[QuickTidal]

amphibian, on 02 June 2022 - 01:38 PM, said:

You can like Depp all you want and hate Heard all you want, but the way you're talking about it absolves him of harmful acts he willingly admits he did and of the legal harassment he's been commiting for years now.

What harmful acts?

amphibian, on 02 June 2022 - 01:38 PM, said:

legal harassment he's been commiting for years now

Holy shit. The Sun called him a wife beater, so he sued them.

She wrote an op-ed calling him an abusive husband.

So he sued her for saying it.

Like wtf do you mean legal harassment?

Amph, understand me here....I have DATED this type of woman, and heard the shit out of her mouth myself, and was abused by her and told by her no one would believe me if I said anything. So I never said anything. Only my wife and close friends know because of how embarrassed I am by it happening to me.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Macros, on 02 June 2022 - 06:43 AM, said:

I'm baffled by why and how this whole trial was viewable by the public, like, what was the point? Isn't our celebrity obsessive bad enough without shovelling this down our throats literally 24/7 for the last month?

'On a per-article basis, the trial has dwarfed all other major topics in the news (see chart [...]

There have been double the Google searches for Amber Heard than for Elon Musk over the last month[...] There have been nearly 4x more searches for her name than for abortion or the Supreme Court.

[...] Entertainment outlets are treating the event like their Super Bowl.

"Hands down it's a record setter for us," [...]

[...] Courtroom dramas, especially those featuring celebrities, have long been a staple of the American media appetite, but this one stands out as the first major trial to go viral in the TikTok era.

"Consumption has changed for trials like this," [...]

Many of the most viral clips mock Heard, putting a pro-Depp spin on the media craze.

The hashtag #justiceforjohnnydepp has over 10 billion views, [...] while the hashtag #justiceforamberheard has 39 million.'

America more interested in Depp-Heard trial than abortion (axios.com)

[amphibian]

I am a lawyer. I went to school for years to learn about stuff like this. I do not practice this law specifically, but there are times when it is relevant in my work. You are mansplaining the proceeding in Virginia to me and doing it very badly.

I will link you to a few different articles that have other people explaining the concepts involved because you are not going to listen to me.

QuickTidal, on 02 June 2022 - 02:50 PM, said:

amphibian, on 02 June 2022 - 01:36 PM, said:

and specifically in Virginia to get the most friendly to him laws possible in the English speaking world

What? No, he did it in Virginia to get it televised because the court of public opinion is what he wanted to win in to clean his reputation after 6 years of her lies. Proving liable in that state is just as hard as everywhere else. It was not "friendly to him"...WTF?

Legal tourism specific to Virginia for very friendly to the plaintiff defamation laws has been a thing for quite a while. Devin Nunes made a big stink recently and it spurred articles about that. Forum shopping is a thing that rich plaintiffs do, but going after Heard in the UK and in Virginia with the messages to his friends about how he's doing it to show how much he wants to destroy her, hurt her, and call her awful names shows that he's doing this lawsuit stuff more for that than he is for his career.

https://www.virginia...-slapp-statute/

https://www.techdirt...nti-slapp-laws/

"
Depp is among a string of politicians, corporate interests and celebrities, who have filed defamation claims in Virginia in recent years, despite their loose connections to the state, in what critics call "libel tourism," according to The Washington Post." https://www.necn.com...rginia/2741123/


In regards to what the jury was considering:
"The seven-member jury must decide if two passages and the headline of the article are defamatory. The jury verdict form gives jurors instructions on how to determine that, including by asking them whether the statements were about Depp, were false and had a defamatory implication about him. Because Depp is a public figure, Heard can only be found guilty of libel if the jury decides that she acted with “actual malice,” meaning that she either knew what she wrote was false or that she acted with reckless disregard for the truth. Heard’s lawyers told the jury Depp’s libel claim must fail if Heard suffered even a single incident of abuse.

[...]

"The jury verdict form asks the jury to decide if Depp’s former attorney, acting as an agent for Depp, made or published three statements that were about Heard, were false and were seen by someone other than Heard. The jury must also decide if Depp’s attorney made the statements with actual malice." https://apnews.com/a...ddcff202e2d0b15

Heard is not an ideal defendant at all. She's an addict that seems to create abusive dynamics wherever she goes, she's lied about many things - including charity donations, and she does not come across as particularly credible. I firmly believe she abused him. However, it's very clear to me that he abused her and continues to do so via legal harassment including this trial we're talking about right now. That's gross and I don't think anyone should have to undergo that.

Neither person here comes out looking like someone I would work with or support. You have made your decision to support him, yet much of that seems to be driven by your experiences with someone in your life rather than what he did and what admits freely to doing - which I think is still gross enough to leave him in my mental scrap heap.

[QuickTidal]

You do you. He didn't admit to abusing her. Ever.

He's a good person. She's a viperous, narcissistic piece of shit with diagnosed, but untreated BPD, and HPD.

Honestly, if you cant' be bothered to listen to he tapes her her admitting to abusing him....then you and I can't have a conversation about this in good faith my guy.

Ciao.

[amphibian]

I believe she abused him. I believe he abused her.

I am also a person who has gone through physical abuse at the hands of my romantic partner. I have been kicked down stairs. I have left my house bleeding at 2 am to go to my parents' for medical care. It was life altering then and continues to be now.

I am thoroughly and intimately aware of some of the dynamics abuse can take.

What happened in Virginia is much more along the lines of continuing abuse than it is an obtaining of justice or recompense.

[QuickTidal]

amphibian, on 02 June 2022 - 03:53 PM, said:

I believe he abused her.

This is why men don't come forward. Because even when he has a metric shit-tonne of evidence proving her not only an abuser, but a liar, and that her "evidence" is falsified in multiple instances and that he was the victim...and they bring forward MANY random bystanders who were present for incidents who say Amber is lying and was the one causing the problem in a given instance they were a party to (to which her lawyers claim they are seeking their 15 minutes of fame....)...he's still not believed.

FFS Amber has a damned DV prior...which she and her then-GF tried to spin out as the Cop being a homophobe...a cop who came out and said that's impossible since she herself was a lesbian.

You want to "both sides" it with no viable evidence of him abusing her.

This is a guy who was physically and emotionally abused by his own mother....and his reaction to that abuse was to run and hide from her...and this is exactly what the did when Amber started shit as well documented on audiotape by Amber herself FFS. This is a man whose whole substance abuse problem very likely stems from that childhood abuse.

But for some reason, his reactionary anger in emails and texts after all this aimed at his abuser is somehow "legal harassment"?

I can't man. I can't take anyone who saw all of that laid out in the trial and find him abusive seriously.

I want you to think on some things that go hand in hand with DV.

Abusers separate their victims from friends and family to control them easier...Johnny not only let her friends and family come over all the time, and stay over all the time, he let many of them live in the very space he shared with Amber. Amber, however, would throw a fit if he wanted to hang out with his sister, or his two kids. She wanted HIM separate from them. He never separated her from anyone, and encouraged her to go and see anyone or bring them over.

Victims don't taunt, lash out, chase after, or anything else at their abusers. They walk on goddamn eggshells so as not to upset them for fear of them lashing out. Amber not only did all that to Johnny, in court she was stymied why he would not look at her...it's because she's his abuser...in any other DV trial with a man who abused a woman, you would not see the woman look at her abuser, nor would anyone expect her to.

She kept him from sleeping. She kept him drugged and pliable. She cheated on him in his own home with two men who REFUSED to testify in her defence. Think about that.

She showcased so many abuser red flags in his evidence against her, but also in court that again, I can't imagine anyone watching and coming out thinking anything she presented was valid or accurate.

There's also a reason why he was kind, and understanding of her sister Whitney lying (when asked about it) about what happened because he knows she has faced that abuse since the girls were kids from her older sister, so he understood that she was caught between the truth, and defending her sibling whose wrath she'd obviously face.

[Cause]

Macros, on 02 June 2022 - 06:43 AM, said:

I'm baffled by why and how this whole trial was viewable by the public, like, what was the point? Isn't our celebrity obsessive bad enough without shovelling this down our throats literally 24/7 for the last month?

Justice is public. You have the right to observe any trial I believe unless its specifically made to be closed to protect a witnesses identity or something like that. Since its Johny Depp and a million people want to observe and they cant fit they televise. Does it create a reality TV spectacle that was never meant to be the intent, yes.

[Malankazooie]

I only ever saw some clips of the trial and was never proactively seeking out the coverage.You would have to live under a rock to avoid any of it though. It's a sad commentary on us that this was more popular than other current events. I could never serve on a jury for a trial like this. The creep factor that Johnny Depp oozes, even all cleaned up in the courtroom, is just too much and would damn him in my eyes. Amber Heard's mannerisms on the stand sure didn't help her cause though. Is it true some camera coverage caught, what looks like, her taking drugs?

[Lady Bliss]

I think there has been more obsession about this because people are looking for a news distraction. I know that I can’t look at anymore news on the school shooting without tearing up, and I feel generally helpless wrt what is going on in the Ukraine.

[Tiste Simeon]

He lost the case against the Sun. That to me says something as they're forever printing nonsense and having to retract and getting sued. The fact that he lost is quite telling and does not absolve him of everything. Undoubtedly she's a vile person, there's no denying it but I can't believe he is utterly innocent either.

[TheRetiredBridgeburner]

Tiste Simeon, on 02 June 2022 - 08:05 PM, said:

He lost the case against the Sun. That to me says something as they're forever printing nonsense and having to retract and getting sued. The fact that he lost is quite telling and does not absolve him of everything. Undoubtedly she's a vile person, there's no denying it but I can't believe he is utterly innocent either.

This. Bearing in mind we're in the UK - I'd say it's pretty hard to lose a case against a rag like the Sun if you have a leg to stand on.

As a survivor of an emotionally abusive relationship I went in prepared to fully believe her, but she has lied and came across extremely poorly on the stand. I'm as certain as it's posisble to be that she has abused him.

Do I think that automatically means he didn't abuse her? I'm not so sure. The emails and texts might have been justifiable anger, or they might have been how he spoke to her - we can't know that. I find it very easy to believe jealousy, insecurity and control were present when he married a woman half his age (which I find creepy in the first place, I'll be honest). Add to that the serious problems with addiction and I find the narrative throughout that Johnny Depp is a saint a little troubling. None of that takes away from him being a victim of her abuse, however.

To my mind they're both ill and in need of serious help and support, and I worry about the significant amount of damage Heard has done to the "believe women" cause by lying. At the same time, it is good to see domestic violence against men being properly acknowledged as a thing that happens.

This post has been edited by TheRetiredBridgeburner: 03 June 2022 - 06:09 AM

[Macros]

I think we have our latest circus now that bread is getting so expensive.


All the other shit that's sliding to the background in the news because of this crap.....le sigh

[QuickTidal]

Tiste Simeon, on 02 June 2022 - 08:05 PM, said:

He lost the case against the Sun. That to me says something as they're forever printing nonsense and having to retract and getting sued. The fact that he lost is quite telling and does not absolve him of everything. Undoubtedly she's a vile person, there's no denying it but I can't believe he is utterly innocent either.

Well there's a few things there.

1. the Judge is twice compromised (his son works for the company that OWNS the Sun, and his wife is friends with a woman who is good friends with Heard. He should have recused himself.

2. The actual findings of the UK case basically boil down to the judge believing Ambers story to be credible. But you needn't believe me, you can read his result yourself. In none of that result do I feel that the judge made a decision based on evidence.

Quote

The judge had back then highlighted three incidents where he said Depp had put Heard in “fear of her life”.

One of the incidents took place in Australia in 2015 during the filming of one of the editions of Pirates of the Caribbean.
Heard claimed he had assaulted her multiple times, severed his fingertip, and blamed her for the injury.

The finger severing was proven in the US trial with multiple experts as the result of a thrown bottle, not an injury Depp could have caused himself.

Quote

The judge did not accept Heard had been responsible for hurting the fingertip by throwing a vodka bottle at Depp. He accepted Heard had been the victim of “sustained and multiple assaults”.

"The judge did not believe"....I mean...okay dude.

Quote

“I accept her evidence of the nature of the assaults he committed against her. They must have been terrifying,” the judge had said.

This same "evidence" was submitted and debunked in the US trial. Make no mistake, most of the ruling from the UK Judge was about what he personally believed VS being based on evidence.

Quote

Justice Nicol had said that “a recurring theme in Mr Depp’s evidence was that Ms Heard had constructed a hoax and that she had done this as an ‘insurance policy’,” and the actress was a “gold-digger”.

Hoaxes that were literally proven in the US trial, like falsified/photoshopped images, and edited video.

Above and beyond all else. Johnny Depp would have to have been the MOST spectacular narcissist to ever live to run afoul of literally no one else in his 58 years, and only let abusive behaviour out at a single woman.

Now, I don't think Depp is a saint either, but he's not an abuser.

And quite frankly, in a few years when Amber's next victim speaks out, I feel like the media trying to play this off as a big loss for Amber is going to feel really silly.

[QuickTidal]

Here is Jennifer Howell (former employer of Heard sister Witney and one of her best friends) deposition that was not allowed in the US trial. This is really worth reading as a window into things from not only an unbiased source, but one with ties not to Johnny at all, but to Whitney Henriquez (Nee Heard).

https://www.ifod.net...8/HOWELL-US.pdf


And then here is her statement after the US trial ended.

Quote

Adam Waldman was being rather kind using that word for this conspiracy to commit fraud against another human being. Everything he has ever said has beenthe truth and it has been mind blowing to watch the main stream media,huge organizations and companies cover up such crimes. These people literally called people I know and asked them to avoid being subpoenaed and to lie about me if they happened to get a subpoena. They did this for no other reason than I was telling the truth. Me, a very small partof this thing.
Imagine being the person that let them live for free for years, allowed them a place to have their extra-marital affairs, gave and gave only to be the target of their extortion. I have been destroyed over this and I was not the one they sought out to target. Adam Waldman told the truth and some people can’t handle the truth. Those people wage a lawsuit against him to keep him out of the courtroom because they know he knows what they have done.

This woman literally has no dog in the fight...she is a well-respected individual in Hollywood (A producer, former VP of 20th Century Fox TV animation, Executive VP of the production company that owns South Park with Trey and Matt, Head of Comedy for Paramount TV, and then Head of Animation for Dreamworks) with a solid track record who runs a charity. To me her testimony is the most damming and it lines up directly with what we know of Whitney and Johnny being friends and confiding in one another over what amber was like, and what we've heard Johnny say about Amber.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 03 June 2022 - 11:49 AM

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

'Tina Fey, Seth Meyers Among "SNL" Alums Who Allegedly Witnessed Horatio Sanz Assault Underage Fan

[...] alleging that the comedian groomed her from the age of 15 and sexually assaulted her at an SNL afterparty when she was 17[...]

[...] "[...] groped my breasts and buttocks and digitally penetrated my genitals," Doe writes. "He was also rubbing my vagina over [the] top of my clothes."

Doe's affidavit states that she and Ana Gasteyer made direct eye contact while Sanz groped her, at which point, "Gasteyer's jaw dropped, her arms shook and she became visibly startled."

"Next to Gasteyer, I saw Fey and Dratch looking at us and laughing," Doe continues. "When I looked at Fey and Dratch, who were excitedly giggling and talking with their hands over their mouths while looking directly at me and Sanz, they were startled and positioned themselves behind other people."

[...] Also present, the affidavit claims, were Seth Meyers and Maya Rudolph—who allegedly also stood "directly in front" of Sanz and Doe, "facing us, and Rudolph looked grossed out."'

Tina Fey, Seth Meyers Among 'SNL' Alums Who Allegedly Witnessed Horatio Sanz Assault Underage Fan

[Edit: but SNL is filmed in New York where the age of consent is 17, so she wasn't 'underage' in that sense. Assuming the party was also in New York and not LA (etc.) that is....]

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 10 June 2022 - 11:24 PM

[Malankazooie]

Ghislaine Maxwell sentenced to 20 years. Won't be surprised if she dies sometime before the year is over. I don't think it will be suicide because that would be too conspicuous and would really get the nuts talking. Possibly an illness?

[Tiste Simeon]

R Kelly sentenced to 30 years for sex trafficking.

https://www.insider....nviction-2022-6

Brings a new perspective to the song about bump n grind doesn't it?

[polishgenius]

https://twitter.com/...508441796161537




He seems nice.

[TheRetiredBridgeburner]

The move for a mistrial looks slightly less mad after reading that, presuming it's real.

I find the idea that fans can pay to have documents unsealed very strange... but then I know nothing about American law/

This post has been edited by TheRetiredBridgeburner: 31 July 2022 - 04:26 PM

[polishgenius]

TheRetiredBridgeburner, on 31 July 2022 - 04:21 PM, said:

The move for a mistrial looks slightly less mad after reading that, presuming it's real.

I find the idea that fans can pay to have documents unsealed very strange... but then I know nothing about American law/

She corrected herself later, these are documents that weren't sealed but you do have to pay to get a copy apparently.