Nick Viall

OK, if that's true, did he show this video?

Did he not show this video?

Why did he hang on to this video until this very time?

And then it brings up a lot of other questions.

Can I push back on that just a little bit?

Because law enforcement did have the video.

Dakota gave it to law enforcement.

The prosecutors had it.

It's in court records.

So I don't know if he was just sitting on it in that way because the court process was going on.

But the question I had about that, because they had the video, that was all in public record that ABC and Hulu would have had from the time that got filed in February 2023.

But they didn't do a protective order when she was taking the plea in abeyance, which is normally done.

It seems to me so they could continue to film together.

Well, I guess what's that mean they didn't do a protective order?

When there's a domestic violence plea in abeyance like that, there would be a stay away order between the two parties and a pretty thorough protective order.

that would cover the time of the probation to keep the parties apart or to have limited contact to exchange children.

There's a pretty structured protective order that would generally be in place if someone's on that kind of probation because the sad reality is that if there has been an incident that came to the court's attention, there's a ton of concern that there will be further incidents and they want to try to mitigate that with a protective order.

In this case, there was no protective order done at that time.

I wonder if that was to accommodate for future filming.

And if that's the case, I can't imagine that lawyers would not have been very involved in those conversations about how these two can navigate continuing to film together because her plea and abeyance says she can't be around places where alcohol is being served or consumed.