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?

For me, it is because she was arrested for domestic violence back in 2009. She has prior form.

And I've not watched the videos but surely if she hadn't recorded them noome would believe her?

For me, it is because she was arrested for domestic violence back in 2009. She has prior form.

So that means she can't be a victim of abuse herself, ever? Is that it?

To be fair, most posters on this discussion seem reasonable in that they see neither party is innocent and both have their faults.

There really are very few people here arguing it's black or white and that anyone is 100% victim or abuser.

I thought that Johnny and Vanessa had split before he got together with Amber?

My son was in an abusive relationship and she did everything she could to provoke him, she wanted him to be the bad guy and I think she really wanted him to hit her. Fortunately he wasn't a drunk or drug addict so he kept his head. He drew a line the day he was sitting with baby in his arms and toddler on his lap and she punched him in the face. He was in shock and the toddler was hysterical.

Some women are batshit and we shouldn't pretend it is always the man anymore than we should pretend it is never the man.

People tend to think in black and white, dichotomous thinking. There's no grey. So it's 'pick a side, who's the abuser?' rather than being able to recognise that they were mutually abusive.

People are also angry I think that his career and image has been so badly tarnished while hers has been largely untouched and she's continued with her career unharmed, painting herself as a victim and hopping onto the MeToo movement while privately she was just as abusive as him. So people feel aggrieved that in a relationship where they were both abusive, one abuser had their life ruined while the other got off scot free and got endless public sympathy.

I think that's the point of this trial tbh, JD isn't going to win, there's plenty of evidence of his abuse. But he's thinking if I'm going down, then so is she, and that the public should be aware of her actions as well as his.

There's also the wider picture and how people will often fail to recognise abuse from a woman because the stereotypical abusive relationship is a man harming a woman.

It sounds like they are both hideous toxic people who I am very glad I don't know.

I don't think we'll ever know who started it either. He still sounds worse to me though.

I agree with this completely and, to be honest, I'm also shocked that DC (Aquaman) hasn't cut ties with her considering she has actually admitted that she hit JD and would throw objects at him etc.

I think if both parties had been treated equally then there wouldn't be this sentiment that JD is hard done by and an underdog, and therefore seen as the innocent party

So people feel aggrieved that in a relationship where they were both abusive, one abuser had their life ruined while the other got off scot free and got endless public sympathy.

The idea of Heard getting 'endless public sympathy' is ridiculous in fairness.

As for careers, that's in the hands of studio executives. They're under no obligation to hire anyone for anything, so there's a degree of entitlement here on thinking Depp has rights to parts. Depp is a much bigger star than Heard, so obviously hiring him would be a different proposition in the circumstances.

What about what he did? His defence of Roman Polanski who raped a 13 year old. His friendship with Marilyn Manson and his sexual attacks on women. His misogynistic texts saying he wanted to fck her burnt corpse and the fact the high court concluded he could indeed be referred to as a “wife beater” because there was substantial evidence to do so?

I know who JD is although I don't think I've ever seen him in a film. I'd never heard of AH before the legal cases. Reading about them they do seem a very toxic couple but I don't really agree with all the abusive comments about them. I think they are both damaged and both have MH issue and they need some help. It is a shame no one can step in and get them that help before they destroy themselves and probably damage other people on the way.

I Agree.
This is certainly not a black and white issue however people might like to paint it as such. There is a whole load grey in there.

I think they're two people who should have never been in a relationship.

At the end of the day, no one ever knows what goes on behind closed doors.

If she signed a NDA, then she's broken it. Simple legally, but morally it's a whole other story I guess.

She did sign an agreement that was a non disparaging clause in divorce. Therefore he is furious she wrote that article although she tried to get round it by not saying his name.

I’ve been over this before on here, it is not black and white. Some of the things they have said and done are unhinged and it’s hard to tell if it’s their toxic relationship or their personalities or substances.

He sent texts to his friend raging about AH and she was constantly recording him secretly when he was clearly intoxicated and I interpret some of her actions as goading. He is underplaying the severity of his addictions and in fact can’t remember some of the things he has done or writes them off as trauma responses.

She took a restraining order out on him then went to his hotel room, he rejected her so she got into his bed and asked him to get in too. He said no.

my view? She is an emotional terrorist and he is an unhappy unstable alcoholic drug addict and together they made an utterly toxic mess

@TheKeatingFive

i am not saying he is not abusive - I think they both are. But also I know how the judicial process works; it doesn’t necessarily mean that he did all of the things he was accused of, it “just” means that on balance the judge thinks he was abusive and Amber was scared. That doesn’t mean she wasn’t abusive. It doesn’t mean he did actually do XYZ, it’s about the balance of probabilities and I think most reasonable people assessing the scenario would say they are both a hot mess, and abusive.

people defending him are wrong. People excusing his behaviour due to drugs etc are wrong. Likewise people defending her or calling her a “strong woman” are wrong, based on the recording of her mocking him for complaining she punched him. They are terrible individuals.

Because Amber isn’t the perfect Victim, she is not cowering in the corner of the court room and omg she has dared to smile at her lawyers!

whilst its very clear Amber was no Angel in the relationship and she definitely shouldnt have painted herself as some domestic violence advocate (when she was also an abuser) Johnny Depp has also been an abusive person, whilst people are doubting some of the physical violence against Amber how anyone can deny his Emotional abuse is beyond me

he has trashed the house and thrown things around, that is emotional abuse, people use the excuse of Amber gaslighting him but that kind of behaviour is terrifying to experience!

whilst he may not have been physically violent with his women before he definitely has a history of being violent. Trashing hotel rooms And i believe he is currently being sued by a crew member for being violent on set

if this was a normal husband and wife case everyone would be blaming BOTH sides but unfortunately people have their rose tinted glasses on when it comes to Depp

Likewise people defending her or calling her a “strong woman” are wrong, based on the recording of her mocking him for complaining she punched him.

but who is doing that? I might have read one comment along those lines, that's all.

The only thing of importance in this case is whether she's libelling Depp in calling herself a victim of abuse. She doesn't need not to be an abuser herself for that to be true.

They are both awful, but he's the worst of the two. From the evidence playing out in court it's pretty clear both were abusive and each has struck the other (she admitted it on tape, he admitted in a court of law that he headbutted her. I'm not buying that it's possible to headbutt someone by 'accident'. The UK court clearly didn't buy it either, as they found the Sun's wife beating allegation to be substantially true). All that said, the only one claiming they're a wholly innocent victim and only one party - the other one - was abusive, is Depp.

Having read his suit and her countersuit, I believe both. Hers seems pretty much irrefutable. He's been [mis]using the legal system for years to carry on abusing her with a seemingly legitimate basis. This is an abuse of the system. Civil courts exist to pursue one end: restitution for harm done, the sole recourse being payment of damages. They are not there to 'clear your name' - that's the purpose of the criminal courts - and they're certainly not there to pursue someone relentlessly and enact petty revenge against them. If legitimate questions are opened up about the abuse of the system in this way - the two daft WAGs and their stupid internet argument being another case in point - that will be one good thing to come out of these pointless trials.

The more Depp uses the courts to continue pursuing Heard, even after losing the UK defamation trial, the more he seems to justify her claims of abuse. Given he's voluntarily showing himself up as everything she says he is, he can't be any too bright. As for those hate-filled texts, a decent human being simply couldn't entertain sentiments like this.

#Team Depp/Heard is obviously asinine. No matter who comes out of this case the victor, both have already lost. With any luck they'll be rendered unemployable and this will be the last we hear of them.

No wonder she recorded them. There's a precedent for this. Oksana Grigorieva had irrefutable audible evidence of her powerful, male, Hollywood partner's abuse. Powerful Hollywood Male had been on record many times in the past in his true racist, misogynistic, homophobic and repulsive colours, of which similar were in clear evidence on those tapes, in his own words and spoken in his own voice.

And still people didn't believe her, or twisted it around to somehow being her fault. Excuses were made for PHM, for whom an extremely low bar was set. 'Just look at what she made him do'.

I don't know who Amber Heard is or what this is all about but the past simple tense of shit is SHAT.

That is all.

There is also the issue of her lying. From what I've read she lied about giving the £7m to charity (I don't know if that is true) and she lied about the make up. The company have come out and said the make up thing isn't true and i'm not sure why they'd lie. I do have difficulty with believing people when they lie, particularly when they do it more than once.

Her lying about specific things doesn't mean it's inaccurate to call herself a victim of abuse, which is what the case is about.

I know the make up thing is all over SM, but it's not necessarily some big gotcha either. She could be misremembering the brand, or referring to a promotional product.

Again, I suggest people read the U.K. judgement. There's all manner of shit that went down in there.

As far as the make up thing is, having read the transcripts, they haven’t actually specified that particular brand.. they just said colour correcting palate showing that one, doesn’t mean it was the exact same one used.. there are thousands of such products.

people are trying to tear apart everything her side produces whilst letting everything slip from his Side.

No but you do lose some credibility if you lie.

I wonder what the truth is with the £7m, that is hard to get wrong isn't it. I mean you don't think you've given someone £7m if you haven't.