Amber Heard&Johnny Depp verdict

[Miscfeminista]

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 >>>>>>>>>>

The claim that she lied about Kate Moss - Depp actually accurately deduced that Heard had turned it in her head into something it wasn’t. I think she did believe it, probably based on her own experience of him

I think that claim in particular is so ridiculous because she was referring to a rumour she heard, not saying it happened or it didn't.

Aspiringmatriarch · Today 12:24

"I know this isn't aimed at me particularly but are you saying you don't believe those are bots - dozens of accounts with identical comments?"

I don't care. There's no evidence that they have anything to do with Johnny and make no difference to the outcome of the case even if they did.

"You say the UK judge rejected her rape claim - this is false FYI. It was confidential and accepted by the judge."

Not my understanding at all. He discounted two incidents, one of which was the rape claim

"How about we stop making blanket statements about victim behaviour?"

Not blanket statements but realistic observations of human behaviour

"Or should we do the same for Depp? Someone who is being abused doesn't call their abuser a lesbian camp counsellor, doesn't yell "Don't fucking pretend to be authoritative with me", etc."

I think it highly likely that someone being physically abused would yell obscenities and insults at their abuser.

""Doesn't say they can't promise not to start physical fights" - Honestly I don't think any of us knows what we might do or say after years of abuse. Some victims do provoke or instigate a fight to get it 'over with'."

Then if they start a physical fight they are no longer merely a victim but an active participant in abuse. The one who starts a physical fight is an abuser even if they themselves have been abused.

"All of which is to say that you can be scared AND be angry and completely sick of someone's bullshit."

You can, but that doesn't really fit the case here. She doesn't appear at all scared in any of the tapes.

"A broken nose and two black eyes are impossible to hide with makeup." I'm sorry but this is factually inaccurate. Makeup can cover up tattoos and it can certainly cover bruises. Not all broken noses actually look that dramatic either."

We are in the realm of fantasy here. If you are beaten with the severity she claims you cannot possibly cover that up with makeup. There are cuts, swellings etc. Just look at Rihanna's face after her beating.

"WRT your claims about Jennifer Howell and about the past arrest. Obviously we know Tasya Van Ree has made a statement about that, so why should we assume there was abuse, any more than we disbelieve Kate Moss about the stairs? I have no idea how reliable Jennifer Howell is, but why are we assuming she's telling the truth about a situation she was one step removed from, but assuming all Amber's witnesses are liars (which they would have to be)?"

In a case like this we are dealing with a weight of evidence and probabilities. Howell might be unreliable, The Hicksville man might be. TMZ guy might be. The police officers might be. The butler, body guards and island manager might be. The neighbour might be. Amber's own witnesses who contradicted her might be, just to name a few. Alternatively, a simpler explanation is that Amber is lying. We know for certain she lied about the charity donations and pretty much had to be the one who leaked the video and TRO visit to TMZ.

"Whitney has said the reality show scene was nonsense and they were trying to create some drama and a storyline. If she does ever come out and say Amber abused her, I would absolutely support that but otherwise it's just malicious rumour IMO."

I'm sure Whitney has said that but Howell wasn't the only one who heard her say Amber hits her and Amber's ex-assistant wasn't alone in testifying that Amber treated Whitney terribly.

"And why doesn't Depp’s violence against other men concern you even if you discredit his possible (probable) violence against Amber Heard? He's in court in a few weeks for an assault."

As far as I'm aware his violence amounts to attacking an intrusive press photographer. There is no record of him ever hitting a woman. The current assault case against him is not strong. He was apparently intervening on behalf of a homeless black woman against his accuser and a witness has said he didn't hit him at all. We will have to see what happens in court. It still doesn't make him a wife beater or a rapist.

I am absolutely stunned that even with everything her witnesses said in court they found in Depps favour. And that's not just needing her to lie. Either they believed his agent, his manager,his ex girlfriend, his friend and some of her friends lied when they said he was jealous, controlling, frequently drunk/drugged and had a temper in those circumstances. Or they believed that because she was a liar, it didn't matter he was abusive and angry.

Totally agree.

The so-called rogue juror claimed that Heard’s less than forthright comments on the donation is what destroyed her credibility - but apparently no amount of ex friends, agents, managers undermined Depp’s.

He said everything she said “came off like bullshit” - but the same is true for Depp.

If he is for real - his comments on Whitney were revealing - he felt she was supporting Heard “out of obligation and manipulation” and said she looked like “she didn’t want to be there”. As if anyone wants to be at a defamation trial that is being globally televised.

I hope that he was not for real and he was just some lying random.

There is no doubt that even a sense that you are embellishing / exaggerating / lying about bad things that someone did to you will damage your credibility with a jury or most other audiences - especially, I think, when it comes to domestic or sexual abuse.

But not if you’re Johnny Depp.

What are you referring to wrt ‘trolls’?

Could you quote what you mean and debate that

AdamRyan · Today 13:21

"So, not sure what else she could do. She showed he was abusive IMO. Yet because he showed she was a liar, he won."

Yes, it is a terrible idea to lie in court if you want to win a case. If you do your evidence, even if it is substantially true, becomes hard to believe

"It's awful really because if you are abused all your abuser has to do is undermine your credibility and then you clearly don't deserve justice."

In a case of he said/she said both sides try to undermine the credibility of the other. In this case we were dealing with mutual claims of abuse with the credible evidence leaning towards his claim.

"And as life is all perspectives and interpretation its pretty easy to suggest someone isn't credible."

It is and that is why you shouldn't add fuel to the fire by obviously lying.

"That's why this trial has upset me. Not because I'm a huge AH fan or a man hater. Because I think its awful that someone can go on this kind of trial for implying her abusive ex husband was abusive."

Well, honestly, what do you expect? You can't make poorly veiled accusations about someone in a national newspaper and not expect them to fight back, especially if what being accused isn't true or you have failed to admit your own wrongdoing in the relationship. You need to be very sure you can back up your claims with strong evidence if you accuse people of career wrecking and reputation destroying accusations.

"Oh and also. In my eyes the fact she was granted a restraining order in the first place is evidence she was abused. And the fact the UK judge found in favour of the sun."

Absolutely not. A restraining order is not evidence of anything. It's granted based on one side's accusations only. She also had no need of one as he wasn't in the country for a month at least. It was all for show and conveniently leaked to TMZ.

@MarshaBradyo it was the poster above my previous response. S/he clearly didn't read any of the previous posts that aren't even that far back on this thread. It's already been chewed so many times that I lost will to repeat myself and for my own satisfaction call them what they are at this point

"I hope that he was not for real and he was just some lying random"

Yep and called out and deleted account.

Miscfeminista · Today 15:51

"He absolutley is a wife beater and a rapist. These trolls are so annoying, "if you repeat it three times it becomes truth"doesn't work here"

And yet he won an extremely hard to win defamation case and your golden haired heroine lost because she couldn't stop lying and admitted on tape to being violent herself.

I would give your advice back to you. Endless asserting that someone is a wife beater and a rapist doesn't make them so. It just makes you look like a fanatic.

At this point the main troll on here seems to be you. You insult and belittle anyone who dares disagree with you, be they Kate Moss or other feminists who aren't as convinced of Amber's victim status as you are yourself.

In a case like this we are dealing with a weight of evidence and probabilities. Howell might be unreliable, The Hicksville man might be. TMZ guy might be. The police officers might be. The butler, body guards and island manager might be. The neighbour might be. Amber's own witnesses who contradicted her might be, just to name a few. Alternatively, a simpler explanation is that Amber is lying. We know for certain she lied about the charity donations and pretty much had to be the one who leaked the video and TRO visit to TMZ.

And what of Barkin, Depp’s ex manager, agent, friend. Is your position that they are all barefaced liars?

Raquel Pennington’s testimony:

“I was worried for her physical safety. I was worried that when he turned he might accidentally do something that was worse than he ever intended.

[Depp] could be very unpredictable and [Ms Heard] didn’t have a lot of self-preservation.

I was scared for Amber. I was sad for her and I was also sad for Johnny as he was my friend too,”

And I really wanted them to be able to get it together.”

And Ms Pennington’s reference to “the monster” – a name Depp gave himself for what he could sometimes turn into. She said she heard Mr Depp directly refer to himself as “the monster” on several occasions:

“We called it the monster... me, Johnny, Amber, anyone else in the inner corcle that was privy to the private things that would happen,” she said, adding that it was Mr Depp who “named it that”.

Note Depp lied that he had never called himself the monster. Apparently that doesn’t impact his credibility.

Pennington is the one who saw the “disarray” in the trailer at Hicksville - but she is more likely to be lying than the Hicksville man?

Good.

However, my point stands that no amount of credible witnesses who nothing to gain from testifying against Depp appeared to undermine his credibility.

@ChuckBerrysBoots @IrisVersicolor I am not saying the alleged donation did swing the judgement, although it was the judge's entire justification for rejecting the theory that Heard had constructed a hoax (para 577). I am merely pointing out that it is one of a number of pieces of evidence that were not available to the judge in the UK and we can never know how they would have affected his verdict. He may still have found for NGN, but equally he may have decided Heard was an unreliable witness and found for Depp. Given that the US case had pretty much all the evidence available in the UK case plus some evidence that was not available in the UK case, I would not hold the UK judgement up as proof that the US judgement is wrong.

Heard admitting to hitting Depp doesn't mean she also wasn't hit or abused. DV cases are often notoriously complicated. In many DV cases, the relationship is so dysfunctional that both hit, scream and throw things at each other. Just because the wife fights back and 'gives as good as she gets' doesn't mean she isn't abused. There is often abuse on BOTH sides. I find it strange that people think that Heard is the only abuser and Depp is innocent. Abused women fight and hit back. It doesn't negate the fact that they are abused.

As for the donation, I will never get the bizarre obsession with this. So she changed her mind. So what? A woman changed her mind about how she would spend her own personal money. Not sure that that proves she 'lied' or proves anything else other than......... she changed her mind. Big fucking deal? Who cares?

Indeed it’s the additional evidence against Depp in the US case that shows the U.K. outcome was the right one.

I don’t think the additional evidence purported to undermine Heard actually makes any difference.

IrisVersicolor · Today 16:06

"And what of Barkin, Depp’s ex manager, agent, friend. Is your position that they are all barefaced liars?"

Barkin said he was jealous and once throw a bottle but not at her. That's pretty weak stuff to work with. His agent said he was getting more unreliable, not that he beat and raped women. His manager is accused of defrauding him (which may or may not be true) and might well have a grudge and again didn't provide evidence he was violent. What friend do you mean? No witness saw him do anything serious to Amber or anyone else for that matter.

"And Ms Pennington’s reference to “the monster” – a name Depp gave himself for what he could sometimes turn into. She said she heard Mr Depp directly refer to himself as “the monster” on several occasions"

Not very convincing. He could be referring to his addictions as he claimed.

"Note Depp lied that he had never called himself the monster. Apparently that doesn’t impact his credibility."

Again, possibly very weak stuff to work with. He said he used the word monster to describe his addictions not that be turned into Hulk when he was on them. Even if he called himself a monster it doesn't mean he meant he was a wife beater and rapist. He could just mean he was bad tempered and insulting.

"Pennington is the one who saw the “disarray” in the trailer at Hicksville - but she is more likely to be lying than the Hicksville man?"

Not necessarily but you have to choose who to believe. Because Amber lied so much the jury leaned in his favour. I see no reason why he would lie. The claim he is a rabid fanboy seems not particularly credible.

Again, we have two sets of witnesses and we have to decide who is more believable. Had Amber not lied so much the case might have gone her way. However, the number of neutral witnesses was more in his favour and her lies are unavoidable.

Heard admitting to hitting Depp doesn't mean she also wasn't hit or abused. DV cases are often notoriously complicated. In many DV cases, the relationship is so dysfunctional that both hit, scream and throw things at each other. Just because the wife fights back and 'gives as good as she gets' doesn't mean she isn't abused. There is often abuse on BOTH sides. I find it strange that people think that Heard is the only abuser and Depp is innocent. Abused women fight and hit back. It doesn't negate the fact that they are abused.

I know I’ve said the same many times on here. It falls on deaf ears.

Alb0 · Today 16:25

"As for the donation, I will never get the bizarre obsession with this. So she changed her mind. So what? A woman changed her mind about how she would spend her own personal money. Not sure that that proves she 'lied' or proves anything else other than......... she changed her mind. Big fucking deal? Who cares?"

She's free to change her mind and not donate. What she isn't free to do is go on chat shows and into the dock and claim she has given the money to charity. That is a barefaced lie. Someone who lies in court is not a reliable witness. That's why people care. It's definitely a reason why she lost and why hardly anyone believes anything she says.

Abused women fight and hit back. It doesn't negate the fact that they are abused.

I know I’ve said the same many times on here. It falls on deaf ears.
^^^
But that fact 'they were both abusive' doesn't make Johnny depp a wife beater or a rapist.
It really doesn't.

That there was 'abuse on both sides' is the point for many, though. Some have argued that mutual abuse is impossible but I can't imagine that that is a widely held theory.

An acceptance that it was a mutually abusive relationship by both sides could have settled the whole mess years ago.

He admitted he headbutted her in the recordings.
His text messages are violent and misogynistic.
He has a history of smashing things about.

On any AIBU or Relationships thread, if a poster said this about their DP/DH, they'd be told to LTB because he is dangerous and abusive and it 99% leads to physical abuse.

Based on the evidence there is little doubt that he was an abuser and a wife beater. Very, very little doubt at all. I don't doubt he raped her either. He presents as the classic Domestic Violence abuser.

Sorry @carolineshaw I find your post weak and unconvincing. It’s just a limp apologia for Depp.

You avoided the point about Pennington vs Hicksville man as to who was more likely be reliable, and fell back on ‘oh but Heard lied’ which wasn’t the question.

Barkin said a lot more than jealous. She said he was ‘jealous.. controlling.. drunk a lot of the time..always drinking or smoking a joint..”

No witness saw him do anything serious to Amber or anyone else for that matter.

So basically domestic or sexual assault does not exist without witnesses.