Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: chat

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Amber Heard&Johnny Depp verdict

1000 replies

Miscfeminista · 31/05/2022 14:28

Continuation of previous thread

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4552076-amber-heardjohnny-depp-trial?page=36&reply=117586863

Speculations on verdict, news related to it, insights into specifics of legal matters, opinions and impressions…let’s keep it going and see how verdict finds us >>>>>>>>>>

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
Autumndays123 · 02/06/2022 15:17

Serious question, if Elaine and co continue saying JD is an abuser and committed depraved sexual offences etc surely at some point they risk also being taken to court?

Houseoffools · 02/06/2022 15:27

MichaelMumsnet · 02/06/2022 14:52

Hi all. We've received a fair number of reports about this thread so we're going to go through it and remove anything that breaks the Talk guidelines. We'll also be removing any personal attacks and anything that looks like it's derailing the thread into a spat between members. Please bear with us, and please do report any further concerns.

What is actually an interesting topic is bring detailed by one aggressive poster, as last night’s thread was. It’s so off-putting. No wonder this board gets a bad rap.

TiddyTidTwo · 02/06/2022 15:28

@Sandra1984

I thought the verdict was correct, however, she's not really helping AH at all here.

Implying the judge was unfair, the jury were influenced (even though she brought in a SM analyst who declared what the main hashtags were) and continuing to make the allegations against JD, I'm sitting here thinking what on earth Elaine.

Also AH needs help right now, not continual perpetuating on MSM. And I'm definitely no fan of hers.

Go through the proper channels to appeal or release an official statement. (Which someone else has checked first 😂)

TiddyTidTwo · 02/06/2022 15:31

@Autumndays123

Seems risky to me. Apparently in the state of Illinois her interview goes against the rules of professional conduct, but obviously not VA.

LetitiaLeghorn · 02/06/2022 15:57

Sandra1984 · 02/06/2022 15:17

So Amber is a lying con-artist and Elaine Bredehof (a well known attorney with an impeccable professional record) someone who "needs to keep her mouth shut"? It's actually her job to keep her mouth open. Sounds like find powerful women with opinions a tad annoying? Internalized misoginy?

My comment about Elaine Bredehof was just a bit tongue in cheek for a Jubilee Thursday. She's obviously a good lawyer or AH wouldn't be paying $6m for her. But I think her main area of expertise is negotiating settlements before they go to trial. Certainly Rottenborn seemed to me to a better interrogator. And I also noted that the people jury watching and feeding back reactions said the jury often turned off when she stood up. So keeping her mouth closed might have played better with the jury. Whereas they were more engaged with Rottenborn. And in a case where time is important, she was quite poor at it. Again a better judgement if how much to stay and when to stop talking might have been better for her client. I also think saying that the UK and,US trials,we're equivalent when Depp didn't even sue Heard shows her to be ill-informed or deceptive. So either way better not to openher mouth over it. But I'm sure normally she's great.

Where have I said AH is a con artist? I believe they really loved each other. I think she was entitled to a divorce settlement. She got, one way or another, $14m. I do think she decided to use her settlement to improve her standing which might improve her acting offers. Nothing wrong with that. Charity wins, she wins. Great. But I am a very honest person. And if someone says they have given all their settlement to charity, then I believe the money has actually left their account and is in the account of the charity. Not that she might pay it in 10 years. So that's a lie. And then she goes on to compound the lie to say that both charities had agreed to a 10yr payment plan. Candie Goldbronn disagrees. So two lies. And a sort of conning of the public, yes.

If thinking that as woman I have an equal right to anyone on the planet to criticise or call out lies made by any woman on the planet makes me a misogynist, then I'm happy to be called it. Because to just accept that 50% of people on the planet are beyond criticism and I have no right to speak out is not the fight that I've fought my entire life for. It's the exact opposite.

Miscfeminista · 02/06/2022 16:10

TiddyTidTwo · 02/06/2022 14:04

Sorry, forgot link:

www.today.com/today/amp/rcna31583

What is unprofessional there? It's a good interview, Elaine explains they couldn't include that in UK trial they found more than 10 instances where"he commited DV"and some other texts that were quite damning for him

OP posts:
ObjectionHearsay · 02/06/2022 16:11

Autumndays123 · 02/06/2022 15:17

Serious question, if Elaine and co continue saying JD is an abuser and committed depraved sexual offences etc surely at some point they risk also being taken to court?

I mean they could be done for slander I suppose. But given the general public consensus now that JD has been victorious, you'd have a hard pressed time believing the slanderous remark would have a wide impact. Also Elaine is AH paid for advocate and legal team, they will always say "she was right, she was telling the truth" they can't exactly say "yeah she's a liar, but I got paid well" 😳

Autumndays123 · 02/06/2022 16:16

ObjectionHearsay · 02/06/2022 16:11

I mean they could be done for slander I suppose. But given the general public consensus now that JD has been victorious, you'd have a hard pressed time believing the slanderous remark would have a wide impact. Also Elaine is AH paid for advocate and legal team, they will always say "she was right, she was telling the truth" they can't exactly say "yeah she's a liar, but I got paid well" 😳

I suppose, but AHs whole case was that JDs lawyer had said things about her that weren't true 🤷🏼‍♀️

Autumndays123 · 02/06/2022 16:19

Miscfeminista · 02/06/2022 16:10

What is unprofessional there? It's a good interview, Elaine explains they couldn't include that in UK trial they found more than 10 instances where"he commited DV"and some other texts that were quite damning for him

If the evidence wasn't accepted it's because there's something wrong with it, most likely that it wasn't genuine. The judge wouldn't just deny evidence being admitted with zero grounds.

I think Elaine is playing a dangerous game here. She's making out the jury and to some extent, the judge are incompetent. If these mounds of evidence were not allowed in because there were issues with them and she's hiding that, I think that's a very dangerous game indeed.

TiddyTidTwo · 02/06/2022 16:20

Misc

Making out the judge was unfair and the jury were "confused".

Also she clearly let SM opinion into the courtroom with her own witness. Perhaps she thought that would garner sympathy with the jury but she cannot go in TV and pretend the jury were influenced by outside SM.

I just don't get why they continue to believe people can't see this?

She hasn't done AH any favours at all and I not pro AH at all.

ObjectionHearsay · 02/06/2022 16:27

Autumndays123 · 02/06/2022 16:16

I suppose, but AHs whole case was that JDs lawyer had said things about her that weren't true 🤷🏼‍♀️

Welcome to law 101.

My client right your client wrong.

Other side

"No! Your client wrong my client right"

Let the fight begin 🤣

Everyone's always a liar in a court of law in someone's opinion. That's why juries have so many people on them, so a overall majority can be reached on who believes the best liar.

Truth and court are some sort of oxymoron for the legal professionals in there.

LetitiaLeghorn · 02/06/2022 16:29

It's a good interview, Elaine explains they couldn't include that in UK trial they found more than 10 instances where "he commited DV" and some other texts that were quite* damning for him

I don't think it was unprofessional. It's quite common in the US. But her argument was wrong. Trials are different in different countries. What can be said in court in one country, what evidence is allowed or excluded, who hears it etc, is different to others. What evidence is allowed in a UK, may be different in the US. In this instance it wasn't even the same defendants. However, they were allowed to present the exact same case with fresh eyes, fresh, up to date evidence, so how were they disadvantaged?

As for texts, the judge allowed loads in. Some were excluded for legal reasons. It went the other way as well. Bottom line, Bredehof lost. This was a big case that would have raised her profile and she lost. And garnered bad publicity on the way. Of course she's going to say the case wasn't fair because thats their appeal case and she wants to win. She won one issue. I don't hear her saying that was unfair on Johnny Depp.

NoKids2 · 02/06/2022 16:30

puffalo · 01/06/2022 23:03

JD’s reputation isn’t done for- he will be back on top in no time. He’s a talented actor who has grown a huge fanbase, especially with a younger audience, over the past few weeks. Actors with worse scandals have made comebacks- he definitely will, too.

However, there is a point I would like to make, regarding these JD/AH threads (some of which have been deleted). There are so many comments where posters say something along the lines of “they’re both as bad as each other, both of them are awful”, etc.

It seems to me that these posters are almost annoyed he “won” the lawsuit? I can’t imagine for a second if it was the other way round anyone would be saying that. The threads would be full of support for her, saying how she was a victim of such an awful man. No one would blame her for taking drugs, drinking excessively, etc.

Yes, he clearly suffers from substance abuse. Most actors/celebrities do- it kind of goes with the territory of being famous. The relationship was evidently toxic.

However, he absolutely did the right thing by bringing this to court. She obliterated his career with lies after lies after lies. He absolutely needed to clear his name for the sake of himself and his family.

She is an absolutely awful, evil woman. She used him for monetary gain and trailed his name through the mud when it didn’t work out for her. She lied repeatedly and made an absolutely mockery of DV victims across the globe. She promised she’d donate money to two different charities then kept it all for herself. She acted (badly) throughout the entire trial. There wasn’t a single point in the trial where I felt empathy or sympathy for her. No one came and supported her, other than her sister who didn’t even look like she wanted to be there.

None of this would have happened if they’d just divorced amicably and they both moved on. She kept going back for more and more- she wanted more fame, more sympathy, more money. She got greedy and it bit her on the arse.

The verdict today was fair. Her career being over is absolutely deserved.

I am a woman and I will always support women, but I refuse to support anyone who thinks it’s appropriate to lie about DV for their own gain. It’s absolutely disgusting. It doesn’t matter if you’re a woman or not.

I also don’t feel bad for her lawyers, either. They knew who they were taking on. Amber went through enough teams beforehand; there were plenty of red flags. They came hugely unprepared, and made mistakes I wouldn’t expect to see from someone who had just passed their bar exams. Objecting to your own question? Saying “I’m trying… I’m trying” in the middle of questioning? Constantly objecting like a broken record with absolutely no basis? Wasting hours and hours of time on absolute nonsense (ie asking a man about every single makeup product a woman might be wearing on her face?)

JD’s team were incredible. Very talented, professional but still managed to come across as likeable to the general public. Camille, Ben and the team did an astounding job and I hope this win brings them further success for the future. It was a masterclass.

I agree Puffalo although I think she has tried to gain from his fame more than his money. I think she has done damage to DV victims and women in general.

LetitiaLeghorn · 02/06/2022 16:34

Also she clearly let SM opinion into the courtroom with her own witness.

I can't tell you how many lawyers were cringing online listening to Dennison repeating over and over #justice for johnny. #amberturd. How Heards legal team got into that mess is a mystery.

TiddyTidTwo · 02/06/2022 16:38

@LetitiaLeghorn

I know! They let the words "Amber heard is a liar" "justice for Johnny Depp" and "Amber turd" repeatedly, into the courtroom to help her case? 🤔

I'm no lawyer, but....crazy

Miscfeminista · 02/06/2022 16:43

“I got drunk and destroyed my hotel room. There are hookers and animals in here.” In the text message, Depp also states that he killed an animal “for sustenance” and there was blood in the hotel room."

People, people...I agree supporting surrogacy in any way can never be feminist but if we want to pick between bad and worse, Depp won. If only all the prostituted women who he abused during years came forward and people wanted to listen. But again, they are"worthless women"for similar set of reasons given to discredit AH so no one would listen, no one cares. I guess someone will say that above text was"also a joke a la Monty". If people applied same judgment they applied to AH he would not win. Similarly the evidence of their wrong doings in court was highly dependant on people's views that are reflected in public by people overlooking and justifying Depps behaviour.

I think Elaine had a good point saying that there was no way jury was not influenced by media and Depps fans. They had a long break and Depps fans were out there every day they'd come out. They would have to be put on an isolated island with no signal and be blindoflded and wear noise cancellation headphones every day when coming out. It was a valid point

OP posts:
Aspiringmatriarch · 02/06/2022 16:52

I'm really upset about this case. I've never been a fan of Amber Heard or seen any of her films but I think she showed a huge amount of courage and stoicism throughout the court proceedings and I admire her for that. She put forward the motion to protect the jury's identities, turned up for the verdict while Depp disappeared off to England to indulge in his rock star fantasies, having accomplished his stated mission of globally humiliating her. I've never seen so much vitriol online against one woman. It's deeply disturbing.

Evidence excluded from this trial included her therapy notes showing contemporaneous reports of Depp's violence, medical evidence about her broken nose, and Stephen Deuters' texts which are crystal clear on the fact that Depp kicked her on a plane ride.

There are also a number of instances when Depp has been shown to have lied.

In the UK, he initially claimed Stephen Deuters' texts were faked or doctored, then pivoted to say they were examples of 'placating' Amber. If you read them you can see that's simply not the case.

Much was made in this trial of the 'nonexistent' wall phone in Australia (the one Amber said Johnny smashed up). But in the UK trial he admitted he'd done just that.

He said he'd never headbutted her, and when confronted with audio proving he had, pivoted again and claimed it happened accidentally when he was restraining her.

The texts, the audio where he berates her for pretending to be 'authoritative' and calls her an over the hill stripper. Testimony from her friends where they were literally in tears over seeing the state Amber was in after he attacked her. Her makeup artist explaining how she covered up her injuries. The photos. She had so much evidence of his abuse. To be found guilty of defamation on all three counts is just a devastating blow for victims.

Just so sad.

TalkingCat · 02/06/2022 17:00

Aspiringmatriarch · 02/06/2022 16:52

I'm really upset about this case. I've never been a fan of Amber Heard or seen any of her films but I think she showed a huge amount of courage and stoicism throughout the court proceedings and I admire her for that. She put forward the motion to protect the jury's identities, turned up for the verdict while Depp disappeared off to England to indulge in his rock star fantasies, having accomplished his stated mission of globally humiliating her. I've never seen so much vitriol online against one woman. It's deeply disturbing.

Evidence excluded from this trial included her therapy notes showing contemporaneous reports of Depp's violence, medical evidence about her broken nose, and Stephen Deuters' texts which are crystal clear on the fact that Depp kicked her on a plane ride.

There are also a number of instances when Depp has been shown to have lied.

In the UK, he initially claimed Stephen Deuters' texts were faked or doctored, then pivoted to say they were examples of 'placating' Amber. If you read them you can see that's simply not the case.

Much was made in this trial of the 'nonexistent' wall phone in Australia (the one Amber said Johnny smashed up). But in the UK trial he admitted he'd done just that.

He said he'd never headbutted her, and when confronted with audio proving he had, pivoted again and claimed it happened accidentally when he was restraining her.

The texts, the audio where he berates her for pretending to be 'authoritative' and calls her an over the hill stripper. Testimony from her friends where they were literally in tears over seeing the state Amber was in after he attacked her. Her makeup artist explaining how she covered up her injuries. The photos. She had so much evidence of his abuse. To be found guilty of defamation on all three counts is just a devastating blow for victims.

Just so sad.

Very, very well said!

prh47bridge · 02/06/2022 17:02

Autumndays123 · 02/06/2022 15:17

Serious question, if Elaine and co continue saying JD is an abuser and committed depraved sexual offences etc surely at some point they risk also being taken to court?

I doubt it. As Depp is a public figure, he would have to prove that Brederhoft knew the allegations were false and was acting out of malice. He could take the approach Heard did with the count she won and sue Heard again on the basis that Brederhoft is acting as Heard's agent and saying what Heard tells her to say. However, I would be surprised if he goes down that route. I doubt he wants a repeat.

TiddyTidTwo · 02/06/2022 17:05

No he won't I don't think. He's made a statement and sounded final.

Im not even sure whether he will take her money either. He doesn't need it. We will see.

ObjectionHearsay · 02/06/2022 17:10

TiddyTidTwo · 02/06/2022 17:05

No he won't I don't think. He's made a statement and sounded final.

Im not even sure whether he will take her money either. He doesn't need it. We will see.

I have a feeling he will decline payment. He knows she can't pay it, and I don't think this was ever about money for him.

TimeTravelSickness · 02/06/2022 17:11

ObjectionHearsay · 02/06/2022 17:10

I have a feeling he will decline payment. He knows she can't pay it, and I don't think this was ever about money for him.

Then people will say what a lovely man he is..🤮

TalkingCat · 02/06/2022 17:21

He is extremely vindictive and spiteful, he means to ruin her. No way he won't take payment. He'd love nothing more than to bankrupt her.

TiddyTidTwo · 02/06/2022 17:23

Probably time and the opposite if he takes it.

I'm surprised at the amount I thought it would be minimal.

He could settle for a smaller amount or just gift it to one of the charities, not ACLU though!

TiddyTidTwo · 02/06/2022 17:23

Probably time and the opposite if he takes it.

I'm surprised at the amount I thought it would be minimal.

He could settle for a smaller amount or just gift it to one of the charities, not ACLU though!

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread