Part 3 AIBU to wonder why so many people assume Johnny Depp is the good guy and Amber Heard is the villain

[StormzyinaTCup]

Following on from parts 1 and 2
Trial has gone 'dark' this week as the Judge is at a conference so it's going to be quiet on that front and I expect this thread will run slower than the previous two, however, there is still plenty of material and evidence from the last three weeks that we can 'cross examine'.

Any and all opinions welcome.

That’s a list of things you don’t personally believe, whether they’re objectively true is a different matter.

And it’s not true to say that it’s Heard’s testimony that has changed people’s minds: it may have changed some people’s minds, but many people didn’t believe her from the start - they were already parti pris.

Johnny is far from a perfect victim, whitney is far from a perfect victim, Weinstein's and Cosby's victims were far from perfect... there is no perfect victim. There is a big difference between perfect and truthful

Not the ones that I saw, let’s just say that. You were working in upper management in a company apparently.

I've been watching the trial. I'm not a supporter of either of them. Drugs and alcohol can damage the best of relationships. I was surprised to read that Depps close friend is someone that was accused of abusing women and is into some very dark things, Marilyn Manson. That's not reason enough though to think Depp is same.

What worries me now is how the whole of twitter is salivating in their hate for Amber and all the disgusting hashtags for someone they don't even know. I worry for her mental health and hope she does have some good support especially with having a young child.

Careful, your bias is showing: Johnny as a victim on par with Weinstein’s and Cosby’s (which unless you are alleging Heard raped Depp is as illogical as it is distasteful.)

Either way, the job of the defence team is to destroy the credibility of the main witness, to have you questioning every word they say,

This is not a criminal trial but a sue/counter sue situation, but Depp’s team’s role is the same.

They have the benefit the pre-existing bias towards Depp and against Heard.

Yes I was. Healthcare has many roles! I did the upper management one for four years before deciding it wasn't for me.

I am absolutely not putting him on par and I apolologize if it came across that way. I was just saying that in this case and other cases, there are no perfect victims and no expectation of perfect victims. Of Amber or anyone else.

Not exactly. I saw a compilation of a dozen or so photos of the cuts from over a few months as they healed. Hers are pretty standard in terms of self harm. There is really no way that being dragged over jagged broken glass by your hair could cause her injuries....although I realize you might believe she is bionic and her body functions like a non human species and so maybe you think glass cuts her differently too! Or maybe you think she can mind control the glass to cut her exactly as she wants it to. I haven't quite figured out what you think other than you don't believe in evidence or science or rational thought.

No, I am simply pointing out that you were not there, nor privy to the exact nature of her injuries, and your bias against Amber is visible from space.

I think, and I'm no expert.

JD's team are arguing even though he was told the same "creative differences. That A) AH still went on to act and featured heavily in the MeToo campaign and didn't suffer a negative backlash. By her own admission she got Aquaman and is still to have a part in it to present day.

JD however had the wife beater article, was dropped immediately from everything and a new actor cast for his part in Fantastic Beasts. Now had the op-ed never been written this wouldn't have happened in their opinion. As even though she had filled for a TRO in 2016 he still stared in fantastic Beasts 2 released 2018 so his reputation had not been that badly damaged, but the op-ed was published in 2018, it's after that where both Warner Bros and Disney dropped him and started citing "creative differences".

So even though both companies Disney and Warner Bros have cited "creative differences" for both. Only one has gone on to loose everything and only one has had a op-ed written about them.

Personally I don't think any major production company are going to touch either of them ever again, and those creative bridges have been burnt.

But again I'm no expert and could be talking shit, and I'll accept that 🤣

Yes I was. Healthcare has many roles! I did the upper management one for four years before deciding it wasn't for me

It does indeed. But to be seeing self harm scars on a regular basis you’d need to be at the coal face psychiatric work - psychiatrist/psychiatric nurse/psychotherapist/counsellor/GP/A&E etc.

Until recently you were apparently working in a role in collaboration with the ‘company lawyer’.

It also really upsets me how Amber and Tasya slandered the police officer who arrested her and called her homophobic and mysogynistic as a way to deflect from Amber's abusive behaviour. This is a clip from TMZ from 2016 (?) when the officer (Beverly Leonard) who is a proud lesbian with a partner and a history of both activism for gay rights and donations to domestic violence shelters spoke out in her own defense. She was just doing her job (when you witness an assault and you find out it is between two people in a relationship, the charge becomes domestic violence) and to be accused of awful things as a way for Amber to twist the narrative to suit her is again just par for the course for her.

www.tmz.com/watch/0-36jq5pf8/

"Very few rape victims ever have enough evidence for a conviction so I just find it so disheartening to see this attitude. It's not like she even went public with that allegation until she was forced to in this trial. What on earth do you think she would gain by fabricating it, knowing she was going up against a powerful Hollywood actor and knowing it was always going to be her word against his? She could have 'won' with far less extreme allegations, she could have got more money in the divorce, she could have just gone away and stayed quiet"

I think she ended up having to elaborate again and again on her story. So once she told one lie it snowballed into more and more until it was out of her control. This often happens with lies. Before you know it your little white lie has turned into a web of lies you can't get out of. For whatever reason, AH implied their was sexual abuse in the article. Once JD decided to sue her for it she had to elaborate on this.

For me it's not just believing or disbelieving. You have to weigh up if the situation is believable. If it's actually possible in a practical sense. Lots of things AH says are just not practical and just can't have happened in any logical way. I just can't believe she was dragged over glass, punched etc and only had a few injuries. Those marks on her arms are straight, even cuts. When you are walking on glass or pulled over glass you simply do not get cut like that. It simply defies the laws of physics. The same with her other bruises. I believe she was able to cover up possible minimal bruises she had with make up but can't believe she was able to cover up black eyes and a potential broken nose and swelling.

When they questioned her about the sequence of events in Australia it was just not possible for JD to have cut his finger off and then pinned her down by her neck and penetrated her with a bottle and the same time. All with a cut off finger. It just is not believable.

The same with JD being able to punch Witney and trash his apartment and pull over all those heavy racks of clothes all with a cast on his hand. You need to weigh up what is physically possible, what is logical. Nothing for/against AH but I just don't believe these two events as they simply aren't possible.

The same with the police statements and web cans of the apartments. We are expected to believe they tidied that whole apartment in such a short space of time between the two sets of police arriving. Again, it's just not possible and so I don't believe it.

Some people on both sides seem to be prepared to overlook impossibilities to claim someone is telling the truth.

@IrisVersicolor

Yes, that is getting a bit outing but I spent over a decade at the bedside in psychiatric units and went back to the bedside on and off for years more in another role. I don't really need to detail my CV to you. You can choose to think I am lying through my teeth if you prefer and ignore all my posts.

She was just doing her job (when you witness an assault and you find out it is between two people in a relationship, the charge becomes domestic violence)

No it doesn’t. There’s no such thing as a ‘domestic violence charge’. And if there had been evidence of assault, the charges would not have been dropped.

Leave it out Iris. You are targeting and harassing this poster by looking up her previous posts. It's unnecessary and weird. If you don't agree with them, close MN and go and do something else.

I don’t know whether you’re lying. I do know you’re making blanket statements about self harm that don’t stand up to scrutiny.

@ObjectionHearsay

I won't quote our conversation about Warner Bros/Disney, because it will be humongous 😂

Ah, I see what you mean. Yeah, you have a point, it's not something I had considered.

You're probably right.

I have wondered if JD will file a motion to dismiss AH. I suppose we will see on Monday.

I was smacked in the face by a door being closed on me in anger. I went downstairs and passed out because of the smack to the face. The correction to my teeth cost £2000 and I still have the shrapnel of teeth fragments in my lip. I couldn’t go out for weeks.

I’m simply engaging in a discussion with this poster as to the background of her claims. It’s perfectly valid and I’m not breaking any rules.

If you don’t like my posts, you don’t have to read them.

For whatever reason, AH implied their was sexual abuse in the article. Once JD decided to sue her for it she had to elaborate on this.

I may be wrong on the timeline but didn't JD sue the Sun before her article was published? In which case she had already made those allegations.

Those marks on her arms are straight, even cuts. When you are walking on glass or pulled over glass you simply do not get cut like that. It simply defies the laws of physics.

But again, you weren't there, were you? Do you know exactly where the glass was, etc? I do think Amber has hurt her credibility by making it sound even worse than it was, but I don't think she's describing it in a clinical way. She's describing her experience, there was clearly broken glass around and I think she said she got the cuts on her arms while being held with her forearms on a counter. I can see there may be some exaggeration there but you only have to see the state of the house to realise it must have been a terrifying experience.

I believe she was able to cover up possible minimal bruises she had with make up but can't believe she was able to cover up black eyes and a potential broken nose and swelling.

Well, not everyone bruises up the same way. If you think she had minimal bruises, I have no problem with that. It still shows physical abuse, and she has multiple witnesses to the fact that she had those injuries and her makeup artist covered them up.

When they questioned her about the sequence of events in Australia it was just not possible for JD to have cut his finger off and then pinned her down by her neck and penetrated her with a bottle and the same time. All with a cut off finger. It just is not believable.

Is that the sequence of events? I'm not sure if she said exactly. In any case, if he was capable of trashing the house and went hours without calling for medical help then I see no issue with him being able to do that.

The same with JD being able to punch Witney and trash his apartment and pull over all those heavy racks of clothes all with a cast on his hand.

I honestly can't see why that's difficult to believe. He trashed the house in Australia with an open wound on his hand. And I could probably pull over some clothes racks and I'm pretty weedy; it's hardly Incredible Hulk territory. Especially if fuelled by rage.

The same with the police statements and web cans of the apartments. We are expected to believe they tidied that whole apartment in such a short space of time between the two sets of police arriving. Again, it's just not possible and so I don't believe it.

No idea on this one, I'll have to look at the footage. How much time was there between the visits?

I accidentally walked into an opening door (my fault) in my early twenties and it hit me in the forehead. It was a very small cut but it looked like a massacre. It bled so much, there was blood everywhere. I ended up just closing it with butterfly bandages but people also asked me for ages what happened to my head. I still have a small scar although you can't really see it now, but you can still feel it. Heads and faces tend to bleed a lot.

Apart from your first point your response has made no difference to my opinion.

I simple don't believe he did these things over that level of broken glass. She said it was everywhere. She was walking over it, dragged over it and laying on it. I don't believe he did trash the house after cutting his finger. I think he and she did the writing on the mirror. If he had there would have been blood everywhere not just the drops of blood she photographed . Why did her reflection not appear on the mirror ? If she had bad injuries then why did she not evidence this in the mirror.

There is absolutely no sign of the photo she says he cut his finger on.

There is a very long recording of JD getting medical help afterwards. AH is there too at the medical centre. In the recording at no point is there any reference to AH being treated, showing any signs of injury. No concern whatsoever for her, nor does she report any. She is repeating sorry, sorry. Dr K says she cut his finger off. Unfortunately this can't be shown to the jury. Very unfortunate as it really is pretty damning.

I choose to believe the physical evidence that is there and the possibility of something actually being able to happen logically and practically. Nothing she has said in the cases is at all believable on a real life situation with real people. So I don't believe it happened.

The bruises do show physical abuse, I agree. But unfortunately they also show AH is not telling the truth at points. So how much of what happened can and should we believe based on the knowledge she can lie under testimony? Does this rule out her whole testimony? It's up to the jury. How do you decide if she's credible, what is true or not true?

The instructions to the jury will be very interesting to hear. They have a difficult task ahead of them. Remembering testimony from weeks ago can't be easy. I do think Johnny's team has the 'advantage' in having strategically kept more than double the hours for the last week.

I can’t wear dark lipstick because my mouth is so deformed. She is a liar from my experience alone.