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.

@mummyrocks1

I would have to go back and relisten to his testimony. That isn't my recollection that he says drugs and alcohol don't impact him and he has never trashed anything. It is a few weeks ago now so I would have to revisit that to be sure of what he says.

There is video footage of Amber and Johnny before the Boston flight - or purported to be from before that flight. It is just a short clip but shows them together with luggage outside before getting on the plane. I believe she had actually testified he was already on the plane when she got there but the footage shows them together outside the plane. He appears (as far as one can tell in a video) to be fine - steady on his feet, talking, picking things up and putting them down. From the video - he doesn't 'appear' obviously intoxicated. It didn't have sound so it is observational only.

I don't really see any signs of controlling either. According to her own expert, her career flourished during her time with Johnny, there are ad campaigns and photo shoots with her wearing next to nothing, lots of pics from red carpets with her in dresses with low cuts front and back - both with and without Johnny. She came and went as she pleased and did as she pleased, she took trips with friends and went many places without him. Half the time they either weren't even in the same house or country due to work or his music. I really see no evidence he controlled her friends or her career or what she wore at all. She felt comfortable briging other men home overnight on at least two occasions.

To me she has no credibility. She has lied repeatedly about everything. We saw with the police officer from the domestic violence arrest, she didn't hesitate to lie and throw her under the bus, and call her homophobic and sexist just to twist the narrative to try and cover what she did and make herself look good. She gave him an ultimatum to give her money and houses or she would get a TRO and the TRO seems completely set up given the sequence of events before and after it. I just don't believe her. She testified with great emotion about how awful and horrifying it was to walk out of the courthouse to paparazzi and we know they were actually there because she called them. She testified she covered her bruises by putting on foundation, then concealer, then using a bruise kit on top - no person who has covered bruises for 5 years would say this is how to cover a bruise. Her own make-up artist described a completely different process when she said she covered a bruise. So many examples of this kind of thing.

Probably punched himself ican 🙄

Also under cross she switches from past to present tense. She's making it up as she goes along.

Kate moss did not do that.

Believing all AH says must be very tiring, to do these mental gymnastics so you can arrive back to a certain narrative.

This case is this case and should be based on its own it's own merits

The way I understood the jury instructions, was out of the 3 statement AH wrote, thet could find AH defamed JD on 1 or 2 or 3, or all or none.

But I may have misunderstood.

So, AH 3 statements are:
a) I spoke up against sexual violence and faced our cultures wrath
b) Then 2 years ago, I became a public figure representing domestic abuse and I felt the full force of our cultures wrath
c) I had the rare vantage point if seeing, in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse

For example, the jury could find 1 statement is defamatory and he would "win" on that part. And they could find the other 2 statements are not defamatory and he "loses" on those 2.

So if they find at least 1 statement defamatory, they then calculate the cost of damage.

"She is as full of shit as a Christmas Goose!"
<tm JCD>

Yes @minou123 I think that's the case from watching the judge explain it.

It's the same the other way. And I think someone said earlier that a denial doesn't make it true. She references beatings and hitting and he doesn't deny it either.

That's why they started the recordings because their recollection of events and conversations were different. They say this multiple this times in the audios. I am not saying you are a lier but I don't remember it like that. You said x no I didn't. Listen back to the recording then etc.

Anyway, we are going around in circles. We aren't going to agree and I feel you are now taking my words out of context.

So let's agree to disagree as the whole thing is a circus of who said and did what. Lots of comments said about JD or AH can be said about the other one. They have both lied, both tried to mags themselves out as something on the stand, both tried to deny or change evidence. It's a complicated case. I would not like to be in the jury but the ruling will be interesting.

Will we get to read the reasoning behind the decision like we did with the judges decision in the Uk trial?

Oh mummy absolutely not. This thread is for debate and I think we are opposite sides but not extremely so! I see where your thinking is as I'm sure you can see where mine is.

AH triggers me, he doesn't. AH triggers my DH that much so, he won't engage on it all. That's based on my/our life experience but I'm only one person at the end of the day

Thank you @ENoeuf . I wasn't sure if I understood it correctly.

So for me this is my conclusion (for short hand I'll use "JD Win" and "JD Lose")

a) I spoke up against sexual violence and faced our cultures wrath
JD Win
I think based on the balance of evidence, I believe AH did not tell the truth about sexual violence. The photos and medical evidence does not correlate with what she said happened.

If I was on the jury, I believe this was said in malice and would award JD $7million.

b) Then 2 years ago, I became a public figure representing domestic abuse and I felt the full force of our cultures wrath
JD Lose
I'll start off by saying I believe AH was also a domestic abuser. However this is about JD as an abuser.
In my view, verbal and emotional abuse falls under DA and I think based on text and voice recordings he did also abuse her. Maybe not as bad as she did, but he did do it.

I've disregarded the video of him banging cabinets as this, in my view, is not domestic abuse.

c) I had the rare vantage point if seeing, in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse
JD loses?
I really don't know about this one. I'm struggling.

On one hand "Hollywood" generally does protect men, but I'm not sure if in JD case they did.

Minou

I agree but c) he wins

Totally agree with this.

What do you think about her charge against him?

@minou123 I agree with what you think the verdict will be. I'm also unsure about the third statement.

Trouble with this whole case is JD did this to get his side out and he did. I think he's content whatever the result.

My issue is how the result affects everything looking forward.

Is AH wins then imo, this enables her further. That does not help her or those around her as I think she will continue on this crusade of hers. If she loses, then she's going to be angry and that also does not help her of those around her.

JD will be ok whatever the result. She needs medical intervention and proper help. She is very ill imo. Winning will not help her one bit.

@mummyrocks1
What do you think about her charge against him?

Her counterclaim falls down, on the balance of evidence, Adam Walderman was an "agent" of JD. And said those hoax statements on JD instructions.

For me, AH didn't provide enough evidence the Waldermans statements was on behalf of JD. AH team should have had more evidence to prove this.

So it falls on the 1st hurdle, for me

If anyone feels AH did prove Walderman was acting on AH behalf, I'm happy to post the 3 statements and we can go through them

What I mean is wrapping this up in a defamation case, muddies the waters as it's really not about that end of the day but I guess that's the only route he had left. It's worked for JD.

I don't think the second one is as clear cut as it isn't just about an incidence of abuse but that she became a public figure representing domestic abuse. I am also not sure she felt the full force of wrath before Dec 2018. She was still being invited to speak at Metoo anniversaries and at women's marches and she was being published in magazines and online stories etc.

I also don't think it was clear on #3 that any insitutions protected him.

The recordings of AH taunting JD sway me more to his side , there is no way in a million years i would have dared speak to my abuser like that . Also with regard to JD saying he cut his own finger off , I made up many stories of how I sustained injuries all blaming myself for being clumsy, walking into doors , knives slipping when I was chopping vegetables etc.

Also Jennifer Howell. She doesn't give a shite about either JD or AH. She cares about Whitney and her alone. One of the strongest witnesses if you look into her deposition and evidence

Update for anyone not watching.

The jury have come back with a question.
In regards to the line
I spoke up against sexual violence and faced our cultures wrath

They were asking do they take the Op ed as a whole or is this the statement that need to find if it was defamatory.
The judge has replied back that this line is the statement they need to decide upon.

The judge thinks they got confused because the statement was the title of the Op Ed on the online version.

Is anything on live at the min?

@RosieRooster83
Is anything on live at the min?

No, they just came back for that question.
They'll only go live if the jury asks another question or they have a verdict.

I swear I'm not a sad individual who is watching this live 😁 I just get updates on my phone

@mimou123 I agree with you, with regards to both cases.

JD will win on statement 1. The others are a no for me.

AH will loose her counterclaim. Because it was never proved that waldman a)had an effect on her career or that he was working for a agent on behalf of JD.

"The recordings of AH taunting JD sway me more to his side"

I agree. It also seems so strange to me that one of the biggest stars in HW put up with being called "a ball-less sack of shit", "a washed up old has-been", and "a fat old man" for so long. Such horrible, hurtful insults. He says he's done in a text, but still actually stays with her for more than a year. Why?

When I see people defending AH on here now, I just roll my eyes and wonder how many tinfoil hats they own. To hold so much hate or contempt for the opposite sex that you can't accept reality even when presented with irrefutable evidence... That's literally insane.

I wonder if or what effect the result in favour or against AH will have on the metoo movement. People are saying it's going to set it back hugely. I really worry about this and I really hope not. The tides were only just beginning to turn where victims were able to stand up against rich and powerful men and have a voice.

Hmm there seems two part to these statements - I spoke up / I faced consequences. So both have to be true? On the sexual violence the op ed references college but the 'wrath' is because people though it was JD? I'm confusing myself!