Part 5 AIBU to want 15 minutes fame? (depp v heard)

[ENoeuf]

www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4554620-part-4-aibu-to-keep-this-discussion-on-amber-and-jonny-going

continuing our unhealthy obsession 😂

I think if I'm honest, I have been a bit of a ghoul with this trial; I have followed it intensely and it has been on my mind to an unhealthy extent. However, I witnessed a great deal of DV throughout my childhood and I really don't think by being interested in this trial, it means that I am making light of DV or disrespecting victims.

I also feel that this trial is actually about more than DV. I think it has really important social implications; about men being victims; about the Metoo movement; about unconditionally believing the victim; about the UK Justice system if it turns out they got a lot wrong; about the lengths someone has to go to to have their side their story heard; about the mob mentality where it is now seen as acceptable to unleash an enormous amount of hate on a clearly flawed and damaged individual (modern day witch hunt); about celebrity lifestyles and about getting proper insight into the American legal system.

I have found it fascinating on a number of levels, but my background is sociology, so perhaps that is why. And I have also found it pretty heavy at times too, but I have enjoyed reading people's comments and insight on here. I think it is important to have forums where people can discuss these things and at the end of the day, if people find it distasteful and triggering, then they don't have to read it or become involved in the discussions.

And, if I am being completely honest, Its been a bit of a bit of a relief to have a distraction from war, the UKs utterly depressing political landscape, escalating poverty and Covid fallout.

"But who, and why?"

Obviously I'm only speculating here, and I haven't a scoobie who. Why? The potential reward of some or all of $100 million of JD's money, surely?

*about unconditionally believing the person who claims to be a victim, that should say

Mental health and fear of abandonment making her want to distroy him now he's left her . Seen it before .

If she'd have stuck to the truth I doubt any of this would have happened

Same sozzler

And having experienced DV myself, watching absolute gaslighting from AH and blatant lies and watching others incredulous that this happens, played out live with no editing has been sort of validating? Don't want to sound ghoulish but her downfall today on the stand was justice for me.

If JD wins, if there's money involved I'm hoping he will donate it to those two charities.

Just watched it. I thought Camille could have grilled her on much more though. Where were the questions about the other photos? I didn't get what she was trying to say with the wine bottle photos.

She could have asked what A thought of the testimony that JDs finger could not have been cut off from bashing a phone. About Whitney's testimony about the stairs incident and Jennifer's email.

So apparently the police, the Hicksville guy and the media guy are all lying. She's the only one not lying. How can she expect others to believe that?

From the Guardian:

Heard’s tormentors, many of them young women, do not seem to see themselves as anti-feminist. They believe women, of course – just not this one.
It is not they who are damaging #MeToo, it is Heard – by virtue of being an imperfect victim.
They perhaps forget that the project of #MeToo – the whole point – was to help imperfect victims. Those who were wearing the wrong thing, or were drunk, or were promiscuous, or loved their perpetrator, or had previously broken the law, or had lied before, or had a bad character, or seemed “a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty”, as David Brock once memorably described Anita Hill, who testified during Clarence Thomas’s US supreme court confirmation hearings in 1991. In fact, perfect victims have never needed feminism, partly because they barely exist.

I think Dr Curry has Amber down to a tee.

She's incapable of accepting any blame and is hell bent on revenge.

And today's acting was woeful!

The public reaction to the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard trial is what a #MeToo backlash looks like. Here are the facts of the case. Depp is suing Heard for defamation after she described herself in a 2018 article that didn’t mention him as a “public figure representing domestic abuse”. Depp says he is innocent of abuse and her statement amounts to lying. On his side are two facts that seem clear. Heard promised to donate her entire divorce settlement to charity, and didn’t. There is a recording in which she admits to hitting Depp.
On Heard’s side is the following evidence. Depp admits to head-butting his ex-wife (by accident), and there are texts from his assistant alleging he kicked Heard. There are texts from Depp to Paul Bettany saying he wanted to kill Heard and rape “her burnt corpse”. There is a recording of Depp shouting at Heard for speaking in an “authoritative” way to him. She was awarded a domestic violence restraining order in 2016. In 2018 Depp sued the Sun newspaper for libel after it called him “a wife beater”. He lost the case after the judge found 12 of 14 alleged incidents of Depp’s abuse of Heard to be true.

She didn't do a very good job with the wine bottle photos, it was a bit confusing. Amber's team had entered the same photo as evidence twice in the trial. Once to show evidence of Johnny wrecking the place in Dec and once to show evidence of Johnny wrecking the place in March - but it is the exact same picture. Amber then couldn't remember the picture and said if she could see the metadata she would know which one was the right date for that picture.

I believe Amber. I don't think she's perfect, of course not, but I'm in no doubt he did those things to her. I've gone from fairly indifferent to her as an individual to having a huge admiration for the strength she must have. So I think she'll be OK ultimately; I'm sure she'd appreciate all the faux concern though if she knew about it.

Some of the comments and the projection on here are so wide of the mark it's surreal and laughable. So I'll leave you to your alternate reality now.

Yes. What is her motive in fabricating this? I really believe there is at least some truth in what she’s saying.

It is only the likes of the gutter press, Daily Mail, social media where there is this, quite frankly, disgusting attack.

Any opinion piece you read in our ‘better’ newspapers are giving a more reasoned account on the impact this trial is having on DV and the metoo movement.

The sort of posts I’m seeing here are utterly shameful.

I think this is the worst/most shocking thread I’ve read on Mumsnet.

Misogyny is very much alive, well and kicking it would appear.

Except ony Amber supporters are talking about perfect and imperfect victim. Those that don't believe her dont care at all if she is imperfect in 100 different ways because she isn't the victim she claims to be. Nothing to do with imperfections - everything to do with lying and a complete lack of credibility.

And why would she have been awarded a TRO if there was nothing in it?

It actually isn't mysogyny to believe men can be victims. Trotting that out repeatedly that anyone who doesn't believe Amber or who thinks Johnny could be a victim is misogynistic is missing the mark entirely. There is a whole thread of people who are fervently supporting Amber. I find that thread pretty vile and shameful as you do this one. You will find more like minds there.

Im still with my thoughts on the last thread. I think he's a nasty drunk, has much deeper substance misuse issues than the party hard image and probably can't remember half of it. I doubt he has any clue whatsoever what happened to his finger. I think his team (including the Australia tapes) are keeping the gravy train going and had him as number one priority all the time.
I think she thought she could manage him, hated being left when he had other stuff going on, and probably has exaggerated some events. She also seems not to be over him which isn't uncommon I don't think. Knowing what he was like she should have not done the survivor stuff - leaving sleeping dogs lying would have been a better strategy.
I think he's done a dirty campaign against her and I hope she has friends and strength to get through the next few years.

It actually isn't mysogyny to believe men can be victims. Trotting that out repeatedly that anyone who doesn't believe Amber or who thinks Johnny could be a victim is misogynistic is missing the mark entirely.
👏

A temporary restraining order is based simply on the applicant's testimony and errs on the side of being issued - as it is temporary and in place for a few weeks until the actual court hearing and evidence. Judges are going to grant them, all they do is basically tell the alleged abuser to not contact the alleged victim for 21 days until the court hearing. Amber walked in with a 'bruise' and said she was being beat up. Of course the judge will issue one. In Amber's case the court hearing was delayed so the TRO was extended until she withdrew it with prejudice before the court date.

What is really unusual is to want to live in the same building as the person you are fiing against. For most women getting up the courage to file the TRO is hard and then they fear repercussions when their alleged abuser finds out. Separating and filing a TRO is a known time for increased violence. Most alleged victims hide or avoid their alleged abuser at the time.

Amber sent a letter telling Johnny she wanted 3 of the penthouses, a range rover, and $50K a month and if he didn't give her what she wanted, she would file the TRO. She wanted to keep living in his building but feared for her life enough to file a TRO? She only filed the TRO when he refused her demands. And called TMZ to take pictures and had no bruise the days before or after the TRO hearing. And did a photo shoot in the court house while getting the TRO.

@Midlifemusings I didn't even realise she did that - demanding the penthouses and money etc otherwise she would file for the TRO. So she's effectively blackmailed him (criminal offence) and then retaliated when she didn't get her own way. Good grief.

Yes, her lawyers sent it to Depp on May 24th and said he had until May 27th to sign it or else they would have no choice but to get a TRO and serve him. She later withdrew the request for 50K a month after the public got wind as she said they misunderstood why she needed that much money per month.

She said it was her reputation, what people were saying about her in that phone call. I think she's made that much worse for herself.

I think she might have been given incorrect info by her legal team. She said the lawyers were making her do it. As I said before one lie lead to another and another. If she'd left it and not written that article and tried to align herself with metoo then this wouldn't have happened.

I agree, yet again! with you.
I think he will.
I also think he will.

I would add to that - a repeated and proven pattern of smashing up places, destroying things, punching walls is classed domestic abuse in this country. On that behaviour alone the relationship would be defined as abusive, on that behaviour alone Heard would have been advised to leave. She is correct on that score.

Such an unintelligent response. That poster did not say men cannot be victims or that Amber is is completely reliable.

This is deeply misogynist thread, that poster is correct. But I’m aware that the posters involved are unaware of it, or quite how badly they come across.