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.

You CLEARLY haven't watched the trial!!! 🤦🏼‍♀️ 😆 He has TONNES of evidence of her admitting she is making this all up! She has ZERO evidence that he ever laid a finger on her. In the recordings you can hear her begging him not to walk out of the room! Every time she started he walked away and so she threw things at him - one thing was a broken bottle which sliced off his finger ffs! Yet idiots are saying things like "both as bad as each other" Absolute nonsense

It's difficult to believe anything she says when there are proven lies.

Your post is very one sided OP and I think that's unreasonable.

I was a battered wife - many many years ago. I thankfully got out, but abuse victims aren't gobby and fiesta, they are pushed into a fragile state. AH has never shown she is that at all - she shit in tge bed. An abused person would nit do tgat for fear of retribution. But JD showed tge behaviour of soneone abused many times.

He hasn't played a blinder, he has sought the truth. The relationship was messed up. But is JD an abuser? There's absolutely zero evidence of it. I mean zero - police, employees etc saw nothing. She faked bruises using make up. But he lost the top of his finger and had cigarettes put out on him....

If you're going to post, please look at the facts and don't focus on he said she said. The evidence is clearly there for all to see.

Also I doubt either of them are ruined. She's young some stupid film maker will want her.

JD will be back too. I hope first in line is JK Rowlings, she fought really hard for him but had to capitulate after the ridiculous Sun Court decision.

I agree OP, in short.

The comments I've read on these pages/threads about AH have been sickening, utterly sickening. She doesn't look or sound like a rape victim. She doesn't 'act' like an abused woman should. She's too confident. She's manipulating the court. She sounds scripted when giving evidence about being sexually assaulted. Oh yes. She looks ugly as well. Or too pretty. Apparently abused women should have the grace to behave according to the rulebook.

I've steered clear, mainly, as it's somewhat depressing to read page after page of venomous misogyny, profound ignorance about so many issues around the case, and posters just being so incredibly cruel about a complete stranger.

It's certainly brought out a vile streak in some people that's unpleasant to read/see.

Agree. I have no real interest in it and yet my social media is flooded with "suggested" videos of the pro-Johnny narrative. Horrible little memes that appear to be making light of it and "uh oh, this isn't how Amber wanted it to go." Sheer propaganda and totally disgusting.

I hate it.

They absolutely are as bad as each other.

This generation of youngsters appear to have no ability to see shades of grey. Somebody needs to be the villain to them and somebody needs to be the hero. And then they reiterate the trope through memes, all just jumping on the bandwagon.

Awful.

Why are you trying to tell me what "the law" is? Btw it is different in every country.

Still waiting for those stats you promised.

@AndSoTonight That's the law of evidence in almost all developed countries. You cannot convict or claim someone has committed rape with no evidence. It's not a reasonable stance.

The U.K. courts clearly stated that he was absolutely an abuser.

Yes because they refused to look at ANY of his evidence!!! Also the judge was related to Dan Wooten who was the writer of the article in The Sun - what the UK court case was all about!!! 🤣👌🏻 It was the biggest conflict of interest I've ever seen

Why do so many posters claim that because they have been abused they know how all abuse survivors behave? You clearly don't.

Are you genuinely suggesting that no woman who was ever beaten by her partner had ever been feisty? That is absurd, and totally untrue.

havent paid a lot of attention to it really as it just seems like a huge circus now , and i wouldnt know who or what to believe from either of them , they both sound nuts . if she actually did shit on the bed though that is disgusting , i mean who in their right mind does that , if of course she really did

They did believe her

but we have innocent until proven guilty in the uk.

I noticed someone posted earlier about her bruises being makeup. Whilst that is a possibility, there's no concrete proof that was the case. The metadata for those photographs need to be analysed but that data is what she has allegedly withheld from the court despite a court order for her to turn the data over. It also raises the question of what or who caused the bruising.

What I'm finding is interesting is how JD has driven this legal action to dispel he is abusive (despite a UK judge deciding that he has been abusive to her) however the waters have been muddied to :
She may also been abusive therefore it almost doesn't matter if he was.

Definitely trial of AH by social media.

Depressing how it's playing out.

I have never claimed otherwise, I don't know why you're going off on this tangent.

I just asked what evidence would be expected (given that the poster, can't remember whether or not it was you) assumed that because they didn't believe AH's account of rape, it could not possibly be true. Evidence comes in many forms, not just a verbal account. And for the record, AH disclosed the abuse to her therapist, it is not as if she just came up with it last week for the trial. To suggest this was pre-planned for years is to be grasping at straws.

And voicing thoughts like that is absolutely normal behaviour. Not a red flag at all.

@tellmewhentheLangshiplandscoz

Spot on, this case is a MRA’s wet dream. It’s all about discrediting #metoo

@AndSoTonight disclosing it to the therapist at the time may help her case but at the same time, it is still just her word. Courts rely on a multitude of evidence, some of which includes the testimony's.

The thread is about a legal case which is why I am discussing law, and it has been suggested on here that we should believe all allegations a woman makes even without evidence to substantiate those claims.

False, on two counts. One is that she hasn't been diagnosed with a personality disorder. A forensic psychologist who's met her twice evaluated her and deduced that she had certain traits consistent with two personality disorders. Around the second of those, Narcissistic Personality Disorder, there is professional contestation as to whether it actually exists in the first place. Also, this evidence was challenged by a second forensic psychologist.

The 'domestic violence' past people refer to was an arrest with no follow-up conviction. According to the woman she's actually accused of assaulting, her ex-wife Tasya van Ree, Heard did not assault her, and she's actually published a column stating as such.

It's fine to take issue with some of Heard's behaviour - she's been definitively proven to have lied and that casts doubt on her credibility as a witness, none of which is good for the credibility of victims of domestic abuse in general. But that's not to let bias against her get in the way of the facts.

In fact, the only piece of evidence I've heard of a witness actually seeing one of these two people physically strike the other was that of Stephen Deuters, whose evidence (to the good fortune of Depp) has been struck. There may not be definitive evidence, other than direct witness testimony, of Heard's behaviour to Depp, but in the court of public opinion it's practically taken as a given that his account is the authoritative one here. There's also no firm evidence that she shit in his side of their bed, but again public opinion has cemented that as unassailable fact.

Yes, they're both awful. But the one pursuing the other in the courts, and hellbent on ruining them seemingly no matter what the cost to themselves, is him.

@MarieIVanArkleStinks Dr Curry made an official diagnoses of Borderline Personality Disorder and Histrionic Personality Disorder, both of which are Cluster B disorders.

And voicing thoughts like that is absolutely normal behaviour. Not a red flag at all.

Painfully some people have gone at pains to suggest it is. I don’t know a single person who would ‘joke’ in that manner but sure, it’s just words right?

Actually in one of the many other threads someone justified his words by saying she (the poster) finds dead baby jokes hilarious. I mean it’s really scraping the barrel of defence.

If anyone has discredited #metoo surely it is Amber?

Yes, but it’s being used in an argument about whether or not we should believe people who say they’ve been raped. Is the solution to false allegations (which are vanishingly rare) just not to believe anyone? How can we improve those very, very rare stats?

I used to work within the English Court system and was occasionally bemused about the decisions judges and magistrates made but I think on the whole, having seen the whole picture, they have a better grasp than me on what's going on. So I believed Judge Nichol. So it was interesting to see the US evidence being rolled out. We haven't heard all Amber's evidence really so it's difficult to judge but I'm wondering how the English judge could be so definite in his conclusions. There seems doubt to me over quite a few of her claims. And we definitely know she lied over some stuff, although I doubt even if the truth had been known, Depp would have won.

I've not heard of her being scared of passed out Depp, but I have seen her acting scared of Depp in court. If Amber Heard was so scared of him, why did she meet up with him in a San Francisco hotel bedroom months after their divorce had started and whilst her restraining order was still in place? Would you have met your abusive alcoholic ex in a hotel bedroom?

I agree that he laughs at inappropriate moments. But that's his baseline behaviour and how he is in all his interviews. It's probably nerves. I do the same and I remember a therapist I saw telling me off for doing it because it annoyed her. She said it sounded like I wasn't taking the situation seriously enough, which was not true at all. But I took on board what she'd said and I try to control that now. Perhaps his PR team should have told him the same?

Around the second of those, Narcissistic Personality Disorder, there is professional contestation as to whether it actually exists in the first place.

That's half the threads on MN fucked, then.