Part 4 AIBU to keep this discussion on Amber and Jonny going?

[ENoeuf]

Just in case we run out on part 3

I'm going to listen with interest to closing arguments. I'm still having a hard time following the lies A is alleged to have made, although the photo 'in different light' is clearly the same one just with contrast adjusted. I think some of her evidence has been hard to believe in places - the bottle incident for example.
I'm not convinced J reputation is fully restored - that's balanced by the misogyny and very heavy substance abuse that's come out. Whether the social media fan base translates to new roles/continues will be interesting.

but I don't think anything can be done about the UK trial verdict as JD was denied the right to appeal. who do you complain to, to get that right reinstated?

" heavy substance abuse that's come out"

But there's nothing new about that; it's been well known for decades. You'd have to have been living on Mars not to be aware of it. 😐

I didn't previously think 'very heavy substance abuse' with black outs, taking it around his kids, constant use - I knew he liked to 'party' obviously but I didn't have him (if I ever actually thought about him) in the same category as other heavy, addicted, unpleasant types in my mind.

The AH having no chemistry sounds possible, although I remember them saying they don't bow to pressure but the petition probably didn't help any decisions. I saw it with my kids and her character didn't really fit.

Today is going to be very interesting, especially the metadata expert

I also thought it was well known that JD drank a lot, did drugs and messed up hotel rooms. I remember it from when he was with KM too and whilst I expected he'd calmed down a fair bit as he got older, I knew he still had issues.

I also knew that Tim Burton often had a job persuading some studios to work with him because of his reputation for turning up late and being unreliable on set. But I also knew that everyone who worked with him spoke very highly of him and that he turned out stellar work, so it was excused.

I'm not even a JD fan. I don't dislike him but he's not the reason I watch a film. I remember watching him in 21 Jump St and then him going out with KM and have always been aware of him as a Hollywood actor and all his issues.

What I think we’ll here today:

• meta data has been tampered with/ taken by devices not available at the time they were supposedly taken.
• Kate Moss will clear up the staircase incident between her and JD (possibly share something she knows about his relationship with AH).
• Flight Attendant testimony to totally discredit story about flight to Russia.

There has been so many testimonies that is has become so blurred. Seeing the Hicksville testimonies side by side, they are chalk and cheese of the trailer.

That will leave AH with only the Australia story as unverifiable. But in the light of all the other being shown to be direct lies and manipulations of the truth then I’m not sure the jury can believe her. How can we believe anything she’s said when she has been caught lying so many times now. The children’s hospital testimony was really damning because it turns out she donated much less than we though. I suspect the ACLU only got more because she needed them to bolster her story.

I’m not sure it is blurred. Everyone, other than AH’s friends and sister, have testified either that the abuse didn’t happen or that she hit him. And Whitney’s testimony has just been blown up.

So what evidence does she actually have apart from hearsay? The inference on the text messages is tricky because you can make it mean whatever you believe it to mean- just like all written text.

It’s the testimony of what happened in the trailer, and the damage it caused.

@Legrandsophie ignore the above I read it completely wrong. I mean blurred about what happened where and when

Yes, absolutely agree @Boulshired

I suspect the whole pint of AH’s testimony was to muddy the waters and put in doubts about the evidence he had presented about her. It all felt really reactionary, especially Whitney dropping in that bit about him controlling her devices as the reason she didn’t take pictures. Also very convenient that she couldn’t produce her phone or messages from the time period either.

*I’m not sure it is blurred. Everyone, other than AH’s friends and sister, have testified either that the abuse didn’t happen or that she hit him. And Whitney’s testimony has just been blown up.

So what evidence does she actually have apart from hearsay? The inference on the text messages is tricky because you can make it mean whatever you believe it to mean- just like all written text.*

She has photos- although I will be very interested to see what the experts opinions are on them. Imo the jury is out on that.

She has a make up artist and JDs friend who saw bruises. She has a hairdresser who saw chunks out her scalp. She has text messages and emails she has sent claiming abuse over a prolonged period of time. one where JDs assistant says JD kicked her and an audio where JD says he head butted her- accident or not is to be decided! I can't remember ever accidentally head butting someone even in an argument though.

She has medical notes from a couple therapist reporting abuse and from her doctor saying she has a bloody lip and a bruise under the eye. She has Clear evidence that suggests JD does have blackouts and periods of time when under the influence that he doesn't remember and becomes a monster.

She has an expert saying that JDs finger was not cut off by her throwing a bottle. Which if they believe this put him as a liar too and the jury could discount lots of his testimony too.

She has audiotapes where he is at least verbally abusive and intimidating behaviour. As does he though.

I think the experts opinion on the photos will be make or break for her.

You cannot compare Dr Curry to Dr Speigal! Dr Curry actually used psychiatric evaluation tools to assess amber to come to a diagnostic conclusion. Dr Clown watched him on Graham Norton 🤦🏻‍♀️

I think this case will be determined by whether the jury judge each case separately on its merits or if they pick a winner. In so much as who they believe the most will be rewarded. As I’ve said before for Depp this has been about the court of public opinion. I think Depp has done enough to quash or limit damages to the counterclaim.

This is an interesting video which suggests that the scores Amber was given did not meet the threshold for the diagnosis that Dr Curry made. I think Dr Curry played well with the public (and possibly the jury); she's attractive and articulate, but Dr Hughes was actually more qualified as well as being an actual DV expert.

Dr Spiegel was really interesting but obviously there's a question mark over whether he should have been discussing Depp’s mental health in the first place. I don't have an opinion either way on that but his cross-examination definitely didn't go well.

I have to completely disagree with you. Other points you have raised I have agreed with, but if we were on the jury I'd wholeheartedly disagree with you here on Dr Spiegel.

Dr Spiegel is not a forensic psychologist, he is a psychiatrist. He was not court ordered to make an assesment. He acted unethically and outside the remit of his medical capabilities.

His testimony is completely irrelevant to the case. His opinions unfounded and his observations completely irrelevant.

Other than Dr Shaw the psychologist in my opinion have all in some ways let their profession down, from Dr Speigel no explanation needed, Dr hughes with her gender bias and dr curry where I do think it’s was over the top to actually diagnose on such a short time.

So basically the jury have to decide if A was making up the op-ed content (we know it's been agreed it refers to JD) and if she did , then did it impact his earning. If she didn't, the impact doesn't matter because truth is a defense.
I don't think A has a chance of winning her claim, which was £££ plus immunity from his accusations. I guess in case she says anything else in the future?

@Boulshired I completely agree with your opinion.

Especially your concerns of how it affects DV in the future, for women. Although @TiddyTidTwo is correct, it has certainly raised the fact that male DV by women is a real thing. More than we realise.

I also spotted AH a mile off, I said so in first thread. Agree 100% she has NPD. NPD is brutal and not just narcissm, it is a whole other level. I am in the process of divorcing myself and DD from it. It has made me physically ill. I am giving up $$$s to simply be rid. I will have nothing to fall back on. It has taken me 18 years to do this and realise this and parent alone. I am not in my own country and this has made it very easy to be exploited.

A key part of NPD is defaming your partners reputation to absolutely everybody. It is isolation. But totally believing your lies. I think Elaine has clocked this.

I just hope the truth of the matter comes out. I just think AH has NPD. I really do. JD was abused. I do not care for either of them particularly. JD seems to have empathy. AH is prepared to exploit everybody, including her DSis. (I also agree with a PP that he is protecting Whitney)

I could be 100% wrong. Obviously. I could be projecting massively, obviously. But I can almost smell it!

@Legrandsophie I think you have it right on the outcome today.

*I mean I have always parented alone, he moved out when DD was 2, but sort of played happy families when it suited him. He did not want a divorce. He wanted control.

I do not think AH wanted a divorce.

With you on that I think

The jury instructions, I think, will be really interesting.

They have been submitting, to the judge, what they want to be included in the jury instructions, so it'll be interesting to hear what the judge tells them.

Between this and the Sue Grey report due to be released, I'm not sure how I'm going to get any work done today.