Amber Heard - but wait hear me out!! Watch this

[MrsMingech]

So I was on the fence with these two, and I read the threads but didn't follow them and when I searched them I only found and old one.

My search efforts suck, clearly.

Theres many recordings, albeit put together by a clear DP Pom Pom shaker. But it can't be denied (unless it's suggested it's another woman).

Its so bullying, awful
and nasty, I couldn't list to it all.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=e5SaPZpFhcg

if there's a more relevant thread that I suspect I've have missed please link and I will ask for this to be deleted. I swear I did search first.

For a court it would take medical evidence, such as a report or a check at the doctors.

So you would believe every women who reported a rape?

I just don't. Her body language, the way she speaks, the stories she tells - I don't believe it.

I believe he was toxic, drunk, angry, smashed things up and probably at times did scare her, but I don't believe he hit her, I don't believe he raped her, and I think he was more of a threat to himself.

She has repeatedly lied. And I don't believe people who are proven liars. I also, sorry to be crude, cannot wrap my head around the idea she didnt know whether this bottle inside her was broken or not.

Initially, yes.

You have to remember this isn't a criminal trial. Had it have been, I would have supported her, as I would support any woman.

I've been in an abusive relationship and you couldn't have paid me enough to want to sit in a room with that man in court (thankfully he changed his plea the ay before and I didn't have to). I certainly couldnt have smirked the way she does and then wanted to do it all over again.

@Pumperthepumper I would initially believe everyone who reported a rape and then thoroughly investigate.

So no matter what evidence she had, you wouldn’t believe her anyway?

This is getting obtuse. I think its fair to say minutes would believe her if there was proof such as a Dr's report. The trouble with rape is that unless the victim immediately seeks medical attention it is practically impossible to prove. It is the man's word against the woman's. Undoubtedly thousands of men will have got away with it due to lack of evidence but we cannot assume everyone who reports it is telling the truth and convict with no evidence

As these were not criminal cases, there did not (in the uk anyway) have to be proof ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. In the usa it was a defamation case. The case here was Depp vs The Sun. A civil case where the same level of proof is not required as in a criminal case. Therefore as no criminal case was brought, all of the above discussion is irrelevant in this case. In the UK, the judge found what the Sun said to be substantially true. That was that Depp was a wife beater. The judge here did believe Heard and that the Sun report was ‘substantially accurate’. Depp then goes off to the sympathetic usa where his star shines brighter and a jury is involved.

>>>Depp then goes off to the sympathetic usa where his star shines brighter and a jury is involved.

That's a serious oversimplification. There were different issues and different disclosure because Heard wasn't a party in the UK case. In the UK, if she's not a party they don't get access to all her recordings, documents etc.

An example is her claim she donated all her money to charity. This was relied on by the UK judge to reject a claim as to motive that she made it up to get a restraining order for divorce leverage/for cash. It was accepted as true by the judge and there was no disclosure on it. In the USA, the fact she hadn't donated all the money at all and a substantial part of what was donated was donated by Elon Musk was in evidence.

Same for the trailer park incident. UK evidence was mostly her saying he trashed it v him + one witness peering around the door from a distance. In the USA, the trailer park owner gave evidence saying it was only a light fixture broken that cost $60.

The UK and USA cases are not directly comparable although the media would like you to think they are.

As I said. Depp went to USA as a bad loser. Heard was under oath to tell the truth here. I don’t care about either of them but the facts of what was written were examined in court here.

Seriously? EVEN drug and alcohol addled, there is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that he ever abused her physically, sexually or verbally. Have you just pulled a conclusion out of your ass?

What about the unequivocal recordings of Heard telling him that she didn't punch him, she hit him? Did you listen to them?

@JetTail you seem pretty passionate about this, but your comments are also coming across quite angry- are you really angry about this? It’s a tough one to discuss I hope it’s not upsetting you too much, this is a topic that divides people. Plenty of legal experts thought that the jury might find JD at fault, or both equally at fault or neither, there was a lot of evidence on AH’s side, including recordings of JD acknowledging he head butted her, photos and witnesses (his assistant saw him kick her in the back). You may think lots of people on here are wrong, that’s fair enough - the majority online seem to agree with you, but it’s not crazy that people also disagree- it wasn’t that clear cut of a case. People are here to discuss, not insulted so maybe take it easy? It’s a very sensitive topic for lots of people, none of knows what nerve this has touched for other posters

Johnny Depp is in court again in July with a new assault case against a former colleague, who claims he punched him in the ribs. Wonder if that one will be televised?

@JetTail er yes but that's not the issue at hand on this particular part of the thread. If you look at my other posts you will see I'm team Johnny all the way, my point in the above post is that, yes, some men will rape and get away with it BUT that we cannot simply take a woman's word for it and I certainly don't take AH word for it. I agree with you that SHE is the abuser

And before anyone dives in on my above post, I DO automatically believe a woman but as another poster said there would need to then be a thorough investigation.

If and when anyone, man or woman, tells me they have been victimized, I immediately validate and support. The time of initial disclosure is not the moment to ask questions and given that most disclosures are true - in that moment I will always respond with support and validation. Then as time goes on, either the pieces align and I continue to support or the pieces start to not align and questions start to be raised and then it is time to look deeper into the allegation and available evidence and what happened and proceed from there.

It makes no sense to me to continue to blindly believe someone just because they are a woman when there is evidence to the contrary. I have a brain for a reason and I use it. Critical thinking is essential to understanding complex dynamics.

I don't know how many of you followed the case of Jian Ghomeshi. That was another interesting one that started with an anonymous post but ended in criminal charges. In that case, public opinion was that he was in the wrong and had been abusive however the alleged victims colluded and lied and ultimately he was acquitted. Regardless of his guilt or innocence in that case, the dishonesty of the alleged victims led to the acquital. The public was angry at the judge and him and felt the acquital was unfair but the court has a due process to follow and judge or jury, you can't lie your way to a favourable verdict.

Likes his litigation, doesn't he?

I think I worded that badly - Johnny Depp is being accused again of assault, this time for punching a colleague in the ribs and is back in court in July.

I’ll wait and see what transpires from the hearing.

Greg Brooks asked for a selfie with Johnny Depp at the end of filming (so after the event he is suing him for) which GB then sent on to his friends plus, amongst other things, a statement from the script writer who was there at the time (along with several of her time stamped photos) which gives a different account of events.

If this recent trial has taught me anything it’s not to take what MSM pump out as the truth.

You can be exasperating.

As Pp said, I would believe anyone with evidence. She has proved herself to be a liar tome and time again.

She did have evidence. Photos, videos and witnesses. You choose to discount them as not good enough. Your choice. Some of us can choose differently.

If there was any evidence those photos or videos were doctored, they would either have not been allowed as evidence or the expert witness would have shown up the lie. Thar didn't happen. So I think they were genuine photos.

Of course,maybe if someone lies they deserve to be abused.

Mm. a judge thinks otherwise though.

Of course nobody deserves to be abused. Dont twist my words. I never said that. What I actually said repeatedly is that she was never abused.

She refused the court order to surrender her devices - saying she no longer owned any of her devices from the time of her relationship.

Her team refused to hand over the pictures, videos and recordings as required by the court - eventually sending some images but not in a format that could be properly validated.

Amber presented no evidence that any of the photos were taken at the same time as the incidents she described. They could have been taken at any time and the minor marks she had could have been from any event - none were validated as to time and date.

The photos she did submit did not fit with the account of the assaults and injuries she had. There are other photos showing further inconsistency as they contradict her own photos

She submitted the same picture twice of her face - with lighting and colour changed and indicated these were from two different incidents

She submitted a photo as evidence of an assualt in 2013 only for TMZ to release that they had the metadata on that photo and it had been taken in 2012. She then changed her story on the stand immediately after the TMZ release to change the date of the assault to a year earlier - to a time when they were both still with their previous long term partners and almost 6 months before they would release statements regarding the end of those relationships.

She submitted the same photo of spilled wine on the floor for two different incidents.

She has told three different stories about three different events indicating that each of these were the first times Johnny hit her. There are photos of her after these events with no marks or bruises despite her stated injuries.

There is no consistency in her stories, her evidence, or her own testimony. People believe the earth is flat, that the Holocaust didn't happen, that man has never been to the moon, that aliens exist, and that Trump is an amazing and brilliant man - so I am no longer surprised what people believe regardless of fact or evidence!

100% agree.