Part 6 keeping it civil - the Depp Heard jury is out

[ENoeuf]

www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4556643-part-5-aibu-to-want-15-minutes-fame-depp-v-heard

hoping we can continue to discuss without unpleasantness - so far so good.

So you have now said in your own words he is guilty of abuse and her claims aren't false. Even if that was reactive abuse.

Imo it wasn't but we shall see what the jury say.

@mummyrocks1 "Reactive abuse is still abuse. I don't think it's probable that all the times she was abusive to him we are meant to believe he did not react and did not fight back. Knowing the man he is.
I generally agree with you about the injuries. I read a very interesting article which stated that with a headbutt you often see the injuries around the eyes rather than on the forehead or nose which is consistent with her injuries. He doesn't have to had done it hard for it to be none accidental. In the audiotape she says I can't believe you did that. It's reasonable to think that if he was having to defend himself she would expect some sort of fight back from him. It wouldn't be a surprise"

And I would say that if this was the case, which I am not convinced it is because I don't think there is enough evidence to suggest reactive abuse or any kind of physical abuse on JDs part, then she has behaved appallingly by publicly portraying him as a powerful, extremely violent abuser and her as an innocent, defenceless victim. Reactive abuse might still be abuse, but it certainly isn't the abuse she described and it would have occurred as a direct result of her abusiveness and unwillingness to allow him to escape it.

Reactive abuse might still be abuse, but it certainly isn't the abuse she described and it would have occurred as a direct result of her abusiveness and unwillingness to allow him to escape it.

Nice attitude. So it's her fault. I hope you never pass that message on to your own female members of family and friends. Horrible.

Reactive abuse doesn't actually mean both are perps.

Reactive abuse is now being used instead of mutually abusive in some arenas. Some DA experts are starting to make noise that mutually abusive relationships are either rare or do not actually exist. That it is in fact reactionary abuse

One of the most common tactics abusers use is to shift blame for the abuse onto the victim. The abuser will claim the victim is the abuser because of the reaction the victim has. The abuser may even attempt to convince the victim that there is nothing worth reacting over and that the victim is overreacting to the abuse. What the victim is actually experiencing is called reactive abuse.

Definition

Reactive abuse occurs when the victim reacts to the abuse they are experiencing. The victim may scream, toss out insults, or even lash out physically at the abuser. The abuser then retaliates by telling the victim that they are, in fact, the abuser.

Why abusers rely on it

Abusers rely on this “reactive abuse” because it is their “proof” that the victim is unstable and mentally ill. The abuser will hold these reactions against the victims indefinitely. It could be years later and the abuser will say, “Well, back in (whatever year), you had this reaction and acted all crazy. You’re the crazy one! You need help.”

Sometimes abusers use this reaction as an excuse to go to police or even file for protective orders of their own.

Source: breakthesilencedv.org/reactive-abuse-what-it-is-and-why-abusers-rely-on-it/?cn-reloaded=1

So because of this she can't be a victim of domestic abuse herself? Do you not think relationships can be mutually abusive? Are you either abusive and the other one innocent? I don't think it's a clear as that.

I don't believe relationships can be mutually abusive. Abuse is used as a way to assert control over a partner. Of course it's possible to snap and react back on occasion when goaded sufficiently, especially when you aren't allowed to remove yourself, but that doesn't change anything in the dynamic, the abuser always remains in control. Abuse is not a mutual thing.

Mummy it's far more nuanced than that and you're trying to get me to say black or white. I don't believe reactive abusive should be classed anywhere near as serious as the perpetrator but that's not the law in this case. So I guess, yes I'm calling him an abuser (but I don't think that) and I think it's unfair if a perpetrator wins a case because of a reaction to that abuse due to a technicality of law which is outdated.

Sozzler has just put it better than me

Now obviously your interpretation relies on who you believe to be the abuser.

If it's AH then JD is the reactionary
If it's JD then AH is the reactionary.

🤷🏻‍♀️

I'll leave that to each of you to form an opinion. It's not my place to try and correct anyone's opinion.

Objection
That!

He sent that text (global humiliation) before the op ed and in august 2"16 apparently.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/johnny-depp-amber-heard-texts-b2087471.html?amp

I do believe he got Waldman to start a negative campaign and I do think the op Ed was in response to the negativity she got from previous actions (including the TRO) otherwise why write about him being protected?

@mummyrocks1 here is a description of what reactive abuse is and how it happens. It is the first article I came across but there are plenty of others out there that describe it in more detail. It is a response to being abused by someone, it does mean you are an abuser. www.familyproof.com/what-is-reactive-abuse/

*doesn't

But perhaps in one argument she is verbally and physically abusive and he doesn't hit back. In another she is verbally and physically abusive and he does hit back.

In another she is verbally abusive and he gets physically abusive. Maybe reactive abuse doesn't happen in every argument so they are both verbally and physically abusive at any one time.

All I know is I am watching day 4 part one and there which I didn't realise I had previously missed and there is audiotape after audiotape of her talking about him hitting her which he doesn't deny or sound outraged one bit. Then he says it gets physical on both sides, if he doesn't leave it turns to a bloodbath. Then they are arguing and she is heard saying her off me and he walks out. Pretty damning I would say. Do you take a non denial as proof? They are all recordings where she is referring to him being physically abusive. One where you hear he is.

I don't understand why AHs lawyer doesn't question him more about them though and what is happening and why he doesn't contradict her claims.

Also- domestic abuse in this case isn't just physical. There are many types. I think the jury doesn't have to find him guilty of physical or sexual abuse to say he was abusive. He certainly was verbally abusive, emotionally abusive and controlling.

Can they not both be reactionary depending on the argument on any one day. It seemed it became normal on both sides to throw stuff or hurt each other or trash stuff as a response to an argument. This was on both sides not one abusive and the other reactionary every time.

I was abused by my partner for years, I reacted, I threw a fork at him and it caught his head . It was the last straw, I called the police and reported myself, they came round, saw the state of my face and arrested him.
I would never have dared to taunt him or answer back like AH did to JD , which imo, shows she wasn't that scared of him.

Vape. No I wouldn't either.

I've reacted too and got all the "you see? It's you. You need to calm down, you need sectioning". This was after constant gaslighting, stonewalling, blowing hot and cold, mood swings, anger and tormenting etc and that was just the emotional stuff.

Felt like sectioning myself some days. And I did drink, a lot.

What I find baffling about these threads (actually there are a few things) is that there are indeed male victims in the public eye, such as Brendan Fraser, and Kevin Spacey's victims. But you hear very little about them in comparison.

This outpouring of support for Johnny seems to me to be largely about hating Amber Heard, and playing into the idea of women as scheming liars, even to the point of thinking this was something she concocted over years. Because there is evidence from texts, personal journal entries and her therapist seeing bruises etc, that goes back to way before she left and filed for the TRO. I've never seen an outpouring quite like this against a male abuser. Serial predators like Jimmy Saville (posthumously), Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein, yes, but nothing directly comparable to this.

And all this for a man whose own words show a seam of vitriolic hatred against women (at least, any woman not pandering to him), not confined to Amber Heard and not even towards the end of their relationship but from back when, in his own words things, were perfect between them. I absolutely support male victims, but looking at the way he's behaved during the trial, the age and power difference between them, and all the other circumstantial evidence like Stephen Deuter's texts and one of his oldest friends saying he has rage and jealousy issues, the horrific photos of what he did in Australia which frankly if I woke up to I would feel like I was in The Shining, etc.

Is it because you think Amber cut his finger off? Because the evidence for that is far weaker than for many of her claims. Is it the audio? The one in which she admits hitting him but also apologises for calling the police because she was afraid he would kill her by accident?

Sorry, I didn't finish a sentence. I struggle to see Depp as a victim, except perhaps of predatory lawyers and his addictions. In terms of the relationship with Amber, not only is there plenty of evidence of his abusiveness but it's also plainly obvious he was the one with the power.

If she was physically assaulting him and he reacted then yes, it’s her fault.

In terms of the relationship with Amber, not only is there plenty of evidence of his abusiveness but it's also plainly obvious he was the one with the power.

But there isn’t plenty of evidence and it isn’t plainly obvious. If it was this thread wouldn’t be on Part 6.

I think they are both abusive. Imo , as a victim of abuse, I would never have spoken to my abuser the way she spoke to him. Some of his texts were absolutely vile and did show an apparent hatred of women.
My abuser was also lovely to others, a real gentleman to women he wasn't in a relationship with and a mate to all men . Very different person behind closed doors.

mobile.twitter.com/amberheardit/status/1155747336745869313

I will leave this here for those who don't believe AH. Can anyone shed light on why his PA wasn't on the witness list.

No because that is not the definition of reactionary abuse.

So one person in the relationship is always the abuser and the victim reacts to this abuse. It's due to the power imbalance and power ratios in the relationship.

Now you could say it's a mutually abusive relationship, but these are rare, and often found more in same sex couples than heterosexual relationships statistically, even though the margin in increase is small.

The power could go either way in AH and JD's relationship on paper.

Young female, financially less powerful and overall weaker dating a older male, who was financially powerful and had solid support networks and staff. Physically stronger and male.

So you'd say he had the power in this relationship if this was your opinion.

Or

Disabled older man, blind in one eye, with historic substance misuse issues increasing vulnerability and failing financial stability dates woman with increasing lucrative finances, living with groups of peers and friends in his house and increasing social status.

I mean the above reads as a man who's been cuckooed, but again it depends on your opinion and viewpoint of the power dynamics of the relationship.

I mean, if you discount all the evidence she has provided, then sure.

But that can be said on both sides @mummyrocks1 why didnt Amber follow the court order for her photographs and devices. Both of them objected to witnesses. Amber team objected to Kimberly Collins a forensic pathologist who was to testify on the nature of the abuse alleged and the nature of the bruises photograph.

Disabled older man, blind in one eye

Making it sound like she picked him up in a nursing home doesn't quite fit the facts here though does it. 🤣🤣🤣