You see, this is the kind of attitude I don't understand. There is not one text-book set of behaviours exhibited by 'victims'. The idea that if you're a victim you're some shrinking wallflower of a person who sits and cries in a corner: no. It means you've been targeted and then subjected to circumstances which are beyond your control. (Unless, of course, you're taking the line that they asked for it).
The terrified, trembling image is a specific perception people expect to have of a victim, particularly one who has been subjected to trauma and/or happens to be female. On the contrary, victims can also be fighters; they can push back tooth and nail against those who are subjecting them to abuse; they can, on occasion, be abuser and victim at the same time. I would argue back against an abusive male - in what circumstances I'd prefer not to say - over and over again, although I knew fine well he would snap and if he couldn't best me with his vicious tongue he would do it with his fists - purely because I wasn't going to show that bastard that in reality I was terrified of him. I wasn't about to give him that kind of satisfaction. Very likely, certain people with no insight into this predicament would say I was asking for it.
There might be a textbook response to trauma (PTSD/cPTSD); there is not one given set of behavioural characteristics victims display. That's the attitude that undid Joanne Lees, who didn't behave as a victim of a terrifying crime 'should' and because of that, found herself all-but accused of her partner's murder. Lindy Chamberlain served time for murdering her own daughter, because she didn't behave sufficiently like the victim of circumstance she was later proven to be.
It's women who tend to be at the butt of this misconception, and a lot of the accusatory, ignorant BS stated about them happens because of the media.
This isn't necessarily to say that Depp should be discounted as a victim also. But it's clear from the evidence that Amber Heard was.