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.

I am beginning to be interested by the support for AH which frequently references how anybody believing JD's side of events is lacking. It's a version of ad hominem and it ranks second to bottom on Graham's hierarchy of disagreement. Other methods of argument from Heard's supporters include response to tone and contradiction, as well as appeals to emotion which are not founded in evidence. I have yet to see any arguments for AH which can bring a counter argument, or refute the central points with evidence.

I am sure they do have informed opinions. They have education and experience to back up the entertainment aspect of being a Youtuber.

However they have to build their channel and gain viewers and views and to do that they need to keep people watching and they are not immune to not saying things that might alienate viewers. For example - let's say there was a legal analyst on Youtube whose informed view was that Amber has a case and is likely to win the case and Johnny is abusive - that channel wouldn't likely get the same views or viewership.

Every youtuber has to decide how to curate their brand and how to edit their videos and what advertisers / sponsors to use to attract the audience they want. They are not neutral in this. That doesn't make them wrong in what they are saying - but they are not neutral.

Nothing happened? Seriously?

Commentators like Emily Baker etc all have built a solid viewership and reputation for giving excellent analysis - before the depp trial. I just don't think people like her would throw that foundation away to gain more viewers. She backs up every opinion she makes with explanations of the evidence.

I don't deny the Depp trial has been a gift for these 'lawtubers'.....but that's because facts in evidence are against AH and they can explain why.

I'm interested to hear opinions on AH answers on cross regarding 'pledged vs donated'.

Q: you haven't paid the 7 million to charity

A:"That's incorrect I pledged the full 7 million

Q: You haven't paid the money.

A: johnny sued me so I couldn't pay it.

Q: you received the full 7 million 18 months before he started legal proceedings against you.

A: I pledged the full 7 million. I use pledge and donate synonymously.

Personally I was incredulous at her answers.

People are very critical of AH supporters and say exactly the same re: lacking.

I find the whole “supporters” line bizarre. While Depp fans certainly muddy the pitch this is not a football match, nor is it a film.

I don’t like or support either of them. I’m simply interested in what happened.

If I was on the jury, regardless of how I found in terms of the legal definitions of defamation for this specific case - I wouldn't award either of them a penny.

I am still uncertain as to the extent of her exaggerating, attention seeking, and embellishing. Her inability to tell the truth makes it hard to find the line. There are clearly faked stories and staged pictures but how far beyond that does it go....is there some truth amidst the lies or is she a psychopath who made everything up and spent years building a case to take him down and get rich.

Interestingly her relationships with women seem more genuine and with 'regular' people. Her relationships with men seem to be for money and social climbing (all multi millionaires).

If I was on the jury, regardless of how I found in terms of the legal definitions of defamation for this specific case - I wouldn't award either of them a penny

I agree there. All along I've thought she was daft to publish the op ed. I don't think it was clear cut enough in terms of being abused for her to ever safely do that - too much evidence of her trying to persuade him to stay, leeching friends etc. Plus he was clearly an angry irrational person and she could have walked away , pointed to the NDA and statement saying no one had lied and let it die down.
Not to say if she was abused she should have let him get away with it but she could have sued a different vehicle if she was going to raise it publicly.

*used not sued

Although this case is only about the oped, it wasn't just the op ed where she put this forward. She was a guest speaker at events representing domestic violence, she published other aritcles and was leaking and selling pictures and recordings and stories.

She hired / joined The Harry Walker Angecy to be a public speaker on domestic violence at events www.harrywalker.com/speakers/amber-heard

As written on their website, Heard is:
“An outspoken advocate for women’s rights and for the civil rights of survivors of all gender-based violence around the world, Amber works with organizations that encourage survivors both personally and politically to come forward and reclaim their power. Amber makes frequent trips to DC to lobby and fight on behalf of the civil rights of women and the innumerable silent survivors of gender-based violence.”

Guest Speaker at #MeToo Anniversary Event
variety.com/2018/scene/news/amber-heard-johnny-depp-open-letter-me-too-1202975127/

She really put herself out there as the face of domestic violence.

I think it is also telling that the #MeToo and #TimesUP movements really haven't come out vocally in support of her or fighting for her - one of their own activitists who worked tirelessly for the cause.

And Amanda De Cadenet who was one of her best friends and biggest supporters in those movements - distanced herlsef and publicly expressed her disappointment and feeling used by Amber after realizing that how Amber had presented the relationship to her during their years of friendship was not at all what reality was.

I agree with @Midlifemusings and @ENoeuf

I am sitting on the fence so much, I have splinters in my bum.

Maybe I'll be accused of being a coward, or hedging my bets or not being a feminist.
And maybe because I'm not a "supporter" of either side, I am lacking. That could be true and I'm happy to take the criticism.

I understand why people have strong opinions on both sides.

In order for either side to "win" the jury have to come back to a unanimous verdict.

I'm not sure they will be able to.

agree.

If you watch the oj program which is amazing btw...it really shows that justice isn't justice it's just the best we've got.

Surely this is all about him loose pirates 6.

Disney distancing themselves.

Surely he should be taking them to court?

Depp needed a vehicle, any vehicle to sue Amber, the op Ed gave him just that. As it is only in court that the rules of the NDA are overridden. He also needed her to be the defendant so she is not the third party. This was never about pirates or even defamation, this was his chance ( he believed) to fully get his truth out.

If you watch the oj program which is amazing btw...it really shows that justice isn't justice it's just the best we've got.

That sounds an interesting watch @ICanSmellSummerComing do you know where I can find it?

Given the nature of “his truth” that was very unwise.

Suing her twice has not done him any favours at all.

Personally I think this lawsuit is just about money.

He had lots, he was then notified that he had very little, so this $50 million is a chance to restore his finances.

also maybe he lost the UK trial in 2020 and he couldnt take it.

He has stadiums singing his name, his groups records topping the rock chart uk and us last week. He has changed some peoples minds. Amber hasn’t got 50 million. She hasn’t even got the money for her charities. This has definitely benefited him the only risk is if she wins a substantial payout

He hasn't sued her twice?

He attempted to sue The Sun... and is now sueing Heard..

He wasn’t suing her directly the first time, but she was the principle witness. His case was that she was the aggressor and the abuse a hoax.

Anyone got any thoughts on the current theory hitting social media . I checked the original photo and it was reported in the papers in 2020. She did call it a bruise kit.

About as credible as the videos showing her supposedly snorting cocaine on the stand.
Anyway, apparently it's a piece of card from the inside of the ice cream carton that comes with a spoon and shows the different flavours.