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?

My husband, who is in the business, shrugged and said 'Humph, actors...'

They both sound toxic. He's like a child that literally has his arse wiped for him and is tucked into bed, she's clearly a royal pain the the arse.

Who's more of an arse? Depp. Because he could easily overpower Heard and because he used his power and influence to try to silence her.

And now we can state the fact that Johnny Depp is a violent wife beater. Something he himself admitted in court.

No, he did not. The nearest he came was admitting a clash of heads when trying to restrain Heard who was attacking him.

The judge decided it hadn't damaged his reputation because the allegations were clearly false and so his fans could easily tell they weren't true and, therefore, his reputation is undamaged

Complete rubbish. The judge decided it had damaged his reputation (which the Sun admitted) and specifically found that 12 of the 14 allegations were true.

And now we can state the fact that Johnny Depp is a violent wife beater. Something he himself admitted in court.

No, he did not. The nearest he came was admitting a clash of heads when trying to restrain Heard who was attacking him.

The judge decided it hadn't damaged his reputation because the allegations were clearly false and so his fans could easily tell they weren't true and, therefore, his reputation is undamaged

Complete rubbish. The judge decided it had damaged his reputation (which the Sun admitted) and specifically found that 12 of the 14 allegations were true.

@studychick81

It would be interesting to see if JD continues with the other court proceedings or if he will try and settle now he's lost this one.

Do you think he will now try and bring a case of domestic violence against AH?

If he does try to bring a case against her, it would be interesting to see if it's battered wife syndrome.

@studychick81

It would be interesting to see if JD continues with the other court proceedings or if he will try and settle now he's lost this one.

Do you think he will now try and bring a case of domestic violence against AH?

If he tries to bring a case, I wonder whether we'll all learn more about Battered Wife Syndrome? It's a possibility.

Here's the Sun on it. It's not a paper I normally read but in this case it's worth looking at the article. Describes repeated in incidents of quite serious violence from Depp.

From the article:
He ruled Depp, 57, subjected Amber, 34, to years of brutal drink, drug and rage-fuelled domestic abuse.

Out of 14 alleged incidents, he dismissed only two — owing to insufficient evidence.

Depp had sued The Sun for libel after we branded him a “wife beater” — but the judge ruled we were right.

www.thesun.co.uk/news/13090761/johnny-depp-amber-heard-12-viocious-attacks/

I wonder if this was the other way around and it was AH being classed as a husband beater if those of you defending her would feel the same. From the bits I've read they are both abusive and it seems it was a very toxic relationship. Does that mean its OK for her to hit/abuse him just because he is male. Its no wonder so many men suffer in silence. Yes the case was against the sun but like I say if this was the other way around would you feel the same

Feelings have fuck all to do with the ruling that Depp is a wife beater.

Unusually for me, I urge everybody to read the sun article.

It's very clear.

@Itsalwayshard

I wonder if this was the other way around and it was AH being classed as a husband beater if those of you defending her would feel the same. From the bits I've read they are both abusive and it seems it was a very toxic relationship. Does that mean its OK for her to hit/abuse him just because he is male. Its no wonder so many men suffer in silence. Yes the case was against the sun but like I say if this was the other way around would you feel the same

I'd feel the same about people who thought JDs actions had any bearing on the question of whether AH had assaulted him, yes. Anyone who weighs in about laws they don't understand pisses me off.

@prh47bridge
Good balanced posts on the legal strength. I agree the judge’s ruling is not water tight and has inconsistencies, so would not be surprised if JD appeals.

I make no comment as to who is telling the absolute truth of what happened. Both of them are probably telling their own truths which being subjective can conflict.

@Itsalwayshard

I wonder if this was the other way around and it was AH being classed as a husband beater if those of you defending her would feel the same. From the bits I've read they are both abusive and it seems it was a very toxic relationship. Does that mean its OK for her to hit/abuse him just because he is male. Its no wonder so many men suffer in silence. Yes the case was against the sun but like I say if this was the other way around would you feel the same

Yes. If there were articles about her abusing JD and she sued for libel and it turned out she was abusive, so the judge ruled in the newspaper's favour I would feel exactly the same.

The relationship was fucked up and toxic. There's no question that there was abuse on her part too. That is entirely irrelevant to whether he abused her and whether the Sun printed the truth.

It has nothing to do with her behaviour,the state of her relationship, DV against men etc.

there's no question there was abuse on her part too
Actually there is. It could've been battered wife syndrome. We don't know but it's likely.

Posters who seem confused about the facts of the case really need to look at the sun article. It makes things very clear.

Johnny Depp is a wife-beater.

there's no question there was abuse on her part too
Actually there is. It could've been battered wife syndrome. We don't know but it's likely.

Posters who seem confused about the facts of the case really need to look at the sun article. It makes things very clear.

Johnny Depp is a wife-beater.

The question asked of the judge was whether or not the Sun (not Amber Heard, the Sun) had damaged his reputation by calling him a wifebeater. The judge decided it hadn't damaged his reputation because the allegations were clearly false and so his fans could easily tell they weren't true and, therefore, his reputation is undamaged. If the judge had read this thread, he may have decided differently.

You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. The judge didn’t hold that the allegations were clearly false. The judge determined that the allegations were true. JD is a wife beater. Statements cannot be defamatory if true, even if sharing them does cause damage to the reputation of the subject.

there's no question there was abuse on her part too
Actually there is. It could've been battered wife syndrome. We don't know but it's likely.

Posters who seem confused about the facts of the case really need to look at the sun article. It makes things very clear.

Johnny Depp is a wife-beater.

To ask you what is going on and whether this can work ?
Please be gentle . I’m posting here for traffic but I’m very confused and fragile . I’ve been divorced 3 years after a 27 year marriage . During most of those years there was no physical spark between us and after the marriage ended I threw myself into looking after my kids ( mainly older teens and one 10 year old ). I wasn’t looking for a man sn

The question asked of the judge was whether or not the Sun (not Amber Heard, the Sun) had damaged his reputation by calling him a wifebeater. The judge decided it hadn't damaged his reputation because the allegations were clearly false and so his fans could easily tell they weren't true and, therefore, his reputation is undamaged. If the judge had read this thread, he may have decided differently.

You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. The judge didn’t hold that the allegations were clearly false. The judge determined that the allegations were true. JD is a wife beater. Statements cannot be defamatory if true, even if sharing them does cause damage to the reputation of the subject.

Sorry wrong thread

The question asked of the judge was whether or not the Sun (not Amber Heard, the Sun) had damaged his reputation by calling him a wifebeater. The judge decided it hadn't damaged his reputation because the allegations were clearly false and so his fans could easily tell they weren't true and, therefore, his reputation is undamaged. If the judge had read this thread, he may have decided differently.

You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. The judge didn’t hold that the allegations were clearly false. The judge determined that the allegations were true. JD is a wife beater. Statements cannot be defamatory if true, even if sharing them does cause damage to the reputation of the subject.

To ask you what is going on and whether this can work ?
Please be gentle . I’m posting here for traffic but I’m very confused and fragile . I’ve been divorced 3 years after a 27 year marriage . During most of those years there was no physical spark bry

It's libel and some people forget. It's not about her behaviour. He had to prove that he never touched her at all, never retaliated and never abused her in any way but he couldn't.

From what I've read it sounds like the whole relationship was marred with violence and substance/alcohol abuse. There are no winners in a situation like that.

He had to prove that he never touched her at all, never retaliated and never abused her in any way but he couldn't

No, he did not. The Sun had to prove that, on the balance of probabilities, he was a wife beater. He did not have to prove that he was not.