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.

It was a reply to
Pumperthepumper · 10/05/2022 17:46
Unsure33
I also know a girl who accused her stepfather of abusing her and it was lies from start to finish. Luckily the police were able to check the facts and quite quickly dismiss the case . She has continued to lie about everything and has lost her children through it .
but as a woman of course I believe that women should be taken seriously and every case should be investigated , that does not mean that every person should be “ believed “ without exception . That would be ridiculous .
So would it have been better to not believe her from the beginning?

Arieldysney · 10/05/2022 19:35
Police do not ‘believe’ or ‘not believe’ just because someone said so, they need to investigate

IIRC, a police force got into trouble for saying they would "believe" rape reports, as it's important to remain impartial.

I don't know about this. Didn't everyone in the Met get exonerated over Carl Beech, including SI McDonald who called his claims credible and true. In fact, despite breaking the law on certain occasions, didn't most of them get promoted?

So then how is that story relevant when we’re talking about believing women? Should she have been disbelieved?

But there is shitloads of evidence that he is mad as fuck, yet she is called the crazy one and not him. There's no real explanation for that other than blatant misogyny.

But you don't know she is lying. As you say, Depp lost his court case. The courts thought there was good evidence that she was telling the truth.

I'm not sure why everyone is arguing over her mental health diagnosis.

You can have both PTSD and BPD at the same time.

You can also have bi-polar and PTSD at the same time.

I work with offenders, many have both of these as co-dependent MH issues, diagnosed by a independent forensic psychologist. She doesn't need one or the other...she could simply have both 🤷🏻‍♀️

But you don't know she is lying. As you say, Depp lost his court case. The courts thought there was good evidence that she was telling the truth.

But we know now that she did lie about stuff so the judge just taking her at her word might have been naive.

It's funny - when I originally read about the allegations I was on her side. However, when I watched her testify and watched her deposition I got an overwhelming sense that she is consistently lying - I don't know which bits are the lies and which bits are truthful, which means that ultimately I've only got what people other than JD and AH have said about their relationship and what they actually saw. JD, in this regard, has the benefit of a series of long-term friendships, working relationships (e.g. with body guards), and ex-lovers who have testified on his behalf claiming that he is not abusive. We have yet to hear from all of AH's witnesses but so far it's not sounding great.

The thing is, if AH was raped by a bottle - that in itself was sufficient evidence of abuse. Didn't need to be embellished or elaborated on, but you listen to her testimony and something feels off about it.

In fact, no other event even needed to occur for everyone to side with her and see him as a rapist. But there's just so much extraneous detail to her whole testimony, much of which appears to be completely irrelevant or doesn't seem to add up, and you start to wonder - why? Why include bits that JD's lawyers can use to completely kill your credibility with when you've got a completely damning story that is fully sufficient in itself?

I'm sure that he was thoroughly unpleasant to live with (what addict would be pleasant to live with?). I'm sure that he did throw objects at walls, destroy furniture, and act in an intimidating way at times - there are videos, pictures, and audio that prove this. I wouldn't be surprised if he had hit her or restrained her at times - but we don't know whether this purely retaliatory or not. Personally, I don't believe he raped her - you'd remember if a bottle had broken or not, you'd remember if it had liquid inside, you'd probably get a medical exam.

I think the person who has damaged AH's case the most is herself - if she appeared more honest during her testimony then she would have had people on her side.

That remains to be seen.

I simply don't understand why people are SO certain of the version of events they've convinced themselves are the truth, when the case is still midway through and just under half one side's evidence is yet to be heard. There's damning evidence on both sides of this. I'd go as far as to suggest that anyone who thinks one single party is going to emerge from this shitshow smelling like a rose is delusional.

This shouldn't be about #MeToo, although it's difficult to divorce what we are hearing from that context. It's about Depp, and whether she defamed him by framing herself in the media as a victim of domestic abuse. The broader issues are muddying the waters, as we might expect the legal team to do. It's possible - if not probable - that both are abusers and victims at the same time, but the issue is, 'was she a victim?' If so, he loses. Deuter's evidence is very damning for him should this be permissible. The best job his legal team have done so far is to cast doubt on her credibility as a witness.

I'd be interested to know how, in his advanced state of addiction and in the state frequently captured on camera in which he's inebriated and barely coherent, he can know with this degree of certainty that he absolutely never, on not one occasion, physically abused his wife.

It was very interesting how hard his team worked to shut Heard down when she claimed the reason she recorded some of that footage was to show him the way he behaved in that state, and that he typically later wouldn't remember.

They stamped on that one good and quick as 'speculation'. His team are good.

I think the person who has damaged AH's case the most is herself - if she appeared more honest during her testimony then she would have had people on her side.

I think that's unlikely. When the findings came back from The Sun case, she was still the wicked witch.

Didn't Amber say to him 'nobody will believe you you're a man'? regarding him being an abuser.

Yes it was recorded.

There’s a voice message of her admitting she hit him and to stop crying like a baby and another one taunting him daring him to tell someone of the abuse as no one will ever believe him - how anyone can defend her is sickening when they can hear her admitting what she did.

In a completely different case there was a voice recording of a footballer being abusive to his gf - no one questioned it or wondered what she did to deserve it and victim blamed because they could hear it with their own ears.

So how are people hearing her say those things and then acting like it’s JD who has played a blinder.

Except in the UK she had to prove what she said was true. It wouldn’t just be that the judge would take her word, there had to be evidence of this.

Wasn't her deposition already out at that point?

Because JD's appointed professional said she has BPD, HPD and not PTSD
And AH's appointed professional says she has PTSD and not BPD and HPD

Yes, but she could just have both 🤷🏻‍♀️. BPD in women is severely under diagnosed and PTSD overly diagnosed when the issue is in fact BPD.

But like I said both can be present it's not a one or other.

I just don't see it as the smoking gun everyone else thinks it. Because it's really not.

It's possible - if not probable - that both are abusers and victims at the same time, but the issue is, 'was she a victim?'

When all this started I was very much along the line that he had abused her therefore she was a victim. But actually, as the US trial has gone on, I think its wrong to call her a victim. Did he abuse her physically and emotionally? I believe he did. Did she abuse him physically and emotionally. I believe she did.

Their relationship was a fucked up, dysfunctional, mutually abusive mess. It seems to me a travesty that either of them come out of it being able to call the other a spouse-beater or that they were the victim of domestic abuse. As if either of them have the high ground! They both created this vortex. Everyone now knows what they need to know. I wish the jury coukd dismiss them both as a pair of untrustworthy, self-obsessed PITAs. If ever anything illustrated the wisdom of 'Just say No', it's these two.

I actually think JD lost the last case because it is incredibly rare for a man to admit to being a victim of DV, especially a famous one and female-to-male violence does carry less weight in the eyes of many.

There is that bias and looking at Amber it seems hard to believe from the face of it.

As I said, I too jumped on the 'She's a woman and is much less strong than he is, and he's JD older and more worldly wise and she's risking her career so she should be believed' bandwagon.

If she was a man, she'd be getting lambasted and cancelled.

She's being treated equally.

I grew up with domestic violence. She's played the victim when she is the perpetrator and what gets me is she knows damn well women and Feminists in particular will come running to defend her no matter what, because just like Jussie Smollett, playing a victim is some sort of activist rallying cry to the gullible that automatically brings you kudos in these circles and can be used as leverage to bolster your career and social impact.

There are differences, but it's backfired with JS and now it's backfired with AH.

@DysonSphere do you honestly think Depp and Heard are getting equal treatment on social media just now?

It’s the sexual nature of her allegations towards him that I find the most disturbing - if he really did/said what he is being accused of he is one sick individual

Yes, but neither professional who has actually assessed her agree she has both, in fact they both strenuously disagree she does🤷🏻‍♀️

I don't think it's a smoking gun, it's just become another way people indicate who they believe.

Arnica cream is used for bruising. Not sure whether it helps to bring it out but that's what it's used for

She's getting the treatment that would be given to a male actor of equal standing for similar appalling behaviour.

Have you seen what has happened to Will Smith (although yes different circumstances, everyone could see Will Smith and it happened on camera).

But he's not walking about with his career intact is he? He's also been dragged mercilessly on SM and by many comedians and other actors too.

So, no?

@Testingprof
Except in the UK she had to prove what she said was true. It wouldn’t just be that the judge would take her word, there had to be evidence of this.

Amber Heard claimed that she had given the full amount of $7m to charity when in fact she'd given $0.55m. And most of that had been given directly from Depp. Heard requested that, instead of Depp donating the money on her behalf, the money was to be paid to her and she would donate it (reasonable). However she kept the money and didn't donate it (unreasonable). The judge was clearly influenced by her claim. He said...

In his ruling in November, Mr Justice Nicol said of Heard: "Her donation of the $7m to charity is hardly the act one would expect of a golddigger."

The judge took her word and did not ask for evidence.

Interestingly, Amber Heard actually got over $14m in consideration in the divorce.