Johnny Depp has played a blinder

[bennetmoore]

Johnny Depp’s legal team really have played an absolute blinder. He probably won’t win the case as defamation trials are nigh on impossible to win in the USA but he’s ruined her life and so that’s a win for him. I don’t think she’s necessarily an angel but a woman having a fairly brash/mouthy personality does not mean violent retaliation from the man is justified, nor does she deserve to be raped by the man. And no, I don’t believe Johnny in his 50s with his fame, money and power was frightened or intimidated by an early 20s Amber. He wanted a young, blonde accessory girlfriend, a ‘bangmaid’, so to speak. That’s why he describes her withholding drugs from him during active withdrawal (and it was said that this is the recommend way to help the addict during withdrawal) as ‘cruel’.

I know intelligent, switched on women who have completely fallen for the ‘Amber is Satan’ bandwagon. A relative’s wife who was a child protection social worker for decades in the USA, Kentucky, explicitly said on Facebook “I don’t believe her, she doesn’t act like the many abuse victims I’ve seen.” I was stunned. She also shared a post written by a man describing how Amber’s baby needs to be removed from her, Amber doesn’t deserve to be a mother, speculating that Amber probably physically abused her daughter etc. Also petitions to have Amber’s baby removed from her, which I think is absolutely vile. This is an actual living child, not a prop for entertainment.

I think Johnny knows exactly what he is doing. His laughing in court is vile, it reminds me of my abusive ex laughing and belittling me. Watching the laughing and his smug was actually very triggering for me, and the way Amber became anxious in response. He made a huge deal about being absolutely gutted about not getting to say a ‘proper’ goodbye to the Jack Sparrow character. Again, I’m not convinced. He’s trying to get people to see him as their favourite movie character in an attempt to get them to sympathise with him, I can’t believe people are falling for it. I personally won’t be having Pirates Of the Caribbean on in my home again.

I think she's a total liar and a rubbish one at that. She wouldn't win an Oscar for her courtroom performance's put it that way. As for her child if it's proven in court if this case was in the UK social services would be investigating her to make sure she is a fit mother. She's lieing for attention the same type of people also use they're children for attention. Even the makeup brand she says she used to cover her injuries called her out. That particular makeup was'nt even on the market until a few years after the relationship ended. The whole thing is f**d up.

Look up her interview on the late late show with James Corden. Hours after she says she was beaten by JD.

Oh but we do.
We understand abusive relationship too well.
Just because we don't agree with you,doesn't make our voices any less important.

She fought back and sometimes it appears, from edited recorded messages, that she goaded him but that doesn't make her an equal abuser, it makes her a victim who fought back.

She told her therapist that she had learned behaviour from her father and she would start fights with Depp and be the first one to hit him.

I understand that you are an abuse survivor but your situation is not necessarily hers. We just don't know. You believe, you think but you don't know.

He wasn't abusive because she wasn't bruised enough/it didn't leave marks? [Confused]

I'm not 'making assumptions about DV'. I've worked with DV groups. My knowledge is based on research, studies and RL experiences. My belief that you don't tell a victim of abuse that you disbelieve her is based on all of the above and common decency.

Your need to validate a violent male celebrity does not mean you also get to disbelieve victims of DV and redefine what DV means, how it affects people and the very obvious patterns in abuse.

Just returned to thread. I love this comment! That is totally how the UK Justice system works. Judges just decide who to take 'on their word' and a ruling follows from that. If Judges can't decide, maybe there is nothing to decide between the accused and defendant, maybe they both have equally nice haircuts or something, then Judges use the established legal practice of ' Eeny meeny miny mo' to come to a judgement on the case.

Some voices are much less important than others on this issue because they don't understand the law or abuse. And certain attitudes on this thread are not just less important, they are actively dangerous.

They are feeding into misunderstandings about DV. They are encouraging a belief that there is such a thing as a 'pure and perfect' victim who is worthy of respect and others can be belittled and pilloried. They are telling young girls that it's fine for your partner to send abhorrent, violent text messages about you to their friends. They are saying they will ignore the outcome of a court case (the UK case was very clear) to support women bashing in both the literal and figurative sense.

Because this isn't about AH - this is about sending a message to every abused women that even if she takes photos; calls the police; has witnesses and wins a court case - it still isn't enough. Even if a man admits in a court of law what he did - certain sections of society are willing to ignore all of that - if they can attack women. A man's earning potential is worth more than a woman's life.

And the irony is - if you are a woman - regardless of how much you throw other women under the bus - then this systemic misogyny will be used against you too and you won't get any brownie points for your loyalty to the cause of protecting violent men. It won't protect you. You're just as likely to be a victim. And it will be women like us - the ones you couldn't even give the basic respect to acknowledge their abuse or experience - who will stand beside you and give you advice and support. Always.

Violent male celebrity.

Says it all. Then others are accused of being biased.

I wager if I was a biologically female celebrity, I could make anything up and feminists would come running to defend me. I could bank on it, because I'm a woman, and therefore can never be accountable. If I am found accountable, it must be because the patriarchy hates me. And any women not supporting me are handmaidens by default or something.

Unless of course, I spout something that denies the reality of biology and am an ally to the trans Lobby, in which case, like Emma Watson I am fair game.

I wager if I was a biologically female celebrity, I could make anything up and feminists would come running to defend me. I could bank on it, because I'm a woman, and therefore can never be accountable. If I am found accountable, it must be because the patriarchy hates me. And any women not supporting me are handmaidens by default or something.
Find me one example of a female celebrity making something up and being defended by feminists.
I wager you can't

I tend to think BPR stems from complex PTSD anyway (typically from childhood).

*bpd

She was extremely abusive herself.

I agree that people want victims to look and act a certain sort of way, weak, fragile, defeated, sad. You just need to look at the comments people make after they have read Lolita - intelligent, educated people - will start to talk about how she seduced him, how she was a party and partner in it all. She was an eleven year old child, but because her adult abuser (so we only get the story from his perspective) did not write about her as weeping and crying and going ' no, no, get off me' people actually question if she was the victim or agent in this. Its shocking.

So yeah, not being the 'right' kind of victim (see ditto the girls abused in Rotherham and other places) leads to terrible consequences in how you are treated by society.

This isn't a feminist issue. It's an abusive man issue and abusive men affect millions of women not just those who are interested in feminism or declare themselves feminists

Astonishing comment. What do you think feminism is? You seem to be that something is only a feminist issue if it only and exclusively affects people who call themselves feminism or are interested in feminism. That is one of the maddest, most illogical things I have ever read. Remarkable.

Just claiming to understand abuse doesn’t make it true. Uninformed views are always less important in debate. To anyone who has worked in this area yours stand out as particularly ignorant, and simply promulgate damaging myths.

That’s not to say you have not experienced abuse yourself - I hope not. But if so I would have thought you would have respect for other survivors and the wisdom not to generalise from one experience.

All those saying AH is doing a disservice to women who have been abused ..,

That's only true if people make an active decision to make the call an accusation = false, coz y'know, Amber Heard.

If someone now decides based on one individual not to listen and investigate because of one person who may or may not be telling lies, actually that's on them.

Don't blame age old misogyny in this area on one woman.

There will literally be an internet party. And many posters here will be "It's very sad, but ...".

So depressing.

This is not proven, in fact when tested in a UK court found to be untrue.
I'm sick of the double standards, male celebrities are innocent until proven guilty (e.g Ched Evans, Paddy Jackson) even if they admit freely to doing awful stuff.

Any smear can be aimed at a woman, shown in court to be untrue and it's definitely a fact and what's more means she deserves what's coming.

The only way you can think what Depp has done is OK is if you believe some women bring it on themselves. Its disgustingly misogynistic.

This 🙌🏻

Isn't that the other way around? BPD is over-diagnosed and PTSD underdiagnosed?

Also OP if you are still reading (I won't tag you in case you have abandoned ship), I believe you. I have experience of it too x

I think the issue is the alleged attack and abuse she reports to have happened 24 hours prior to the interview would have left very visible injuries. None of which were present on the filming. She reports having bruises up her forearms, a split lip a possible broken nose.

That's not to say that he may or may not have abused her differently or anything like that, but in this instance her testimony isn't matching up with physical evidence.

The other issue is with other allegations there are clear candid paparazzi photos of her 24 hours later, and again there are no visible injuries of which she has reported sustaining.

Now again that's not to say she wasn't abused, but the extent to which she is reporting isn't adding up.

This then leads to many people dismissing her as untrustworthy in her testimony, or that she has exaggerated the claims of abuse.

To be honest. It's a circus that needs to be shit down in my opinion. They are both being dishonest about things and it's becoming a "who can act the best and who can spin a story the best" rather than what I believe to be the fact that it was truly toxic and there were instances of abuse and retaliatory violence by both parties on several occasions. It's closer to a chicken egg sorry than a one perpetrator one victim story.

But the OP-ed inferred that she was the "sole victim" we know now this to be untrue.

Quick note re "possible broken nose" - I have broken my nose. It bled immediately after I was hit, but the only sign afterwards was that both my eyes were black. Entirely possible to cover with makeup.

She may still be lying, I'm just pointing out that - like the rest of what she says - it is entirely plausible to me (having lived with an alcoholic who would purposely wind me up) that it could be the truth.

There is no way for me, or anyone else here, to know what the truth is. I find her side plausible, but I understand that others may have reacted to abuse differently. We are not all the same. It bothers me how many people discount her side - and yes, I fully admit I am taking it personally as it could easily be "my" story - as she is acting on the stand/reacting wrong/not the perfect victim/an unrealisable witness due to trauma/BPD/hysteria/whatever.

All these posts saying "she makes it worse for real victims" have no idea how much they are re-victimising those who were not 'perfect' victims. Not her -potentially lying on the stand - but them saying "this is not how a real victim acts"/"shes proven to have lied about <this>, why should we believe her about <that>". We already have years of being gaslit that we are the abusive party for reacting to physical violence, and now we are doubting ourselves again because we identify with her as the victim. Thanks for that 👍