TMZ: HALLE BAILEY CLAIMS DDG ATTACKED HER MULTIPLE TIMES... Gets Restraining Order…CAREER ENDER? DDG in 5?

[Kiyoshi-Dono]

Black male image is cooked for the whole summer

 

[High Art]

Say what you want, but this sounds like a little bit of truth mixed with a WHOLE lot of trying to keep DDG away from his child

I'm leaning towards this with more emphasis on him being an emotional bytch, though I'm biased since it is well documented on here how much I loathe DDG.

Wake me up at any hour to shyt on DDG is all I'm saying.

 

[Capital Steez]

I'm appalled by the responses so far. What does Halle stand to gain making a false claim on him? Isn't she more successful than him? The evidence is right in the OP

Honestly, he might have more money than her.

 

[darryl]

I am sure Shannon Sharpe thought the same now he about to pay some 22 yr old white woman generation wealth.








Pawg nation keep enriching whitey.

Scare tactics ain't working no more

 

[Jaguar93]

Black male image is cooked for the whole summer

DDG, Diddy, and Shay Shay…crazy

 

[MicIsGod]

Black male image is cooked for the whole summer

This nikka don’t count

 

[Shadow]

How u gonna end a youtuber/streamer career

Change the wifi password.

 

[dtownreppin214]

All these goofy ass streamers need their wigs split.

 

[Umoja]

Yeah why wouldn’t I believe Rubi Rose? She never went public with it. Her abuse was exposed because someone hacked her DMs and screenshot her messages to DDG (amongst other DMs). There was no clout chasing involved.

But again, the judge saw the evidence. Even if it was a “play for the kid”, she won! Cuz he has proven himself abusive, and the judge agrees. The judge actually has a degree btw, you don’t.

I don't think you fully get it.

1. It seems as though it was an ex parte hearing. Judges will hear evidence from one side, grant the injunction and then schedule a return hearing where the other side gets to present their story.

There isn't a guarantee that the injunction will hold up.

2. I don't think people are disbelieving her story, when you actually scrutinise the response. It sounds pretty believable to me. The problem is that certain beats show that games are being played. The battery is tied to her refusing to leave his car when it was his day for visitation. Damaging the ring camera was tied to him snapping when the child was "sick" on day for visitation. Moving the kid out of the jurisdiction. These are nasty games we see play out all the time.

He's a hot head who didn't do himself any favours, but it is kind or apparent that in the events outlined in the article she provoked him.

 

[Voice of Reason]

You and Akademics need to be deported.

 

[JamesJabdi]

have a baby with a woman who has no problem ruining you image to the world brehs......have a baby by a man who beats you up brehettes.....the only one i feel bad for is the kid like always.

 

[Uchiha God]

it’s over

 

[Roid Jones]

I thought the heading said a dog attacked her, I was wondering why she got a restraining order on a dog Anyway I believe her

 

[Oatmeal]

have a baby with a woman who has no problem ruining you image to the world brehs......have a baby by a man who beats you up brehettes.....the only one i feel bad for is the kid like always.

I mean, water seeks it's own level. They're both dysfunctional. Ever since that woman they harassed and ultimately got fired from her job at Saks came out folks should've known what time these 2 were on.

For those that don't know DDG bought a $5k jacket that he wore for a video then tried to return it. The woman said the jacket smelled like cologone and DDG said he never wore it. The girl then pulled up the video of him wearing the jacket on YouTube when he asked for a manager. They ultimately denied the return and the woman kept her commission for the sale. DDG and Bailey then had their fans call her store and harass her and leave negative reviews etc. Bailey confronted the woman calling her unprofessional and all types of mess. They eventually returned the jacket at another location.

 

[Budda]

I don't think you fully get it.

1. It seems as though it was an ex parte hearing. Judges will hear evidence from one side, grant the injunction and then schedule a return hearing where the other side gets to present their story.

There isn't a guarantee that the injunction will hold up.

2. I don't think people are disbelieving her story, when you actually scrutinise the response. It sounds pretty believable to me. The problem is that certain beats show that games are being played. The battery is tied to her refusing to leave his car when it was his day for visitation. Damaging the ring camera was tied to him snapping when the child was "sick" on day for visitation. Moving the kid out of the jurisdiction. These are nasty games we see play out all the time.

He's a hot head who didn't do himself any favours, but it is kind or apparent that in the events outlined in the article she provoked him.

They’re isolated events she just trying to spin it to make it seem as if he be beating her, when it’s not the case, women can be wicked.