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 have tried to avoid the awful circus surrounding this and only watch the court coverage and ignore any stupid bloody punditry and commentary. And yes, I know, I'm a hypocrite, as I'm doing exactly that right now. I maybe think there should only be straight coverage on YT and other platforms, with commentary disallowed. Ditto my previous sentence re hypocrisy. But this is a civil case, and the internet is a beast that cannot be controlled, so that wasn't ever going to happen.

I'll be honest and say that I'm finding much of it rather dry and dull, but I appreciate the opportunity to see how the civil court process works, at least in this particular US state. Parts of it are also quite harrowing, and while my head, from what I've watched and listened to, is coming down on JD's side, I feel genuinely sorry for them both. I think they are both very messed up individuals and the product of their what seem to be dysfunctional childhoods.

I know some have called AH an imperfect victim, but equally I think JD isn't coming across particularly well either a lot of the time. Many would say he's a dislikeable, arrogant arsehole, he's an immature man toddler whose tantrums are/were only tolerated because of the money he brings into the industry, or at least did. I do think that his shortcomings and inability to process strong emotions in a mature way seem to be directly related to a childhood in which there seemed not to have been any model for that. Equally I can only imagine that something similar is going on with AH. I hope that both of them can eventually find peace away from all this.

I was going to say more on this post but I fear I'd be waffling even more than I already have, and besides some of it is feeling too close and similar to the other person I've mentioned in this thread, so I'll leave it here for now.

As Neumeister said, she had dozens of pictures that were very similar. While I think some of her injuries are staged / created., I think whenever she did have any kind of bruise or skin blemish - she would take dozens in pictures in various lights and then touch them up with filters, colours and tone to emphasize the redness or mark or bruise or whatever she wanted emphasized.

It is unfortunate that she didn't give them her phones - it would have made her look a lot more credible if the pictures could be confirmed as real on the dates she said.

Just on the devices issue, did the audio conversations that we have heard all come from Depp’s phone then? I was sure AH was the one doing the majority of the audio recordings on her phone? If they were from AH phone were they entered into evidence via a back up source (eg a PC)?

After six weeks of watching this I’m feeling a bit brain fatigued.

Yes, some were from Amber and she had them backup on her laptop / other devices. Since she didn't surrender her devices, the only recordings we have from Amber are the ones she chose to release. They were ones she thought made her look good.

I don't know why on earth she'd think any of those make her look good .

I think ambers audios originally had already been leaked in 2020

I though Amber did not give her phone in as evidence. This is very interesting in itself. If only they had the phone.

Yes, or even before that. Some of them came out in 2016 or 2017 I think, around the time of the divorce. She leaked them!

She has't accepted that she has ever done anything wrong. In her mind, those show that Johnny is an abuser and she is a victim.

She went to court to get a TRO, which is a temporary restraining order. She went there and had Rocky and Josh both write a statement to back up her claims, her 'bruise', obviously she had called the police so she could claim that as well, and her publicist was there with her as well.

JD had left on tour with the HV, so he wasn't even in the same country anymore. And she didn't alert his lawyers that she was going to do it.

Curiously, 3 days earlier, 24th May, she had sent a letter (extortion) via lawyers with her demands for the divorce settlement.
It stated if he hadn't agreed and signed it in 3 days, then she would be filling for a TRO. He didn't, so she did.

I'll attach a pic of the letter.

Let's then not forget that in July whilst the TRO was still in place. She went to meet him in San Francisco at a hotel. And tried to get him to go to bed with her.
He didn't.
What kind of person who needed a restraining order as they were so afraid for their life, would willingly go to meet that person, alone, in a hotel?
Someone who had nothing to worry about it.

In August 2016, the TRO was dismissed with prejudice, because she had no evidence. With prejudice means she cannot file for another one.

When I first watched the TRO courthouse clip, it was glaringly obvious that she was trying to make sure her face could be seen by the paps. And this week, Morgan Tremaine (ex TMZ) confirmed that they were promised a shot of the 'bruise'.
You can see it here at about 7 seconds in.

Yes, my exdil was the same. It's impossible to deal with someone like that

Even Julian Ackert only mentions her device as iPhone X which is after they split. Neumeister advice is if you are in a similar position of logging evidence you need to keep the device. Which if it is a property destruction relationship maybe difficult.

What kind of person who needed a restraining order as they were so afraid for their life, would willingly go to meet that person, alone, in a hotel?

Someone who had nothing to worry about it.

Not this again.

This is very, very common in abusive relationships - but you know that right? Takes out restraining order, goes to see him, or he breaks it and she lets him in, they get back together, split again, new restraining order, yadda yadda.

A keynote of abusive relationships is codependence and addiction.

In August 2016, the TRO was dismissed with prejudice, because she had no evidence. With prejudice means she cannot file for another one.

But from what I've just read that was withdrawn as part of the divorce settlement just before they were due to go to court and not a judgement on its merits by the courts. So the stuff about having no evidence isn't entirely accurate - she withdrew it.

Yes, some were from Amber and she had them backup on her laptop / other devices. Since she didn't surrender her devices, the only recordings we have from Amber are the ones she chose to release. They were ones she thought made her look good.

That was what I was trying to reconcile because what she has released doesn’t make her look good at all.

Whatever mental gymnastics I try and perform in my head, I am still a way off from hearing anything that speaks as a victim of DV, perfect or imperfect.

I think the audios are an interesting example of how she interprets herself, her actions, her minimising and then expects everyone to see/hear and interpret in the same way. Clearly if you don’t share her perspective and interpretation then you are either a liar or a fully paid up member of the ‘Johnny Depp show’.

@IrisVersicolor

You are correct. l’m pretty astounded. There is no perfect victim. I thought this was common knowledge.

Apparently not.

I am certain that he will not win this trial.

What I would call the ‘decent’ UK press coverage of this case - there are some excellent articles about how horrific the social media backlash has been, and how this is throwing a spotlight on deeply ingrained misogyny is in our society.

The ‘decent’ papers are not siding with JD.

When he loses, I think some very big questions need to be asked.

I'm Team JD. I have never believed AH.

After I escaped my ex, 20 years ago, I needed a restraining order. Well it was called an injunction (uk).
He bought a knife to my parents house where I was staying with my 2 year old daughter (he is the sperm donor). He shoved it through the brass letterbox and rattled it around. Then he went round the back and jumped over the 7ft fence. Said he was going to smash the window and kill me. (Police were on their way and they caught him).
The last words he said to me were he would kill me whether it took weeks or months or years. I never reported any of the things he did to me in the relationship to the police.
I have lived in fear of him coming to get me every single day.
Last year his partner (of 14 years) wanted to split from him and kicked him out. A few weeks later he brutally murdered her.
Stabbed and strangled. The whole thing was caught on bodycam and CCTV that she had installed a few days before.
He was sentenced in January to 29 years. Took the jury just 30 minutes of deliberation.
The only other thing on his criminal record was possession of an offensive weapon in 2002...

I feel the need to tell some of my story because I don't know how else to explain.
It is completely inconceivable in my mind, that she claimed to be 'in fear of her life' and then chose to break the restraining order and be alone with him.
I cannot even fathom in my head, how she could do that if she really was so scared he would kill her.

It's mindblowing to me.

Since when did 'believe the women' become 'believe the women despite vast amounts of evidence that demonstrate this specific woman tells lie after lie after lie'?

I agree that if someone, anyone, says they're a victim, we should believe them ... initially.

However I don't think it makes any sense that they get a free pass to be believed contrary to a ton of evidence!

As for the arguments about perfect/imperfect victims... I am disinclined to believe Heard is a victim of anything but her own mind and making. Therefore her perfection, or otherwise, is moot.

@WiddlinDiddlin

They have both potentially lied and exaggerated.

Potentially. The trial is not over.

The only think that has been determined so far is the UK trial where she was found correct on I think 12 out of 14 counts.

But people are dismissing that. Why?

Because they have read the judgement, at BAILII? It's certainly interesting.

Damn my work commitments meaning I've missed most of this thread 🤣

The only conclusion I can draw right now is I believe AH will loose her counter claim.

JD's claim I think it's a 50/50 with the jury. I don't think I can call it. Closing statements and the impact they have will be crucial as they always are.

Reading these threads and social media really make me think again about the wisdom of juries. We have such different opinions, we can be swayed to an opinion on complex matters we have no prior knowledge of (meta data, clinical diagnosis) by the experts selected and their presentation and we all bring our own experience.

All Juries are like this. I've sat in on criminal cases thinking ah shit not guilty coming in from the Jury, to then be amazed by a guilty verdict and vice versa.

I mean we could go German style and others where a jury is not used just a judge. JD could have gone for sole judgement on this, but his team have been clever and asked for trial by jury in the hope, peers can be swayed.

That's what I mean. I read SM and think how can you think that? And meet people who vote and have no clue who is in charge or what their policies are. And it makes me a little scared at my future potentially being in their hands

There have been quite a few studies about juries and if they are the correct way to conduct justice.

However, based on my own experience of jury service (criminal trial - fraud case), people take it very seriously.

I know it doesn't apply to civil cases, as in the UK as we only have judges decisions, but in the UK criminal jury service it is drummed into you from the moment you step in court how important it is to follow what the judge says.
In the case I sat, the judge was quite funny. But, I understood very clearly he expected high behaviour standards from us.