Who will win between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard defamation case

[Egtermekaar]

If you were jury in this case, how would you decide?

I think Johnny Depp will win because he had strong, reliable and consistent evidence of "his" case

I hope MN will allow debate about a matter of public interest.

“How on earth would a person not know if a bottle supposedly used on them sexually was broken? I'd jolly well know.”

How would you know though? I mean you do realise that sometimes women don’t even know what they’ve actually been assaulted with, nevermind the condition it was in... or would they be lying too?

I honestly don't believe this assault with a bottle, she says she was pushed against the kitchen counter, bent over backwards with him holding one hand around her throat. Then somehow with his other hand he's spread her legs, opened her flaps and inserted the bottle without her feeling anything until pressure on her public bone. A bottle that size, she's not had children, no lube, just how?

Um, where do you think the pubic bone is?

Unless she was comatose, she'd know. You must not really have thought about it to imagine that a shard of broken glass being pushed violently in or outside your vagina is something you wouldn't know about if awake.

But your response tells me that this is how compulsive liars get away with saying blatantly obvious rubbish and yet strangely, are given credence.

“You must not really have thought about it to imagine that a shard of broken glass being pushed violently in or outside your vagina is something you wouldn't know about if awake.”

Nobody is thinking she means it could have been the broken edge and she wouldn’t know. 😳

I didn’t think that actually needed to be said tbh.

But that doesn’t mean the bottle couldn’t have been broken somewhere, or not and someone wouldn’t know - if it was the other end that was broken...

She said there was abroken bottle and she feared that was the one he used.
That's a bit different than she didn't know

I'm guessing in a completely different place to you 😂

I don't actually think I've had anything in my vagina where the only sensations I've had were on my pubic bone, I can't even recall if I've ever thought of my pubic bone during such times

Even at smear times I feel nothing in my pubic bone. My vulva, labia and vagina yes but never my public bone.

The bottom of it is more or less in line with the entrance of the vagina.

Depending on stuff like labia size and speed of the movement it’s really not ridiculous that the first thing you’d realise was unusual was there, it’s basically at the point of insertion .

Women often lubricate when being assaulted/raped

it’s only recently been discovered and they think it’s evolution to stop/limit damage to our bodies

when I was raped I didn’t feel anything like i had numbed myself as I knew straight away what was going to happen I don’t think this is uncommon

Lmao bless you, you even got me a picture, how sweet, how on earth did I get to this ripe old age and not know where my pubic bone was, there was me thinking it was in my elbow.

I repeat during sex, sexual intercourse with a penis or toys, not once has my pelvic bone been the first place of any sensation,

so he didn't touch her vulva, didn't touch her labia, didn't touch her vagina, all she felt was pressure on her pubic bone, well if that's all she felt then I still don't believe the assault happened. Not only which getting a bottle of that size up there with no lube, while holding a woman by her neck, holding the huge bottle with his other hand and inserting it, nah never happened 🙄

It isn't uncommon
So many myths around how people "should" behave that aren't based on experience
I hope you are ok

Yes I’m fine thank you

how your body can react in times of extreme fear/when you being attacked is incredible all so you will be physically harmed less

and I agree it’s once again this can’t have happened never happened to me or she isn’t acting in a way she should be narrative that dominates the whole trial and still continues it’s so damaging

“I repeat during sex, sexual intercourse with a penis or toys, not once has my pelvic bone been the first place of any sensation,”

They’re not really comparable to a large object being suddenly inserted with force against your will though.

“so he didn't touch her vulva, didn't touch her labia, didn't touch her vagina,”

I have no clue where he touched or didn’t tbh, but people tend not to go slowly or gently during sexual assaults, weirdly.

Obviously you can believe it happened or not, up to you, but it’s literally at the entrance to the vagina, so it’s entirely plausible that when something large is inserted quickly and unexpectedly that that’s where the sensation would be.

It really is

I'd like to think it's perhaps a credit to women to go so far to try and find some credibility in a woman who has been repeatedly caught lying. She's shown to be a voracious liar on multiple points that I'm not willing to consider a fairly unusual explanation for something which doesn't have any basis other than her own words.

The idea that a woman would lie so horrifically about such a terrible assault is deeply unsettling. It's a credit to anyone who's trying to find reasons to believe her, you're clearly kind souls. But she has lied so consistently and repeatedly I'm not willing to consider anything which doesn't have objective evidence. With all the photos Heard liked to take, and all the evidence she had ready and waiting, it's beyond belief that she wouldn't have documented this in some way to prove her story.

He's not a saint but she's a malicious liar and I'm not prepared to indulge her in any way. The fact that she continues to tout her story when she said she "just wants to get on with her life" just shows you she's not honest in any way. Even at the most base level.

“I'd like to think it's perhaps a credit to women to go so far to try and find some credibility in a woman who has been repeatedly caught lying.”

It’s not about trying to find credibility in her though.

There’s a huge difference between having the opinion that she’s lying because she’s a liar and trying to argue that a sexual assault couldn’t have happened like that, therefore she’s lying... because it is credible even if you think she isn’t.

I think there was a lot of evidence that Depps team had disallowed from the trial.

If you look at the witness objections on the fairfax County website, Depps team objected to every single witness.

Her medical notes weren't allowed as they were deemed "hearsay" and she wasn't allowed to answer questions on the lasting nature of her injuries as "not an expert witness"

Then Depps team made out she had never consulted a doctor for her injuries so must be lying.

I'd be hopping mad if I was her as that was an outright lie. Inadmissible evidence doesn't mean it didn't happen.

There was also a lot of evidence and witnesses and testimony that Amber's team objected to. That is how law and legal cases work. Each side fights to keep in what supports their case and keep out what doesn't. They fight to create a fairest trial for their client - and given the two clients are on opposing sides, there often isn't a lot in common. That has nothing to do with Amber or her lawyers or Johnny or his lawyers.

Johnny's lawyers had the same view in the UK trial - that so much of their evidence was kept out or dismissed- same as what Amber says here.

Amber's team had the exact same opportunities as Johnny's team and could have called whatever witnesses they needed to support and present their case and their allowable evidence - same as Johnny's team. Any disadvantage Amber's team had was of their own making as they didn't provide the court ordered devices or original photos, and they used so many old video depositions versus live witnesses.

And medical notes are absolutely admissable as long as the person who wrote them testifies to them - See Dr. Kipper, Nurse Debbie, Nurse Erin, Couples Counsellor, Johnny's psychatrist, Johnny's hand surgeon.

Why didn't Amber's team subpoena all of Amber's medical professionals? That was their choice. They could have required them to be deposed.

And all objections to witnesses, testimony, evidence has to be made on LEGAL grounds - both sides get to argue their position - for inclusion or exclusion based on legal grounds and then the court rules. It isn't that either side just bickers it out or can veto the other.

My point is that inadmissible evidence isn't the same as no evidence, so I was surprised Depps legal team were able to say that.

Exactly this.

And they're not "medical notes" - they're therapist's notes. That's a very big difference. Medical notes imply objectivity and evidence. Therapist's notes are just a record of what the person says. And we know that Amber has a very loose relationship with the truth, at best.

Given her proven propensity for lying I am not now willing to believe evidence which is not corroborated independently. And that's entirely of her own making. Also worth saying that I'm not a Depp fan, nor did I start out on his side.

I can't get past the fact she tampered with photos, tried to claim identical photos were different occasions and straight faced lied about the donations on national TV. She has absolutely zero compunction about lying. I also don't believe that with all the medical professionals at hand, she wouldn't have ANY evidence of physical injuries. It's just not believable.

The way she's going after him now absolutely tallies with how Dr Curry described her - and is at odds with Amber's self-proclaimed "I just want to move on but he won't leave me alone" narrative. Apparently she's now "challenged" him to do his own interview - the woman won't leave him alone. I genuinely believe she has serious mental health issues. And I don't say that lightly.

And people's political / philosophical views often blind them to the truth.

Look at people who were staunch conservatives in the US. They believed everything Trump said regardless of how outrageous or clearly dishonest it was.
For people who bought into #Believeallwomen, they are like Trump supporters. There is only one possible truth and that is what aligns with their belief system. There is no other alternative that they would even consider. Nothing Amber (or Trump) said or did would ever make them waver from their view. They had already committed to what and who was right based on their ideology - not based on fact or truth.

@tabulahrasa That's a fair point actually and I can see what you're saying about the difference.

"This never happens during sexual assault therefore she must be lying" is different from saying "she's a proven liar and therefore I'm not willing to take her words at face value with independent proof".

I'm very much in the latter camp.

Depp's team would have seen any evidence that Amber's team had tried to admit. Quite likely they didn't see any diffect connections in the notes between abuse and the notes / reason for a visit and therefore were comfortable with their position. Had what they said been introduced in court as factually untrue - then Amber's team could have been allowed to argue to reenter that evidence.

For example if the ENT notes speak to a deviated septum or other reason for the visit and there is no direct tie to being punched repeatedly in the face and the doctor isn't prepared to testify that what he saw on examination could be connected to abuse, then that evidence isn't going to be allowed in court. Just going to a doctor isn't evidence of anything if the visit, assessment, and treatment isn't connected to the trial claims.