AIBU to wonder why everyone is saying ruling wrong in Johnny Depp libel case?

[WorkQuery]

Jury believed that Johnny Depp was violent to Amber Heard. All I keep reading on Facebook etc is comments from people who believe that the ruling was wrong. Why do people assume that it's wrong? Clearly there must have been very strong evidence to support that Depp was abusive to Amber?

Women will continue to suffer but people like Depp will think twice before brining a libel against newspapers to get an easy win.
Also, this result will most likely set a certain tone for the actual case in the US. So a small step but a step in the right direction.

I've followed this case and read all the court transcripts. I've listened to the recordings where she admits she was violent towards Depp. I've watched her deposition where she is evasive. For me she is the abuser. He has a lot of witnesses, including medical professionals, video recordings, her own words on tape saying she hit him. The judge even disregarded American police officer statements that said they saw no evidence of bruising on Heards face. She taunted Depp saying that no one would believe him that she had abused him. All caught on tape. She also has been arrested previously for assaulting her then partner. People are shocked at the verdict. On Twitter many survivors of DV (men and women) are supporting Depp. The newspaper coverage of this has been very biased. Court details of where she attacked Depp didn't get the same coverage as anything Depp was claimed to have done. Please go and trade the court transcripts if you haven't done so. Amber was caught out contradicting herself in several occasions. Many people are also worried that this will also make men even less likely to come forward to report domestic violence committed against them. Even with all the evidence and Heards own words on tape, Depp hasn't been believed.

@NewlyGranny

Yeah, who knew?! It is indeed a landmark, RuffleCrow, in a very muddy battlefield. All the better because it forces us to put aside society's demand that female victims must be perfect - innocent, beautiful, fragrant, virtuous - before we decide they don't deserve a beating. 🙄

"Oh, she's no angel!" "Well that's OK, then, we don't need to care that she got beaten up, do we?!"

This x 1000.

@Pukkatea

A lot of people don't seem to understand that the case was not Johnny vs Amber but Johnny vs the sun in a libel case. Johnny would have had to prove significant loss of reputation and earnings and demonstrate that the accusations were false - he couldn't, so he didn't win.

It's not really a big win against misogyny, it's a victory for the media to continue writing what they like. Women aren't going to benefit in any way.

Yes, I think that it's sad that Amber Heard's reputation had to be dragged through the mud, even though she hadn't initiated the legal action.

Johnny would have had to prove significant loss of reputation and earnings and demonstrate that the accusations were false - he couldn't, so he didn't win.
The burden of proof was not on Depp to show that the accusations were false. The burden of proof lies with the defendant to show that the allegedly defamatory statement is true. It’s a civil matter, so the standard of proof is lower than in criminal cases - you only have to prove ‘on the balance of probabilities’ not ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. That is what the Sun did - they proved to the judge that on the balance of probabilities, Depp beat his wife and therefore it was not defamatory for the Sun to refer to him as a wife beater.

@user1471590586

I've followed this case and read all the court transcripts. I've listened to the recordings where she admits she was violent towards Depp. I've watched her deposition where she is evasive. For me she is the abuser. He has a lot of witnesses, including medical professionals, video recordings, her own words on tape saying she hit him. The judge even disregarded American police officer statements that said they saw no evidence of bruising on Heards face. She taunted Depp saying that no one would believe him that she had abused him. All caught on tape. She also has been arrested previously for assaulting her then partner. People are shocked at the verdict. On Twitter many survivors of DV (men and women) are supporting Depp. The newspaper coverage of this has been very biased. Court details of where she attacked Depp didn't get the same coverage as anything Depp was claimed to have done. Please go and trade the court transcripts if you haven't done so. Amber was caught out contradicting herself in several occasions. Many people are also worried that this will also make men even less likely to come forward to report domestic violence committed against them. Even with all the evidence and Heards own words on tape, Depp hasn't been believed.

Yes I have read and seen and heard this material. No it doesn’t justify wife beating. And Depp did some truly horrendous things. Did you read them? Thank god the judge did.

@user1471590586

I've followed this case and read all the court transcripts. I've listened to the recordings where she admits she was violent towards Depp. I've watched her deposition where she is evasive. For me she is the abuser. He has a lot of witnesses, including medical professionals, video recordings, her own words on tape saying she hit him. The judge even disregarded American police officer statements that said they saw no evidence of bruising on Heards face. She taunted Depp saying that no one would believe him that she had abused him. All caught on tape. She also has been arrested previously for assaulting her then partner. People are shocked at the verdict. On Twitter many survivors of DV (men and women) are supporting Depp. The newspaper coverage of this has been very biased. Court details of where she attacked Depp didn't get the same coverage as anything Depp was claimed to have done. Please go and trade the court transcripts if you haven't done so. Amber was caught out contradicting herself in several occasions. Many people are also worried that this will also make men even less likely to come forward to report domestic violence committed against them. Even with all the evidence and Heards own words on tape, Depp hasn't been believed.

You do understand it was a libel case brought by Depp against the Sun and not a case about Amber Heard right?

I think that’s why they focused on him and what he’d done.....

They're both dodgy as fuck, and you shouldn't be defending her either, as she is also abusive.

Yes I've read the stuff she claimed he had done. But what about Depp losing his finger. Amber changed her story several times.

Yes you are right it was against the sun. The American trial will of course be Depp versus Heard so might bring a different verdict.

@user1471590586

Yes I've read the stuff she claimed he had done. But what about Depp losing his finger. Amber changed her story several times.

The judge, having considered all of the evidence presented to him which of course wasn’t all made available to the public, has made the decision.

Why is it you think the judge got it wrong?

To me it sounds like a highly dysfunctional relationship where both parties behaved badly. I don't think AH is a victim - she is on tape admitting to hitting him. If he did hit her and she hit him, then they are both as bad as each other.
Neither has emerged looking good.

@ConstantlySeekingHappiness

Misogyny.

This.

Plus media reporting out of context, etc.

@NewlyGranny

Yeah, who knew?! It is indeed a landmark, RuffleCrow, in a very muddy battlefield. All the better because it forces us to put aside society's demand that female victims must be perfect - innocent, beautiful, fragrant, virtuous - before we decide they don't deserve a beating. 🙄

"Oh, she's no angel!" "Well that's OK, then, we don't need to care that she got beaten up, do we?!"

All of this.

@MrsHuntGeneNotJeremyObviously

To me it sounds like a highly dysfunctional relationship where both parties behaved badly. I don't think AH is a victim - she is on tape admitting to hitting him. If he did hit her and she hit him, then they are both as bad as each other. Neither has emerged looking good.

Could've been battered wife syndrome.

Because she's bloody evil. Not all women are good or victims.

The only winners are the lawyers in this one, plus the tabloid press.

@Anotherlovelybitofsquirrel

Because she's bloody evil. Not all women are good or victims.

And even if she is, it doesn’t make JD a saint either - which evidentially the Sun had enough evidence to back up their profile of him.

Well it's just like Angelina Jolie isn't it? Brad Pitt had self admitted alcohol and dope issues, attacked his eldest son when he stood up for his mother, jumped drunkenly out of the plane they were on, appropriated an airport vehicle and drove round the airport making a huge scene and yelling abuse at everyone. This kind of behaviour wasn't unusual either apparently. The son still won't see him, he's only just allowed unsupervised access to his other children and had to be assessed over years by psychologists and social workers for that to happen and still apparently doesn't see them regularly, and yet somehow it was all just because Ange is a just a horrible bitch who won't let a well meaning guy see his kids . The on line hate she's received has been off the charts. Women are rarely believed and vilified for their own abuse.

I'm so glad JD was ruled against.

I think people are forgetting that the judge continuously referred to confidential evidence that was submitted. I can only think that this must have very damning for JD. I wonder if it was violent rape. Will we ever find out?

I find it utterly amazing he brought this case to court obviously thinking he would win. Was he really so out of it he doesn't remember this abuse? as he claims at times. Was his ego so big he just thought no- one could touch him? He must have known the evidence AH had.

Going by some PP's on this thread, it's because people don't understand what the trial was about.
The Sun labelled him a wife beater. He challenged that. He did attack his wife and the Sun had reasonable belief that he did so. No libel.
What Amber did,how fucked up and toxic their relationship was etc. it was all irrelevant unless he could prove self defence for every single incident, and even then it's not a given it would've worked.

It all comes down to two questions.
Did he beat her?
Did the Sun had proof and believed he did?

@user1471590586 do you think that Depp did not abuse Heard?

If you do think he did abuse her then her actions towards him are entirely irrelevant in the context of a libel trial. He was arguing that he was not a “wife beater” as printed in the paper. If on the balance of probabilities based on the evidence before him the judge was satisfied that he did in fact “beat” his wife then he loses on the basis that truth can never be libel.

Amber Heard was there as a witness. Her actions towards him (clearly terrible) do not impact the truth or otherwise of what was printed about Depp.

Evil or saintly, or just dull as ditchwater @anotherlovelybitofsquirrel, any woman's life can be endangered by a violent man. Physical strength is what it boils down to.

People are forgetting that the purpose of the trial wasn't to establish which of them was worse. It was a libel trial where Depp was arguing he had been defamed by being called a "wife beater". The judge found that this wasn't defamatory (because it was demonstrably true in several cases). This doesn't mean that Amber Heard didn't also abuse Johnny Depp: she didn't bring the case so that wasn't up for consideration.

As others have said, neither of them come out of it at all well: she appears an unlikeable and manipulative person who behaved badly towards him in numerous ways which included some abusive behaviour. But that doesn't change the fact that he is guilty of domestic abuse and she was the victim of this.

And obviously his increased physical strength and much greater wealth and profile meant that it was always an uneven fight.

A heck of a lot of people in discussions about court cases don't really understand what the case is about, or why the law works the way it does. So they get worked up without really understanding the decision.

In this instance, I think many felt that AH wasn't credible (which isn't a crazy perspective TBH), so they base their feelings about any claims about Depp's behaviour on that.