Thank you for this. I never took sides either, but the Johnny stans have been creepy, culty, and disturbing. And Heard has been disproportionately crucified a thousand times harder than legitimate celebrity criminals who did horrible, proven things. It has made me sick to my stomach to watch.
Whilst I willn ever understand what is the point of being a fan of an over-paid person who acts or sings or whatever, any of them no exceptions, I kinda understand why a fan would loose their shit in this case on amber.
I saw it from an impartial point of view, I gave a more detailed writting in a comment on this page but to sum it up:
A person who claimed she was beaten all the time by a wife beater, couldn't gather enough evidence to prove it. All she could gather was video of him punching furniture, picture of punched clothes, and edited pictures(confirmed by data expert) of her increasing her usual 'bruised looking purple cheeks' making them more purple than usual to look more like bruised than normal.
And oh boy evidence of a wife beater should have been easy for her with all her free-loading friends and sister living with them all the time.
Instead after all that evidence lacking they decided to pick on his drug use and furniture beating to make up for the lacking evidence, even though all of them are drug users.
In the end after watching the trial as entertainment out of curiosity, logically speaking it was easy for me to pick Johnny's side, even though I never had any extra sympaties for him.
She sadly had more evidence than most victims of domestic violence. I suspect the legal team focused on his behaviors because this wasn’t technically a case about abuse. It was a case about defamation. There is an excellent longform Rolling Stone article about Johnny’s decades-long battles with substance abuse and, importantly, how often it has cost him roles. Also: shockingly, the jury wasn’t sequestered, so they saw all the online abuse and TikToks toward Amber that were drummed up with the objective of destroying her. I don’t think it’s rational to side with either of them, but it certainly isn’t easy. His legal team just did a better job.
I disagree. I watched all of the trial. Not once did Amber take responsibility or acknowledge her issues but Johnny was upfront about his drug an alcohol addictions. Those tapes of her taunting him and telling him she didn't hit him sounded exactly like mine and many others abusers. The deflimation was in regards to her saying he committed SV and DV against her, not that he took drugs. She had no evidence of any SV or DV. The letter she had her lawyers send before she filed the TRO show that she was trying to extort more money and things from him. I was not a fan of Johnny's and I think a lot of them have gone overboard but Amber was guilty. The judge asked the jury to avoid reading info about the case and to imply they did anyways is disrespectful. And what about all the online abuse Johnny got when Amber lied about the abuse. It goes both ways. She is not a victim, she is a victimizer.
This is not a case in which being a DV survivor makes you any more qualified to determine who is better at lying, for there are just as many survivors who see him as the liar, and their experiences are just as valid as yours. I say that as a victim of sexual assault. This is just not a case in which it is wise to take a side. Personal triggers are just as likely to mislead and cause bias, as they are to provide insight.
I never said it did. I said her speaking to JD in the audio triggered me not that it made me a better judge of character and who is telling the truth. The jury who saw all the evidence and the court proceeding made a decision on that alone. To imply that they were swayed by either sides PR teams is improbable and disrespectful. She has the opportunity to appeal the decision, but what the jury decided should be respected no matter ones opinion until decided otherwise. My unbiased opinion was based on what I saw during the trial and what unbiased layers explained about the trial.
I have to share that this case validates my logic for not coming out against a public figure for assault over 20 years ago. He straight out and asked me, "And what are you gonna do about it'? And what I am most livid about is that he was right. I will take it to my grave because I will not be dragged through the mud for responding to what he did. The worst part is when they know they can do things and get away with them. They are the absolute most heinous. The power. The existing reality. On that note, I have experience in social work, Mental health, time as a probation officer and now in law school. I watched both cases and will follow the appeal. This is still largely a woman's issue. Something being a woman's issue doesn't mean that men are never hurt. le sigh.
I was bullied, sexually abused and then raped by my elder brother for 3 years. He used to often twist my arm to my back and would only release it until I tell him he is a lord. He stopped because he moved out, not because he felt any remorse. Rape is a demonstration of power, nothing else. It makes me really angry to hear stories where men blame how the girl or woman was dressed or were supposedly provocative because it has absolutely nothing to do with it. It is to show us who's the boss.
I watched the trial and she had no evidence of DV or SV. Those recording of her taunting him triggered me. I don't believe he won because he was more powerful than her or that his lawyers were better but because he was more believable and had proof of DV. Agree that this is still largely a women's issue. Amber did every victim of DV and SV a disservice.
Unless you've been the victim and had it up to your ears and said, come on...'what are you gonna to to me? I you weren't punched....I hit you". I see a woman at wits end who no longer cares about his shows of rage and is happy to let him kill her if he wants. You can put whatever spin you like. It does not compare to the things he said and did and was convicted of in the UK. That court was a circus. It will be granted an appeal for that reason alone. Ability for a legal team to suppress and frame evidence how they want it to be seen is part of what a legal team does. There was no manipulation of evidence in UK ..a simple trial judge. 133 pages of evidence he went over line by line. And gave good legal reasoning. There was no trying to turn the victim into an incredible source (also a legal tactic to be adversarial) 12/14 incidents, most of which never saw daylight in the US trial. If I took any person on this thread and threatens to take your career, everything you had and your reputation...bashed your reputation in advance and brought the town with torches to witness your further humiliation I'm very confident I could take ANY situation that wasn't on tape and in context and make you look like you're exaggerating, nuts and at worst lying.
Don't come at me here again. He sat there like a Cheshire cat. There was absolutely no evidence or witnesses of her hurting him except her challenging him and clarifying (when being gaslit constantly in the end when fighting for your sanity you will correct the person torturing you to reality even if that reality is I HIT YOU...you didn't 'get punched!) Crazy making is the whole game of narcisstic abuse.
I'm sorry the phrase triggered you but that does not make her an abuser, just like me repeating it doesn't make me one.
He won due to skillful legal tactics and their ability to reframe the context of the truth and suppress anything that could be questioned (like witnesses of his own team who reported her being kicked and dragged by the head on a plane). The suppressed letters she wrote to him in the very early stages of their relationship talking about how he scared her and was surrounded by enablers who were covering up all his issues because the benefited from him continuing work and not going to get help.
She has as diagnosed by his choice of psychologist, BPD. Anyone familiar with NPD would be aware that they are undone by abandonment. So if you noticed parts where she is on her knees begging him not to leave her...that is him...with a perfect victim...torturing her with her own fears of being left. Most people with BPD can't leave relationships as easily as others can. Even if you don't have an attachment disorder leaving any relationship can be hard but it makes them exceptionally vulnerable to abuse. Are they difficult to be around. Yes.
Are they prone to histrionics...yes. Because they feel so much more deeply hurt by threats and perceived threats to be left. And he played that like a fiddle to watch her grovel and gain control when he did things. She begged him to get help for years.
After many years in therapy, she gained the strength to leave him and his ego is very damaged by her daring to date a more powerful man, he can't hold down his job because of his behaviour (also suppressed but framed to make it look like she was his issue even though they've been split a long time), and he attacked her for the mere insinuation that someone abused her. He is a vendictive narcissist. He is blaming her for his world falling apart and still speaking of women like their dirt and for his use and abuse. He is as entitled as it gets.
He made a mockery of court proceedings. If you have never heard a narcissist brag about getting away with outsmarting a judge or jury...they can't help the gloating. They feel so superior.
No worries though. She is in therapy and working on her issues. He, being a narcissist believes he has done nothing. So this trashing of that woman will stand until there is a new victim who will see what he did to her. She will write a memoir while everyone else takes part in the witch burnings.
Finally, Heard had absolutely nothing to gain by being a spokes person for DV. He could have went on living his billionaire life on his private island with his "Sublime little Russian' and fantasizing about ...what was it "drowning amber, burning her and then fucking her dead corpse to make sure she is dead'. I don't know who you think is vile but it wasn't the person saying, 'You need help...I want to help you'.
But leave it to the legions of fans the vilify a woman where the only concrete 'evidence' of all their bizarre accusations is a clipped recording of her out of context saying, 'You weren't punched!!!! I hit you Johnny's Poor you...poor Johnny, who is going to believe you a big man was abused by a woman'. It is a gotcha moment on tape. She accused him of abuse, he assaulted her...she fought back...in an ever so narcisstic move, he told her he was no going to tell everyone she is an abuser. And played it to the fullest.
It is wild to watch the bend on the actual evidence and to. see the legal moves made to reframe what happened. You'd have to be both familiar with personality disorders, domestic abuse, narcisstic behaviour (not the pop culture colloquial kind) and the legal system to have followed this. I am not an Amber Heard fan. In fact never heard of her. My last knowledge of Johnny Depp was Edward Scissor Hands. I have no dog in this race.
It is wild the damage one dog with a bone can cause!
I’m a domestic violence survivor as well, and I liked both people. I watched the trial, and the evidence really showed her being the aggressor most of the time. They both suck, but it wasn’t an equal amount of suck, and her lies will make it harder for other abuse victims to be taken seriously.
I didn’t watch the trial and I have no opinion on who is guilty, who is innocent and what lies were/were not told by each party. I was only complimenting James Fell for his writing and for shining a light on DV.
I'm not a "stan" of Johnny Depp (WTF does "stan" even mean?). I'm more of a music guy than a movie guy at any rate. I saw one of my favorite Law Nerd lawyers streaming it with commentary so I actually watched the trial (no, I don't work thankyouverymuch) and listened to the evidence and have a brain with which to evaluate said evidence and was able to tell who was lying. It was overwhelmingly AH. She admitted to abusing him on her recordings AND on the stand. She admitted that her op-ed was about Johnny, thereby proving defamation. It was a fascinating glimpse in how our court system works, what strategies lawyers use, and how the law is applied. Anyone who cares to can go find all the evidence and stream it for themselves. Or they can find clips with commentary from actual lawyers (my favorite is Emily D Baker). I'm fucking furious with AH trying to gaslight people into believing she is the victim when she is actually the aggressor. I grew up with domestic abuse and SA happening. I know what that looks like. This idea that we should Believe All Women is what is harming the Metoo movement. All victims deserve to have their claims of DA/SA investigated and the perpetrators should be tried in a court of law IF that investigation supports the claims of the victim. Men. Are. Victims. Too. and it is woefully under-reported because men are taught that they are supposed to Be Strong and Be Tough and Show No Weakness.
If you watched the trial you would have seen and heard the abuse Amber inflicted on Johnny. She admitted on the stand to deflimation and did not prove SV or DV. There is no way of you were assaulted with a broken bottle that you would not have to see and doctor and therefore have medical proof of it happening.
Thank you, and I respect your opinion and I also did not watch any of the hearings. BUT I have another take due to my own family's experiences; my father abused my mother, but my brother was abused by his second wife. Neither abuse was visible to outsiders but I could hear the yelling and the hitting, my mother showed me the big hole in the drywall where my father once punched it next to her head. I could see the signs of my brother being abused as his wife slowly isolated him from his friends and family, even openly treating his daughter from his first wife more like a maid than a guest in their home (she refused to visit him again). Both my mom and my brother eventually freed themselves from their abusers, mom never remarried but my brother did and now has a wonderful wife and two kids graduating from high school.
We can't really form opinions on who abused who in the HearDepp relationship despite any evidence presented, we can only delude ourselves into thinking we should support one or the other based on already formed opinions. IMHO it's not entirely outlandish to believe Depp because I've seen it before, and not entirely outlandish to believe Heard because I've seen THAT too.
I also think that the circus was appalling, especially the cruelty displayed towards Heard. What little snippets I saw made me think her legal team was incompetent while Depp's team was extremely effective. This of course doesn't mean he's entirely innocent either, he has a well known history of being a "bad boy" due to his drug use. I don't know much about her, but some of her costars have said good things about her.
He won in the US, she won in the UK, and neither really won at all.
Just as a correction: SHE never won in the uk. The media outlet he sued won. And the question at play, was different so people comparing these two cases is like apples to oranges. Plus, jury trial vs judge AND different countries is a completely different comparator.
yes their system is different and yes it was the media outlet and yes even the question was different but over here many count that as a win for her. their bar is higher, ours is quite low.
I disagree. Having to get 7 people to agree unanimously is higher bar to attain. Plus the judge refused to allow evidence from JDs side in the UK trial.
I also tried not to follow the case, though it was nearly impossible not to. And I am truly disgusted by the comments made by female friends on my FB feed about Amber. Depp lost a defamation case in the UK in 2020 in which a gossip mag called him a "wife beater", and the mag brought forward enough compelling evidence that a judge ruled against Depp. FWIW, because of the laws in the UK it is generally very easy for plaintiffs to win defamation cases there, making it a draw for that kind of lawsuit, so it's significant that Depp lost. I learned a long time ago that popular figures are often not good people, so I usually try not to know too much about anyone in particular in order to continue to enjoy their work. Maybe Amber was abusive, but that does not mean Depp was innocent. https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2022/06/01/johnny-depp-libel-law-uk-us/
I sincerely doubt any of that is true. That is not how the justice system works, either here or in the UK. He has the money for the very best lawyers, and they would have insured that he had the best of defenses. There have been reports of him being abusive for over 30 years, so I'm sure this defamation case loss is legitimate.
Research is your friend- and yes, the justice system is and always will be crooked! … the judge in the UK trial’s son worked with the Sun’s journalist who wrote the defamation allegation. Very direct relationship, yet was allowed to sit on the case. Hmmm.
As a woman, I too have been the victim of several types of abuse. But the most painful thing I’ve seen is a woman using her gifts to purposely hurt another. In the Heard case, she doesn’t even lie/act well, which is another assault on the senses.
I ask that you do more homework on this one, otherwise it’s…
I am deeply disturbed by the depth of depraved behaviour on display in regards to this case. I haven’t even seen child sex offenders or men who kill their wives and children, receive the level of condemnation that Ms Heard is receiving. It is hateful, vicious, and deeply immoral.
It also hasn’t escaped my attention that not one single person I know personally, who has pledged their support for Mr Depp under the banner of #menarevictimstoo, has ever to my knowledge posted anything to show their outrage at the level of violence being directed at women and children (not even when they die).
Even if I were of the view that Ms Heard & Mr Depp were mutual combatants (which I’m not), the fact that Ms Heard is more deeply hated than men who rape children (Roman Polanski, Jeffrey Epstein & Woody Allen, for example) is REALLY BIZARRE and profoundly disturbing.
Thank you for this post. For some good perspective on how gender biases, patriarchal culture and psychology play into this, here are 3 very good reads:
Dunno if you ever find time to read this but as an impartial observer I could shed some light. I never stanned or was a fan of any artist. I never saw the point of idolizing an actor/artist. This trial caught my attention because of the implications the verdict may have at first, then I just got curious and started watching, from an impartial view.
''Both are fucked'' if you take it from the avarage joes view, just because they did drugs etc. But taking drugs in reality doesn't make you a wife better, violent or a bad person by itself. It may get the bad side of you out with some drugs that lower the inhibition, but that's it. Many people use drugs and are functioning people, addiction is a mental disease and different fro mdependence.
And that's all Amber's team had. A bunch of people accusing him of doing drugs, to make it up for the lack of evidence of being a wife beater. That, and a bunch of photos, where since Amber always looks like she has purple cheeks, the colours where intensifieid to look a bit like bruises and a Data expert noticed the photos where touched.
On the other hand Johnny had a shitload of evidence, of her being bad to him, and owners who amber said their property was trashed by johny only to turn up later and say it's not true out of their own will, many proving her a liar.
So the combination of lies and lack of evidence and the focus on his drug use to make up for all the lacking will show anyone who is not a fan that Johnny was no wife beater and she ruined his reputation for nothing plus putting bad light on victims of abuse.
Also - they lived with several people most of their relationship in their house, and most of them where Amber's people freeloading of him, so evidence of him beating the shit out of her as she claimed should have been a piece of pie, but all they could get was a video of him punching furniture and clothes. So I kinda understand the Fans getting crazy against her even though I don't understand being a fan in itself.
Well said, though to be fair I expect nothing less. I tried to avoid as much of it as I could as well; it all seems like the entire intent was to drag Heard while glossing over that they both seem to be toxic, abusive people.
Thank you for this. I never took sides either, but the Johnny stans have been creepy, culty, and disturbing. And Heard has been disproportionately crucified a thousand times harder than legitimate celebrity criminals who did horrible, proven things. It has made me sick to my stomach to watch.
Whilst I willn ever understand what is the point of being a fan of an over-paid person who acts or sings or whatever, any of them no exceptions, I kinda understand why a fan would loose their shit in this case on amber.
I saw it from an impartial point of view, I gave a more detailed writting in a comment on this page but to sum it up:
A person who claimed she was beaten all the time by a wife beater, couldn't gather enough evidence to prove it. All she could gather was video of him punching furniture, picture of punched clothes, and edited pictures(confirmed by data expert) of her increasing her usual 'bruised looking purple cheeks' making them more purple than usual to look more like bruised than normal.
And oh boy evidence of a wife beater should have been easy for her with all her free-loading friends and sister living with them all the time.
Instead after all that evidence lacking they decided to pick on his drug use and furniture beating to make up for the lacking evidence, even though all of them are drug users.
In the end after watching the trial as entertainment out of curiosity, logically speaking it was easy for me to pick Johnny's side, even though I never had any extra sympaties for him.
She sadly had more evidence than most victims of domestic violence. I suspect the legal team focused on his behaviors because this wasn’t technically a case about abuse. It was a case about defamation. There is an excellent longform Rolling Stone article about Johnny’s decades-long battles with substance abuse and, importantly, how often it has cost him roles. Also: shockingly, the jury wasn’t sequestered, so they saw all the online abuse and TikToks toward Amber that were drummed up with the objective of destroying her. I don’t think it’s rational to side with either of them, but it certainly isn’t easy. His legal team just did a better job.
I disagree. I watched all of the trial. Not once did Amber take responsibility or acknowledge her issues but Johnny was upfront about his drug an alcohol addictions. Those tapes of her taunting him and telling him she didn't hit him sounded exactly like mine and many others abusers. The deflimation was in regards to her saying he committed SV and DV against her, not that he took drugs. She had no evidence of any SV or DV. The letter she had her lawyers send before she filed the TRO show that she was trying to extort more money and things from him. I was not a fan of Johnny's and I think a lot of them have gone overboard but Amber was guilty. The judge asked the jury to avoid reading info about the case and to imply they did anyways is disrespectful. And what about all the online abuse Johnny got when Amber lied about the abuse. It goes both ways. She is not a victim, she is a victimizer.
This is not a case in which being a DV survivor makes you any more qualified to determine who is better at lying, for there are just as many survivors who see him as the liar, and their experiences are just as valid as yours. I say that as a victim of sexual assault. This is just not a case in which it is wise to take a side. Personal triggers are just as likely to mislead and cause bias, as they are to provide insight.
I never said it did. I said her speaking to JD in the audio triggered me not that it made me a better judge of character and who is telling the truth. The jury who saw all the evidence and the court proceeding made a decision on that alone. To imply that they were swayed by either sides PR teams is improbable and disrespectful. She has the opportunity to appeal the decision, but what the jury decided should be respected no matter ones opinion until decided otherwise. My unbiased opinion was based on what I saw during the trial and what unbiased layers explained about the trial.
Everything you just said was either extremely biased, or a naïve understanding of our court systems. I wish you peace and hope you find healing.
*Applause*
Reading about the victims who have asked to withdraw their statements out of fear of being similarly targeted is also heartbreaking AF.
I notice the side takers are out in full force and have entirely missed the point.
I have to share that this case validates my logic for not coming out against a public figure for assault over 20 years ago. He straight out and asked me, "And what are you gonna do about it'? And what I am most livid about is that he was right. I will take it to my grave because I will not be dragged through the mud for responding to what he did. The worst part is when they know they can do things and get away with them. They are the absolute most heinous. The power. The existing reality. On that note, I have experience in social work, Mental health, time as a probation officer and now in law school. I watched both cases and will follow the appeal. This is still largely a woman's issue. Something being a woman's issue doesn't mean that men are never hurt. le sigh.
I was bullied, sexually abused and then raped by my elder brother for 3 years. He used to often twist my arm to my back and would only release it until I tell him he is a lord. He stopped because he moved out, not because he felt any remorse. Rape is a demonstration of power, nothing else. It makes me really angry to hear stories where men blame how the girl or woman was dressed or were supposedly provocative because it has absolutely nothing to do with it. It is to show us who's the boss.
I watched the trial and she had no evidence of DV or SV. Those recording of her taunting him triggered me. I don't believe he won because he was more powerful than her or that his lawyers were better but because he was more believable and had proof of DV. Agree that this is still largely a women's issue. Amber did every victim of DV and SV a disservice.
Unless you've been the victim and had it up to your ears and said, come on...'what are you gonna to to me? I you weren't punched....I hit you". I see a woman at wits end who no longer cares about his shows of rage and is happy to let him kill her if he wants. You can put whatever spin you like. It does not compare to the things he said and did and was convicted of in the UK. That court was a circus. It will be granted an appeal for that reason alone. Ability for a legal team to suppress and frame evidence how they want it to be seen is part of what a legal team does. There was no manipulation of evidence in UK ..a simple trial judge. 133 pages of evidence he went over line by line. And gave good legal reasoning. There was no trying to turn the victim into an incredible source (also a legal tactic to be adversarial) 12/14 incidents, most of which never saw daylight in the US trial. If I took any person on this thread and threatens to take your career, everything you had and your reputation...bashed your reputation in advance and brought the town with torches to witness your further humiliation I'm very confident I could take ANY situation that wasn't on tape and in context and make you look like you're exaggerating, nuts and at worst lying.
Don't come at me here again. He sat there like a Cheshire cat. There was absolutely no evidence or witnesses of her hurting him except her challenging him and clarifying (when being gaslit constantly in the end when fighting for your sanity you will correct the person torturing you to reality even if that reality is I HIT YOU...you didn't 'get punched!) Crazy making is the whole game of narcisstic abuse.
I'm sorry the phrase triggered you but that does not make her an abuser, just like me repeating it doesn't make me one.
He won due to skillful legal tactics and their ability to reframe the context of the truth and suppress anything that could be questioned (like witnesses of his own team who reported her being kicked and dragged by the head on a plane). The suppressed letters she wrote to him in the very early stages of their relationship talking about how he scared her and was surrounded by enablers who were covering up all his issues because the benefited from him continuing work and not going to get help.
She has as diagnosed by his choice of psychologist, BPD. Anyone familiar with NPD would be aware that they are undone by abandonment. So if you noticed parts where she is on her knees begging him not to leave her...that is him...with a perfect victim...torturing her with her own fears of being left. Most people with BPD can't leave relationships as easily as others can. Even if you don't have an attachment disorder leaving any relationship can be hard but it makes them exceptionally vulnerable to abuse. Are they difficult to be around. Yes.
Are they prone to histrionics...yes. Because they feel so much more deeply hurt by threats and perceived threats to be left. And he played that like a fiddle to watch her grovel and gain control when he did things. She begged him to get help for years.
After many years in therapy, she gained the strength to leave him and his ego is very damaged by her daring to date a more powerful man, he can't hold down his job because of his behaviour (also suppressed but framed to make it look like she was his issue even though they've been split a long time), and he attacked her for the mere insinuation that someone abused her. He is a vendictive narcissist. He is blaming her for his world falling apart and still speaking of women like their dirt and for his use and abuse. He is as entitled as it gets.
He made a mockery of court proceedings. If you have never heard a narcissist brag about getting away with outsmarting a judge or jury...they can't help the gloating. They feel so superior.
No worries though. She is in therapy and working on her issues. He, being a narcissist believes he has done nothing. So this trashing of that woman will stand until there is a new victim who will see what he did to her. She will write a memoir while everyone else takes part in the witch burnings.
Finally, Heard had absolutely nothing to gain by being a spokes person for DV. He could have went on living his billionaire life on his private island with his "Sublime little Russian' and fantasizing about ...what was it "drowning amber, burning her and then fucking her dead corpse to make sure she is dead'. I don't know who you think is vile but it wasn't the person saying, 'You need help...I want to help you'.
But leave it to the legions of fans the vilify a woman where the only concrete 'evidence' of all their bizarre accusations is a clipped recording of her out of context saying, 'You weren't punched!!!! I hit you Johnny's Poor you...poor Johnny, who is going to believe you a big man was abused by a woman'. It is a gotcha moment on tape. She accused him of abuse, he assaulted her...she fought back...in an ever so narcisstic move, he told her he was no going to tell everyone she is an abuser. And played it to the fullest.
It is wild to watch the bend on the actual evidence and to. see the legal moves made to reframe what happened. You'd have to be both familiar with personality disorders, domestic abuse, narcisstic behaviour (not the pop culture colloquial kind) and the legal system to have followed this. I am not an Amber Heard fan. In fact never heard of her. My last knowledge of Johnny Depp was Edward Scissor Hands. I have no dog in this race.
It is wild the damage one dog with a bone can cause!
Perfectly said!
Perfectly said!
This domestic violence survivor thanks you for this (and compliments you your writing-style). ✊
I’m a domestic violence survivor as well, and I liked both people. I watched the trial, and the evidence really showed her being the aggressor most of the time. They both suck, but it wasn’t an equal amount of suck, and her lies will make it harder for other abuse victims to be taken seriously.
I didn’t watch the trial and I have no opinion on who is guilty, who is innocent and what lies were/were not told by each party. I was only complimenting James Fell for his writing and for shining a light on DV.
I'm not a "stan" of Johnny Depp (WTF does "stan" even mean?). I'm more of a music guy than a movie guy at any rate. I saw one of my favorite Law Nerd lawyers streaming it with commentary so I actually watched the trial (no, I don't work thankyouverymuch) and listened to the evidence and have a brain with which to evaluate said evidence and was able to tell who was lying. It was overwhelmingly AH. She admitted to abusing him on her recordings AND on the stand. She admitted that her op-ed was about Johnny, thereby proving defamation. It was a fascinating glimpse in how our court system works, what strategies lawyers use, and how the law is applied. Anyone who cares to can go find all the evidence and stream it for themselves. Or they can find clips with commentary from actual lawyers (my favorite is Emily D Baker). I'm fucking furious with AH trying to gaslight people into believing she is the victim when she is actually the aggressor. I grew up with domestic abuse and SA happening. I know what that looks like. This idea that we should Believe All Women is what is harming the Metoo movement. All victims deserve to have their claims of DA/SA investigated and the perpetrators should be tried in a court of law IF that investigation supports the claims of the victim. Men. Are. Victims. Too. and it is woefully under-reported because men are taught that they are supposed to Be Strong and Be Tough and Show No Weakness.
All I can say is good luck to his next girlfriend!
Not one other girlfriend/wife has come forward against him. I feel sorry for whomever Amber gets involved with next. She needs mental health help.
Live in Queensland where a certain pirate movie was made.
Friend posted memory of meeting Captain Jack.
I commented that it must have been during the trip where he was found to have violated his wife with a bottle.
Sick of the white-anting (Australian slang for undermining) of Amber on social media.
If you watched the trial you would have seen and heard the abuse Amber inflicted on Johnny. She admitted on the stand to deflimation and did not prove SV or DV. There is no way of you were assaulted with a broken bottle that you would not have to see and doctor and therefore have medical proof of it happening.
It wasnt a broken bottle. She just hoped that the one hewas assaulting her with wasnt the broken one
Well done
Thank you, and I respect your opinion and I also did not watch any of the hearings. BUT I have another take due to my own family's experiences; my father abused my mother, but my brother was abused by his second wife. Neither abuse was visible to outsiders but I could hear the yelling and the hitting, my mother showed me the big hole in the drywall where my father once punched it next to her head. I could see the signs of my brother being abused as his wife slowly isolated him from his friends and family, even openly treating his daughter from his first wife more like a maid than a guest in their home (she refused to visit him again). Both my mom and my brother eventually freed themselves from their abusers, mom never remarried but my brother did and now has a wonderful wife and two kids graduating from high school.
We can't really form opinions on who abused who in the HearDepp relationship despite any evidence presented, we can only delude ourselves into thinking we should support one or the other based on already formed opinions. IMHO it's not entirely outlandish to believe Depp because I've seen it before, and not entirely outlandish to believe Heard because I've seen THAT too.
I also think that the circus was appalling, especially the cruelty displayed towards Heard. What little snippets I saw made me think her legal team was incompetent while Depp's team was extremely effective. This of course doesn't mean he's entirely innocent either, he has a well known history of being a "bad boy" due to his drug use. I don't know much about her, but some of her costars have said good things about her.
He won in the US, she won in the UK, and neither really won at all.
Just as a correction: SHE never won in the uk. The media outlet he sued won. And the question at play, was different so people comparing these two cases is like apples to oranges. Plus, jury trial vs judge AND different countries is a completely different comparator.
yes their system is different and yes it was the media outlet and yes even the question was different but over here many count that as a win for her. their bar is higher, ours is quite low.
I disagree. Having to get 7 people to agree unanimously is higher bar to attain. Plus the judge refused to allow evidence from JDs side in the UK trial.
I also tried not to follow the case, though it was nearly impossible not to. And I am truly disgusted by the comments made by female friends on my FB feed about Amber. Depp lost a defamation case in the UK in 2020 in which a gossip mag called him a "wife beater", and the mag brought forward enough compelling evidence that a judge ruled against Depp. FWIW, because of the laws in the UK it is generally very easy for plaintiffs to win defamation cases there, making it a draw for that kind of lawsuit, so it's significant that Depp lost. I learned a long time ago that popular figures are often not good people, so I usually try not to know too much about anyone in particular in order to continue to enjoy their work. Maybe Amber was abusive, but that does not mean Depp was innocent. https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2022/06/01/johnny-depp-libel-law-uk-us/
He was not allowed to provide any evidence of his own and the Judge was in cahoots with someone at the paper being sued.
I sincerely doubt any of that is true. That is not how the justice system works, either here or in the UK. He has the money for the very best lawyers, and they would have insured that he had the best of defenses. There have been reports of him being abusive for over 30 years, so I'm sure this defamation case loss is legitimate.
Research is your friend- and yes, the justice system is and always will be crooked! … the judge in the UK trial’s son worked with the Sun’s journalist who wrote the defamation allegation. Very direct relationship, yet was allowed to sit on the case. Hmmm.
Do you have proof of that?
As a woman, I too have been the victim of several types of abuse. But the most painful thing I’ve seen is a woman using her gifts to purposely hurt another. In the Heard case, she doesn’t even lie/act well, which is another assault on the senses.
I ask that you do more homework on this one, otherwise it’s…
Lies, damned lies and statistics. Mark Twain
I am deeply disturbed by the depth of depraved behaviour on display in regards to this case. I haven’t even seen child sex offenders or men who kill their wives and children, receive the level of condemnation that Ms Heard is receiving. It is hateful, vicious, and deeply immoral.
It also hasn’t escaped my attention that not one single person I know personally, who has pledged their support for Mr Depp under the banner of #menarevictimstoo, has ever to my knowledge posted anything to show their outrage at the level of violence being directed at women and children (not even when they die).
Even if I were of the view that Ms Heard & Mr Depp were mutual combatants (which I’m not), the fact that Ms Heard is more deeply hated than men who rape children (Roman Polanski, Jeffrey Epstein & Woody Allen, for example) is REALLY BIZARRE and profoundly disturbing.
Thank you for this post. For some good perspective on how gender biases, patriarchal culture and psychology play into this, here are 3 very good reads:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/01/amber-heard-johnny-depp-trial-metoo-backlash
https://www.thenation.com/article/society/amber-heard-johnny-depp-defamation/?fbclid=IwAR1ST_cOPFwPwEwZVrJ5RahSosL1Xw-v44sOlFwA1-KBRhFbhQ5iY99Bz_4
https://medium.com/invisible-illness/cognitive-dissonance-and-narcissistic-abuse-dbeaf83d1d93
Dunno if you ever find time to read this but as an impartial observer I could shed some light. I never stanned or was a fan of any artist. I never saw the point of idolizing an actor/artist. This trial caught my attention because of the implications the verdict may have at first, then I just got curious and started watching, from an impartial view.
''Both are fucked'' if you take it from the avarage joes view, just because they did drugs etc. But taking drugs in reality doesn't make you a wife better, violent or a bad person by itself. It may get the bad side of you out with some drugs that lower the inhibition, but that's it. Many people use drugs and are functioning people, addiction is a mental disease and different fro mdependence.
And that's all Amber's team had. A bunch of people accusing him of doing drugs, to make it up for the lack of evidence of being a wife beater. That, and a bunch of photos, where since Amber always looks like she has purple cheeks, the colours where intensifieid to look a bit like bruises and a Data expert noticed the photos where touched.
On the other hand Johnny had a shitload of evidence, of her being bad to him, and owners who amber said their property was trashed by johny only to turn up later and say it's not true out of their own will, many proving her a liar.
So the combination of lies and lack of evidence and the focus on his drug use to make up for all the lacking will show anyone who is not a fan that Johnny was no wife beater and she ruined his reputation for nothing plus putting bad light on victims of abuse.
Also - they lived with several people most of their relationship in their house, and most of them where Amber's people freeloading of him, so evidence of him beating the shit out of her as she claimed should have been a piece of pie, but all they could get was a video of him punching furniture and clothes. So I kinda understand the Fans getting crazy against her even though I don't understand being a fan in itself.
Not gonna lie, I was worried when I saw you had posted. So happy to breathe a sigh of relief that you see the bigger picture.
Well said, though to be fair I expect nothing less. I tried to avoid as much of it as I could as well; it all seems like the entire intent was to drag Heard while glossing over that they both seem to be toxic, abusive people.