Amber Heard & Johnny Depp....Your thoughts?

[Whatdoyouthinkaboutthisone]

I have seen this in the news over the past couple of days and wasn't really sure what to think. It sounds to me like a very volatile relationship and it may be that they are both abusers. Or at the least they are completely incompatible with each other.

Today I noticed that Amber Heard was walking into court and she had a scarf around her face. Then she removed the scarf and smiled for everyone and waved and seemed to enjoy the cameras being there. It's just an observation but maybe the accusations of her being a narcissist could be accurate? Or is she maybe trying to put a brave face on it all under what must be a very stressful situation for all concerned?

Johnny Depp kept his mask on but was also waving for the cameras I should add.

Anyway, I'm well aware it's none of my business really, it was just something I had thought about after seeing the news today and wondered what others thought!

It’d be a miracle if, between all the drug blackouts and fighting, she was the one person he never hit.

So has evidence been presented to prove that Vanessa Paradis and Winona Ryder have both lied, then? I thought that the Sun were no longer contesting his claim that he never hit either of them.

TinySongstress - AH really does have an excellent QC in Sasha Wass

Given you say you've read every word of the trial, it seems odd that you think Sasha Wass is representing Amber Heard when actually she is the QC for NGN. The trial isn't between Johnny and Amber, Johnny is suing The Sun for libel. Amber is simply appearing as a witness. Ironic that you're criticising others for spreading misinformation on this thread!

The question the court has to determine is whether or not Depp is a wife beater. The Sun is arguing that their allegation is substantially true. With the wife beater allegation, that is pretty much a binary thing. Either he is a wife beater or he isn't.

The Sun is bringing out all kinds of things to try and discredit Depp - substance abuse, trashing inanimate objects and so on. Much of this is irrelevant or, at best, of limited relevance. It doesn't prove their central allegation. I suspect there is an element of playing to the gallery here - they believe their readers like to read about celebrities behaving badly, so they think bringing all this out will help their circulation. If I was cynical I would also wonder if it was intended as a warning to other celebrities who may feel inclined to take on the Sun for printing untrue stories - come after us and we'll trash your reputation.

So far we've only heard the evidence from Depp and his witnesses. Next week we hear from Heard and half a dozen other witnesses. By this time next week it will be possible to form a view based on all the evidence. However, with that caveat, I am struck by the fact that the accusations she makes against Depp are not consistent with the experience of his previous partners whereas the accusations he makes against her do appear to be consistent with the experience of at least some of her previous partners. I also note that some of those giving evidence were her ex-employees. One might think that Depp's employees have a vested interest in defending him. That case is harder to make against her ex-employees, one of whom has accused Heard of taking her experience of sexual abuse and using it as her own.

My view may change next week when we've heard their witnesses but right now my view is that the Sun is going to lose.

My bet fwiw is that Depp loses but there’s been enough doubt cast on some of AH’s claims that he’s partially rehab’d in Hollywood.

@Aworldofmyown

I think the behaviour of AH surely must be enough to cast reasonable doubt on the incidents of violence - or is it not that kind of trial.

The standard of proof in civil trials is the balance of probabilities. So Depp needs to prove that it was more likely than not that he wasn’t a wife beater.

Re. Sasha Wass. I appreciate it’s a barristers job to undermine a witnesses evidence but she really doesn’t make a good case at times, asking JD if it was fair of him to read a book when AH was angry at him for being late to her party I.e. why did he provoke her into “haymakering” (throwing wild punches) I think is victim blaming and the judge will see right through it. Luckily his barrister picked it up during the re-examination.
I don’t rate her at all, I find her questioning monotonous.

Ok, technically NGN group representing The Sun and Dan Wooton have an excellent QC in Sasha Wass, but given she is essentially fighting the case that JD beat AH, then she is still a QC representing AH's side of events. If we're going to split hairs.

@roo2018

I find her monotonous too, but I just think given what she's had to go off, she's added plenty of meat to the bone, hammed it up if you will. I'm sure Justice Nichol will have come across her before though, and will be well aware of her 'style'.

@TinySongstress yes, I agree she’s hammed it up. I much prefer Mr Sherborne’s questioning for getting to the point.
We’ll see if it’s the same next week, when the witnesses for the defence are cross/re-examined.

I thought that, the judge has reminded Wass a few times he doesn't need to hear irrelevant questioning.
I thought the last witness yesterday was interesting AH interior designer. The recording AH took was obviously meant to help her and yet it exposes her manipulative behaviour and feels like more of a 'getting the stories straight' rather than someone confident of what they witnessed.

The one piece of evidence that really puzzles me is the diary entry from the oriental express on honeymoon. While, based on the other evidence so far, I lean towards thinking she has manipulated and abused him and has been proven to have no problem with lying to governments / immigration officials, that’s a hell of a long game to be playing to write a diary entry about being hit while on honeymoon.
The other interesting point to me is that her 30th birthday party triggers off him being late / someone shitting the bed / him deciding that it’s over for good. What I haven’t seen Sherborne put forwards yet is that the reason for his being late (discovery that he’s lost $650m) might have triggered a furious outburst for other reasons - not his lateness, but the fact she’s now married to someone she despises and who isn’t even rich anymore

@Aworldofmyown yes - and there are others who were formerly providing support and evidence for her (Amanda de cadenet is one) who have withdrawn very publicly and said that they have been manipulated by her

So Depp needs to prove that it was more likely than not that he wasn’t a wife beater.

I thought that the onus was on The Sun to prove that he is a wife beater.

Depp said he "accidentally" headbutted her.
Great defense.

@TryAnotherNickname his barrister did ask him about the amount he lost in his re-examination. JD said he was embarrassed by it.

I thought that the onus was on The Sun to prove that he is a wife beater

It is. They want to argue that their claims were substantially true so it is up to them to persuade the court that, on the balance of probabilities, Depp is a wife beater.

Depp said he "accidentally" headbutted her. Great defense.

He claims it was an accidental clash of heads when he was trying to restrain her when she was assaulting him. That is indeed a good defence. An accidental clash of heads is very different from him headbutting her.

@PeartreeProductions in a scuffle where he was trying to defend himself/stop her being able to hit him... yet again. Not really that unbelievable.

I haven't been following as closely as many others have, but isn't he on a really sticky wicket regarding his 'blackouts'? As I understand it, he has admitted that he would regularly blackout - and so therefore by definition has no memory of what may or may not have happened. The Sun group only has to state that an incident occurred and he has lost any credibility in denying it as his memory was so often compromised.

www.ibtimes.co.uk/metoo-activist-amanda-de-cadenet-says-amber-heard-used-misled-her-1679951 This is the article which includes the ‘me too’ activists withdrawing of support from AH.
It seems the recordings being released, is when most people began to dis-believe AH. Other than those who refuse to look at the actual evidence, that is.

@Trumpspeach

I haven't been following as closely as many others have, but isn't he on a really sticky wicket regarding his 'blackouts'? As I understand it, he has admitted that he would regularly blackout - and so therefore by definition has no memory of what may or may not have happened. The Sun group only has to state that an incident occurred and he has lost any credibility in denying it as his memory was so often compromised.

No. The Sun has to prove that, on the balance of probabilities, he is a wife beater. Simply stating that an incident occurred while he was suffering from a blackout won't be enough. They need more than that.

ok, thanks @prh47bridge!

Depp has brought the action in defamation, so his case is that on the balance of probabilities he is not a wide beater. In order to make out the defence of truth, NGN have to prove on the balance of probabilities that he was one. The original question was about reasonable doubt regarding Depp’s case, so I answered it that way round

@CeciledeVolanges

Depp has brought the action in defamation, so his case is that on the balance of probabilities he is not a wide beater. In order to make out the defence of truth, NGN have to prove on the balance of probabilities that he was one. The original question was about reasonable doubt regarding Depp’s case, so I answered it that way round

To get technical, Depp's case is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Sun alleged that he was a wife beater, that the allegation refers to him and that the allegation has damaged his reputation. Since the Sun has admitted all of these things, establishing his case is easy.

Since the Sun is arguing that their story was substantially true, the burden of proof is on them to show that, on the balance of probabilities, he is a wife beater.

In essence, on the allegation of wife beating, the Sun has to get over a higher hurdle than Depp. They have to come up with enough to prove their assertions are true. Depp does not have to show they were false. Obviously it helps him if he can provide evidence that undermines the Sun's allegations but the burden of proof is on the Sun.

I believe Eleanor Laws QC will be cross examining Amber Heard this week. She is a domestic abuse and sexual assault lawyer. Interesting.

So far AH's defence is that everyone's written records about her are wrong and that she only admitted to hitting JD on the tapes to placate him. Once she tried to deflect by pointing out something negative about JD which the QC picked her up on. Classic narcissism.

The QC seems to be doing a good job. I expect at some point she will also bring up AH's casual attitude to perjury.

I can’t watch either of them on tv now without thinking “hello, my bum stinks! Thanks for dropping by” thanks to this thread.