative, and perception.

Hollywood, for all its glamour, runs on illusion. But as social media, legal filings, and podcast investigations peel back the curtain, those illusions are harder to maintain.

Blake Lively’s lawsuit has become more than a celebrity scandal; it’s a case study in how information — or the lack of it — can shape public opinion. If her team succeeds in convincing a jury that “missing evidence” equals proof, it could set a precedent where perception outweighs facts.

And in a city obsessed with perception, that might be the most dangerous precedent of all.

For now, all eyes are on Judge Lyman, who will decide whether Blake’s team gets their wish — and whether deleted Signal messages will haunt Hollywood’s most private players.

Until then, one thing is certain: the drama behind the scenes is far juicier than anything on screen.