AIBU to wonder why so many people assume Johnny Depp is the good guy and Amber Heard is the villain? ..

[Cowslip4567]

People (from what I am reading in a variety of places on the internet) seem to have decided this even before the trial has been concluded. Presumably, we won't know all of the evidence until the trial ends.

The previous trial in the UK concluded that there was indeed evidence that JD was indeed a wife beater. How come everyone feels that they are sure previous trial had the wrong verdict?

whoops

who needs a judiciary when we've got Facebook, hmm?

god how embarrassing to come out with that 🤦‍♀️

Great Post. Completely agree.

‘Paid troll, Johnny Depp fans, of any other layperson’ - and you certainly do fall under at least one category.

I’m not being petulant at all. I’m supporting my statements with accompanying evidence, which you haven’t attempted to refute.

And LOL at the last bit. Yes, whether you like it or not, a judge is in a better position to make a judgment upon review of all evidence. That’s partly the whole point of why we have a judiciary system. We do not rely on the court of public opinion.

Yes, the law really is a lottery (as well as a ass and a idiot according to Dickens). It comes down to the biases of judge and jury and who has the best lawyer on the day. Sometimes the guilty are punished. Sometimes the innocent are convicted. It's anyone's guess which of the two happens the most often.

What about sentencing?

A highlight of absurdity, whilst simultaneously being probably the most notable lowlight of this entire thread.

Fucking hell.

🥴🥴🥴🥴

You're kinda skirting over the fact that he was denied an appeal. This isn't about just one highly experienced, legally trained judge.

but hey, you know better because you've all the info from SM 🤪

No, slamming a door shows you're in a foul mood. It doesn't show contempt for women if a man does it or contempt for men if a woman does it. If I remember rightly it happened just after he found out that he'd lost most of his money. Most of us might take out our temper on inanimate objects after that sort of news.

I don't know about contempt, but his behaviour in that video is scary. It's more than just slamming doors.

So, according to your logic none of us should question any decision made by a judge because they are cleverer, wiser and have evidence not available to us, even in a case where all the evidence is available publicly.

Exactly how does that work when other judges overturn those decisions made by the original wise, clever and all knowing judge?

whilst simultaneously being probably the most notable lowlight of this entire thread.

I choked laughing at this

It was you who brought up the issue of sentencing which I think demonstrates that you haven't a scooby what this is actually about.

So, according to your logic none of us should question any decision made by a judge because they are cleverer, wiser and have evidence not available to us, even in a case where all the evidence is available publicly.

of course not, but as I've said already you do need better grounds than you don't like it

Exactly how does that work when other judges overturn those decisions made by the original wise, clever and all knowing judge?

other judges looked at this case and said there are no grounds for appeal. Just what do you not understand about that?

Well yes, if Charles Dickens said that back in the 19th century it’s absolutely grounds to abolish the entire legal system as we know it.

Trial by social media is absolutely superior.

Btw, are you typing this with a straight face? Or do you fully aware you’re grasping at straws here?

Times have changed. Since Weinstein and Me Too the accusation of being an abusive man is much more damaging, as it should be, more especially if it's true.

“What about sentencing?”

…that’s a keen legal mind you’ve got there. Definitely on par with that of a judge.

that’s a keen legal mind you’ve got there

😂

John Mortimer wasn't too flattering about the legal profession in the 20th century and he was in a pretty good position to know what he was talking about.

Lots of people want Johnny Depp to be the "goodie" because they fancy him/like him as an actor etc etc Personally I don't think either of them are the "goodie" in this story

So the legal judgement is to be trusted in the Weinstein case, but not this one? I guess the legal system is only useful when it supports your own personal opinions.

The relevance here being?

😁 This post is interesting!

In enjoyed his films until some years ago when he travelled to Australia with AH and they smuggled their dogs into the country, because they are "speshul" rich people and not subject to the laws mere mortals have to observe. Later when all this shitshow started to emerge I realised my appreciation was correct and that they are disgusting awful people...

I have better grounds. I looked at the evidence, particularly witness statements. The police said there was no damage to the flat and several people said there was no damage to her face, plus she's just been caught out in a lie about the makeup she said she used to cover her bruises.

It's hard to get an appeal and especially hard in a defamation case. It's not a sign of his guilt or her innocence.

Because in those instances "new evidence" comes to light which could alter a sentence or a conviction. It's not that the original judge was wrong, it is that more evidence has come to light, so an appeal is granted to hear the new evidence and decide if this then alters the case.

It's not a he was wrong but this judge is right. It's "things have changed" so let's look at it again.

Appeals are only granted if there is new evidence, or something was missed in the original case for example a mental health diagnosis was not given enough due diligence in sentencing so a review is needed to look at the severity and cause.

You can't work out the relevance for yourself?

I have better grounds.

Well this is hands down the stupidest thing I've ever read on here. 😂