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?

@gabsalot even. Not sure why i knighted you

I don't believe they are "as bad as each other" at all. I think he met someone young and strong who wasn't as emotionally engaged with him as previous partners so probably didn't show him the deference he felt his due. I think she felt herself his equal, probably laughed at him and generally wouldn't put up with his shit. AH also had/has strong family and friends support around her to help her weather it too, and abusers hate that.

I have seen a lot of people on social media insist the ruling was wrong. I believe the ruling was correct by the sounds of it. In fairness, I’ve not been on the side of JD or the scum. They’ve both got a history of being cunts it’s just that Johnny Depp has was attractive and a “hell raiser” which is code for “difficult cunt who wrecks everything”. But the times are now changing at least a little bit, and he can’t get away with that shit as much as he used to, at least in theory. BTW, I don’t believe it’s fair or actually relevant to bring in ex partners of his to advocate that just because he wasn’t abusive to them, he wouldn’t have been to Amber Heard. That’s really not how DV works. And (plucking one example of abuse at random) one person’s coercive control is another person’s “he cares about me so much” or “I love when a man takes control”. Before it escalates wildly for some.

Although I did find the scum’s statement a bit on the nose, about how they have supported victims of domestic violence for over 20 years (not that impressive for a paper that’s over 50 years old) despite their misogynistic and victim blaming headlines related to DV murders alone. Things like “man murders wife and kids due to wife’s affair”. Etc.

Yep, it always seemed like Vanessa, Kate, and Winona were caught up in his spell somehow. Maybe they didn't fully realise what he was like. I think many of us have experienced that with "really, really ridiculously good looking" and/or charismatic men. Add Hollywood glamour, money and power and it's a recipe for narcissism and inequality in a relationship.

To summarise the trial:
Johnny Depp sues the Sun for defamation after they call him a wife beater. Lawyer "Did you beat your wife". Depp "yes". Then a lot of stuff about Depp and Heard that demonstrates how miserably rich it is possible to be, strange tangent about someone shitting in a bed.
Judge rules it wasnt defamation.
Cue a lot of people apparently not understanding why the judge ruled the way he did (?!?)

@yetanothernamitynamechange

To summarise the trial: Johnny Depp sues the Sun for defamation after they call him a wife beater. Lawyer "Did you beat your wife". Depp "yes". Then a lot of stuff about Depp and Heard that demonstrates how miserably rich it is possible to be, strange tangent about someone shitting in a bed. Judge rules it wasnt defamation. Cue a lot of people apparently not understanding why the judge ruled the way he did (?!?)

Yep, pretty much. I don't know anything about Amber Heard herself, but I do know how the law of defamation works. Can't say the same for anyone I've seen complaining about the result. At the end of the day, Amber wasn't daft enough to pursue anyone for defamation.

It's also true that it was sickening to see the Scum posturing about support for DV.

Maybe the mistake he made in suing the Sun is because the court can only take into account JD's behaviour in terms of whether he was a perpetrator of domestic violence and not whether he was also a victim of it?
I do understand why the judge ruled as they did, but I still think neither JD or AH come out of this looking like people you'd want to know or work with.
I had heard that when JD and VP split, he willingly gave her half of his money because he said that theirs was a marriage in every true sense even if not legally. That always sat well with me because so many rich men try to screw women out of a decent financial settlement. I thought it spoke of a fundamentally decent man, even if he has issues around drugs. But reading upthread about the treatment of the disabled woman, there's no justification for that.

Maybe the mistake he made in suing the Sun is because the court can only take into account JD's behaviour in terms of whether he was a perpetrator of domestic violence and not whether he was also a victim of it?

Yes, pretty much.

@MrsHuntGeneNotJeremyObviously

Maybe the mistake he made in suing the Sun is because the court can only take into account JD's behaviour in terms of whether he was a perpetrator of domestic violence and not whether he was also a victim of it? I do understand why the judge ruled as they did, but I still think neither JD or AH come out of this looking like people you'd want to know or work with. I had heard that when JD and VP split, he willingly gave her half of his money because he said that theirs was a marriage in every true sense even if not legally. That always sat well with me because so many rich men try to screw women out of a decent financial settlement. I thought it spoke of a fundamentally decent man, even if he has issues around drugs. But reading upthread about the treatment of the disabled woman, there's no justification for that.

I believe I read that he gave Vanessa a huge chunk of his money and at the time and thought good for him. Now I wonder if it was maybe paying her off because she must know so many awful things he’s done to people (maybe even her). Not in any way slagging her off btw, they have 2 children together and she hypothetically is protecting them. And hey, I accept I could be wrong and he gave her all that money that he didn’t have to by law because he’s not all bad, despite being a woman beater.

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.

My first reaction to this is: aw diddums, it's not exactly easy for women to come forward and be believed even in the face of overwhelming evidence sometimes so my sympathy is limited.

However, i do believe that all victims of DV should be heard and taken seriously no matter what the circumstances.

My second thought is: if people really believe that it will deter men, they haven't understood what this case was at all and need to work on their comprehension skills. The case boiled down to: the Sun called Depp a wife beater. Depp took them to court for libel. The judge ruled that on balance of probability he is a wife beater.

Heard's actions - and from what I've read she seems to have been a perpetrator of abuse too - do not come into this case at all.

He didn't say yes I beat her though, otherwise he wouldn't have been suing the paper. Most of the allegations he denied except for hitting her head with his which was on tapes and he said was self defence. From what I read anyway. The emails and messages and the way he speaks about women and AH and drugs is appalling but most of the time they don't actually show he bear her. The judge made a big leap from he did it once/twice so he did it every time in a drug/ drink fuelled rage.

Despite the recordings showing AH admitting she was physically abusive too the judge still did not accept any of his claims against her, especially the finger incident which I found very interesting. It seems he formed an opinion very early on.

He should never that taken it to court, his legal advice was terrible. He must have known he had beaten her so was it his ego was too big and he thought he would win?

This is not a landmark case. Defamation cases are a niche area and rarely set precedent that would have any impact on normal people.

There are such mixed opinions on the verdict because people don't understand what the case was about. I've seen many comments about him being "found guilty", but he wasn't, it was not a criminal trial.

The verdict tells us that, on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not), Depp was a wife beater.

The verdict doesn't tell us why he was a wife beater, or whether he was also a victim of domestic abuse.

People on both sides are reading much more into the verdict than it actually says.

I don't know how any woman can read Depp's own words and not think he's a misogynist. Whether Amber Heard was "toxic" too or whether he used to be a nicer guy is irrelevant to me - it's just deeply disgusting watching him talk about how he wants to burn and rape her corpse. And describing her as "used up", a "whore" and a "floppy fish market".

I don't understand how anyone can look at his own words and still come over all poor widdle Johnny about the situation.

Even if Heard was the worst woman in the world (debatable) the language reeks of misogyny. I couldn't look a man in the face if I knew he'd spoken about any other woman like that.

@contactusdeletus

I don't know how any woman can read Depp's own words and not think he's a misogynist. Whether Amber Heard was "toxic" too or whether he used to be a nicer guy is irrelevant to me - it's just deeply disgusting watching him talk about how he wants to burn and rape her corpse. And describing her as "used up", a "whore" and a "floppy fish market".

I don't understand how anyone can look at his own words and still come over all poor widdle Johnny about the situation.

Even if Heard was the worst woman in the world (debatable) the language reeks of misogyny. I couldn't look a man in the face if I knew he'd spoken about any other woman like that.

Damn right. It’s depressing how quickly people are willing to forgive and forget when it comes to someone they admire but don’t even know and will probably never even meet. Even when the person in question has said or done something totally abhorrent.

I don’t really support either of them, I think they’re both toxic and both abused each other. The court case was just an embarrassment for both parties and a bad call from Depp.

Despite the recordings showing AH admitting she was physically abusive too the judge still did not accept any of his claims against her, especially the finger incident which I found very interesting. It seems he formed an opinion very early on

Why would the Judge ‘accept’ any of Depp’s claims against AH? It wasn’t about her. It was about him. How can people still not get this??!!

I think they are both toxic together and he (not sure about her) was in the grips of a drug addiction (not saying its right)
From what I've read they both wound each other up and attacked each other. Not a nice relationship at all

I have no idea, beyond the Cult of Celebrity!

As others have said, he is/was abusive. Nothing she said or did meant she deserved anything.

But she, in her own words, is/was also abusive. So no, not a perfect victim, but that doesn't absolve her of her actions either.

Basically, they are both flawed and angry. Either of them may have been able to behave better in other relationships but together, for whatever reasons, they were a disaster. They both need to just walk away, get whatever help they need, and concentrate on themselves for a while!

I haven't heard anyone saying the judgement was wrong. I used to really like him but now I think he's an arsehole (have for some time). I don't think she came out of it too well either though.

I do get the case and 'accept' was the wrong word. I meant the judge discounted the evidence trying to discredit her as a witness.

The judge made a big leap from he did it once/twice so he did it every time in a drug/ drink fuelled rage.

He only had to have done it once for the Scum to be right, though.

People don't understand what the case wasn't about.

Amber Heard's behaviour towards him was not part of the case. The case was about whether HE was violent to HER and the judge decided that yes, he was. And therefore the newspaper was justified in calling him a wife-beater.

If he wanted to take out a civil suit against Ms Heard for domestic violence then that's another matter altogether.

Lots of sycophants on Twitter yesterday though, can't deal with the reality that their favourite movie star is actually not a very nice man.

@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.

This. 100% this!

It’s not about “misogyny” , why even tar everyone with that brush just because they don’t agree with the judge ?
I read the transcript, (it’s easy to find)and I don’t agree with the decision , I don’t care if people in turn ,don’t agree with me .
No one is saying that because she quite clearly was also abusive that it means men who hurt women are innocent in every case . That’s pretty fucked up .

Orcus- yes I understand that. It's the language the judge uses of overwhelming evidence and that he ruled in the suns favour on 12/14 incidents.