Bollywood News, Bollywood Movies, Bollywood Chat

India-Forums

   
Bollywood News, Bollywood Movies, Bollywood Chat
Bollywood News, Bollywood Movies, Bollywood Chat

Hrithik reply to Leaked photo !!! Big Liar with proof !!! (Page 11)

ChotaBheem IF-Sizzlerz
ChotaBheem
ChotaBheem

Joined: 10 July 2012
Posts: 16453

Posted: 26 April 2016 at 3:47pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by ponymo

Originally posted by Nova19

Originally posted by ponymo

Originally posted by Heisenberg4

Originally posted by ponymo

[
Who confirmed it was a pre production party? Where is the rest of the cast/crew? Where are Priyanka, Vivek? Where is Rakesh Roshan? Also what are Arjun, and other stars like Dino doing there? And why is the "pre production party" happening at Arjun Rampal's house who has no connection with the film?


Who has confirmed it was at Arjun Rampal's house?, why are other actors there?, the same reason why actors who have no connection to a film get invited to film success parties.   Are these all the pics that were taken that night?, are there pics of other people at the party that have not been released?

Even if this is not preproduction party but a party held by Arjun Rampal, that would mean that Arjun invited Kangana.  So the best "evidence" on Kangana's side is some old pic of the pair of them snapped at Arjun Rampal's house, along with several others, including his ex-wife.  From this we are to assume that they had a social relationship outside of work and friend's parties?


Doesn't matter who invited whom, Kangana and Hrithik appear cosy and are not some random strangers who wouldn't want to look at each other unless it was a film scene. They knew each other well enough and enjoyed each other's company. 

It's the way Hrithik has been disassociating with Kangana that I have a problem with. That is all.
Reread the leaked Hindi emails please. If you thought someone was writing that stuff to you (and probably worse in unpublished emails), you wouldn't try to "disassociate" from her pronto?

Disassociating from her because she was being a creepy stalker is okay. But to blatantly deny that he never knew her socially is what gets to me. Why not admit you did know her but after this episode you cut all ties with her (if that's true). It wouldn't make people any less sympathetic for him if there is truth to that story. So why tweak reality? This is my problem.


1-Dono ka pvt photo Kangana kyun nahin deti agar uske pass proof hai to 
Khali batain,Na Paris ka photo, na koi couple Photo,koi dinner date ?
aese main to Hritik ka Paris Hilton ke sath Party photo hai
To kya Hritik ki achi friendship maan lengey Paris Hilton ke sath Shocked 
Ya ye kahengey ki Hritik is dating Paris Hilton ?


2-Aur dusri baat us photo ki to ,as claimed by Hindustan Times- TOI(Bombay Times,sister group of TOI)who got the photo from Kangana's friends said it is from pre-production party of Krish.
To Aap kyun aesa maantey ho ki Kangana jhut bol rahi hai ? jabki ye information Kangana ki tarafse dia gaya hai.Aur nahin bhi hui pre-production bali,sirf party photo hui tab bhi koi badi baat hai nahin.It is a party photo afterall . 


Edited by ChotaBheem - 26 April 2016 at 4:00pm

anonymous39 IF-Dazzler
anonymous39
anonymous39

Joined: 16 March 2012
Posts: 3713

Posted: 26 April 2016 at 4:05pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by Nova19

Originally posted by Nova19

@ Ponymo and Anon39:  I find it hard to believe that you are ready to convict Hrithik because his lawyer had a poor choice of words when trying to convey they were never close friends or intimate in any way. The most damage this poor choice of words could inflict on Kangana is that Hrithik never considered her more than a work friend. Poor Kangana how that much pinch. 
The opposing player in this drama has been caught in so many lies and half truths I don't have the time to list them. Her untruths resulted in Hrithik being considered a stalker, bully, intimidator, s**t-shamer, misogynist, etc.

Hrithik's big bad "lie"* = denied she was ever a friend beyond work

Kangana's big bad lie = character assassination 

Edit: * The word socially is ambiguous and considering in her emails she makes it sound like she had trouble making simple conversation with him, I wouldn't find it hard to believe he truly never did consider her any thing other than some girl he worked with, until she became some girl who creeped him out, until she became some girl he loathed.

Poor choice of words?! From a high powered, high paid lawyer, we get a poor choice of words? The entire profession is about words and how they are used and even when and where periods and commas are placed. The entire job of a lawyer is to make cogent arguments and close loopholes, not to make it easy for the other side to prick holes in the point you are trying to make.

Nothing can be a bigger mistake than the line about not knowing Kangana socially. If Hrithik didn't mean that, it's the kind of thing that leads to a lawyer getting fired. All the other side has to show is that they *did* know each other socially which Kangana's side has now shown.

But I don't think he's a bad lawyer. I think this is precisely the argument Hrithik wanted to make. He went too far in trying to get away from Kangana and his history with her but got caught up in his own loop.

The same stupidity was done by them when they claimed Kangana was sending emails back to back every 6 minutes and then said the total was something like one thousand something. (I can't remember the number) Just simple math makes this unlikely which is again what the other side pointed out.

Trying to create a case but making so many mistakes that the defense can easily exploit either means you have a really bad lawyer or you are not telling your lawyer everything. Remember the defense doesn't have to prove anything. All they have to do is show the prosecution's case doesn't make sense. The burden of proof is on Hrithik's side.

I realize this is only a media trial but this is exactly what would happen if Hrithik dared to sue and filed a defamation suit against her. I can bet 100% that he won't dare to do that.  All they're doing is playing in the media hoping their fans stick up for them.

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

ranikaadi

-Vaishvi- IF-Dazzler
-Vaishvi-
-Vaishvi-

Joined: 09 May 2015
Posts: 2880

Posted: 26 April 2016 at 4:08pm | IP Logged
D'oh

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

willina

SELINA_MV Goldie
SELINA_MV
SELINA_MV

Joined: 13 August 2014
Posts: 2177

Posted: 26 April 2016 at 4:18pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by Nova19

Originally posted by Nova19

@ Ponymo and Anon39: I find it hard to believe that you are ready to convict Hrithik because his lawyer had a poor choice of words when trying to convey they were never close friends or intimate in any way. The most damage this poor choice of words could inflict on Kangana is that Hrithik never considered her more than a work friend. Poor Kangana how that much pinch.
The opposing player in this drama has been caught in so many lies and half truths I don't have the time to list them. Her untruths resulted in Hrithik being considered a stalker, bully, intimidator, s**t-shamer, misogynist, etc.

Hrithik's big bad "lie"* = denied she was ever a friend beyond work

Kangana's big bad lie = character assassination

Edit: * The word socially is ambiguous and considering in her emails she makes it sound like she had trouble making simple conversation with him, I wouldn't find it hard to believe he truly never did consider her any thing other than some girl he worked with, until she became some girl who creeped him out, until she became some girl he loathed.




why you need bother with this PONY. She trying to tell everyone that she is neutral. But, she like everything that said Kangana is honest, Kangana speak her mind and whatever the stupid label to this LIAR lady. She totally adore to the core that bitch women named Kangana.   LOL

Leave her alone and let her to stay in her glass.

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

Nova19

VasusenaRadheya IF-Addictz
VasusenaRadheya
VasusenaRadheya

Joined: 10 September 2010
Posts: 67092

Posted: 26 April 2016 at 4:19pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by CuttingChai

Your post cracked me up ( In a good way ) . ROFL
SELINA_MV Goldie
SELINA_MV
SELINA_MV

Joined: 13 August 2014
Posts: 2177

Posted: 26 April 2016 at 4:23pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by anonymous39

Originally posted by Nova19

Originally posted by Nova19

@ Ponymo and Anon39: I find it hard to believe that you are ready to convict Hrithik because his lawyer had a poor choice of words when trying to convey they were never close friends or intimate in any way. The most damage this poor choice of words could inflict on Kangana is that Hrithik never considered her more than a work friend. Poor Kangana how that much pinch.
The opposing player in this drama has been caught in so many lies and half truths I don't have the time to list them. Her untruths resulted in Hrithik being considered a stalker, bully, intimidator, s**t-shamer, misogynist, etc.

Hrithik's big bad "lie"* = denied she was ever a friend beyond work

Kangana's big bad lie = character assassination

Edit: * The word socially is ambiguous and considering in her emails she makes it sound like she had trouble making simple conversation with him, I wouldn't find it hard to believe he truly never did consider her any thing other than some girl he worked with, until she became some girl who creeped him out, until she became some girl he loathed.




Poor choice of words?! From a high powered, high paid lawyer, we get a poor choice of words? The entire profession is about words and how they are used and even when and where periods and commas are placed. The entire job of a lawyer is to make cogent arguments and close loopholes, not to make it easy for the other side to prick holes in the point you are trying to make.

Nothing can be a bigger mistake than the line about not knowing Kangana socially. If Hrithik didn't mean that, it's the kind of thing that leads to a lawyer getting fired. All the other side has to show is that they *did* know each other socially which Kangana's side has now shown.

But I don't think he's a bad lawyer. I think this is precisely the argument Hrithik wanted to make. He went too far in trying to get away from Kangana and his history with her but got caught up in his own loop.

The same stupidity was done by them when they claimed Kangana was sending emails back to back every 6 minutes and then said the total was something like one thousand something. (I can't remember the number) Just simple math makes this unlikely which is again what the other side pointed out.

Trying to create a case but making so many mistakes that the defense can easily exploit either means you have a really bad lawyer or you are not telling your lawyer everything. Remember the defense doesn't have to prove anything. All they have to do is show the prosecution's case doesn't make sense. The burden of proof is on Hrithik's side.

I realize this is only a media trial but this is exactly what would happen if Hrithik dared to sue and filed a defamation suit against her. I can bet 100% that he won't dare to do that. All they're doing is playing in the media hoping their fans stick up for them.
And nothing to then a big mistake to cover kangana stupid claim SHE AND HR WAS IN INTIMATE RELATIONSHIP. HR clearly said he never know Kangana personally and socially. That the truth. Both of them together around there (that party) because of Arjun. Not because he really want to be there with that women who shameless called someone husband as her lover.

Kangana really sent email almst every six minutes. Actually, some people still adore Kangana. That why they never believe the real Kangana behaviour.

Edited by SELINA_MV - 26 April 2016 at 4:25pm

The following 5 member(s) liked the above post:

rzan1whereiamwillinaiSakeenaTeAmo_Messi

slumgod.. IF-Rockerz
slumgod..
slumgod..

Joined: 17 July 2013
Posts: 9470

Posted: 26 April 2016 at 4:44pm | IP Logged
One thing I have noticed is, this issue no longer man vs woman. Even Feminzis are no longer bringing woman card . I guess direct  effect of HR leaking evidence after evidence and Kangu's inability to bring substantial proof. As someone said, some people were making statement like HR was completely wrong, he took panga with wrong person but now, for them, both HR and Kangu are at fault. Waqt Waqt ki baat haiLOL

The following 11 member(s) liked the above post:

whereiamSELINA_MVTwinkie_StarwillinaiSakeenaMalikaBasilisk-MariaMars-.Screwtape.Beautyful_MessTeAmo_Messi

Nova19 Goldie
Nova19
Nova19

Joined: 28 January 2013
Posts: 1641

Posted: 26 April 2016 at 4:54pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by anonymous39

Originally posted by Nova19

@ Ponymo and Anon39:  I find it hard to believe that you are ready to convict Hrithik because his lawyer had a poor choice of words when trying to convey they were never close friends or intimate in any way. The most damage this poor choice of words could inflict on Kangana is that Hrithik never considered her more than a work friend. Poor Kangana how that much pinch. 
The opposing player in this drama has been caught in so many lies and half truths I don't have the time to list them. Her untruths resulted in Hrithik being considered a stalker, bully, intimidator, s**t-shamer, misogynist, etc.

Hrithik's big bad "lie"* = denied she was ever a friend beyond work

Kangana's big bad lie = character assassination 

Edit: * The word socially is ambiguous and considering in her emails she makes it sound like she had trouble making simple conversation with him, I wouldn't find it hard to believe he truly never did consider her any thing other than some girl he worked with, until she became some girl who creeped him out, until she became some girl he loathed.
 
Poor choice of words?! From a high powered, high paid lawyer, we get a poor choice of words? The entire profession is about words and how they are used and even when and where periods and commas are placed. The entire job of a lawyer is to make cogent arguments and close loopholes, not to make it easy for the other side to prick holes in the point you are trying to make.

Nothing can be a bigger mistake than the line about not knowing Kangana socially. If Hrithik didn't mean that, it's the kind of thing that leads to a lawyer getting fired. All the other side has to show is that they *did* know each other socially which Kangana's side has now shown.

But I don't think he's a bad lawyer. I think this is precisely the argument Hrithik wanted to make. He went too far in trying to get away from Kangana and his history with her but got caught up in his own loop.

The same stupidity was done by them when they claimed Kangana was sending emails back to back every 6 minutes and then said the total was something like one thousand something. (I can't remember the number) Just simple math makes this unlikely which is again what the other side pointed out.

Trying to create a case but making so many mistakes that the defense can easily exploit either means you have a really bad lawyer or you are not telling your lawyer everything. Remember the defense doesn't have to prove anything. All they have to do is show the prosecution's case doesn't make sense. The burden of proof is on Hrithik's side.

I realize this is only a media trial but this is exactly what would happen if Hrithik dared to sue and filed a defamation suit against her. I can bet 100% that he won't dare to do that.  All they're doing is playing in the media hoping their fans stick up for them.
Yes, poor choice of word.  What you think it means, the lawyer did not. What the lawyer thinks it means, you do not. Hrithik doesn't think she was ever a friend outside work. That's his opinion, he's entitled to it. It was not Hrithiks lawyer who made the mistake about the number of emails. That was entirely the doing of Kangana's lawyer who changed "up to 50 per day" to 50 every day because he is illiterate, or not very bright, or trying very hard to "deviate" from the actual point of the legal notice (You know what he keeps accusing Hrithik of doing). Hrithik's lawyer may have chosen an ambiguous word and that was unfortunate because it gives Kangana and her supporters a talking point to avoid what they need to talk about. The only question of substance is, were Hrithik and Kangana lovers, f$ck buddies, drunken one night stand participants.  Did they have sex? That is not an opinion, it is a matter of fact. Yes or no. Time for her to answer on the record (so he can sue her) or apologize for implying something she knows is a lie. 

The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

whereiamSELINA_MV

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Author Replies Views Last Post
Kareena, Liar, Liar Pants on Fire?

Author: TheJake   Replies: 2   Views: 466

TheJake 2 466 16 February 2016 at 2:40pm by TheJake
Hrithik-Aishwarya or Hrithik-Kareena?

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Author: Mugda   Replies: 66   Views: 8087

Mugda 66 8087 24 December 2015 at 4:27am by Baarish.
15 Years of Hrithik Roshan - Hrithik watched it!!!

2 3

Author: ozzyproduction   Replies: 19   Views: 1688

ozzyproduction 19 1688 02 December 2015 at 5:08pm by MidnightRambler
Hrithik Roshan, Sussanne call it quits- Hrithik FB status Pg32

2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 41 42

Author: Johnny.Balraj   Replies: 331   Views: 56376

Johnny.Balraj 331 56376 01 January 2014 at 8:09pm by pakeezah
Liar Liar Whose Pant on Fire? :s

Author: bamboocopter   Replies: 8   Views: 1260

bamboocopter 8 1260 21 October 2011 at 10:26am by tvdekha

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category / Channels
Forums

Bollywood News, Bollywood Movies, Bollywood Chat Topic Index

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.

Popular Channels :
Star Plus | Zee TV | Sony TV | Colors TV | SAB TV | Life OK

Quick Links :
Top 100 TV Celebrities | Top 100 Bollywood Celebs | About Us | Contact Us | Advertise | Forum Index