I'm also struggling to understand how people are failing to understand the verdict.
The verdict was not that both were abused or that JD both abused and did not abuse AH - it's nowhere near that. The jury were asked to find against JD if they believe there was ever just one instance of abuse on his part, they found there wasn't. They also found that not only were ALL of her statements false, she said them with malice, meaning she made them up to hurt him.
AH winning a part of her counter claim does not mean they also think JD abused her. She Los two counts of her counter claim that were very general statements. She won the one that was very specific. The wording of the statement that was defamatory was that on a specific night, she roughed herself up, called the police who didn't make a report, so called her friends and publicist to come and smash up the penthouse, then called the police again to have JD arrested. The jury found there was not enough evidence to prove that is exactly what happened on that night and she wanted him arrested that night.
I'm baffled as to how people are unable to grasp that, it's very simple.
As for those talking about the UK trial. You'll note AH talking in the US trial about this piece of evidence and that piece of evidence that she provided that wasn't shown. The reason it wasn't shown is the judge would not allow it onto evidence. The reason why it wasn't allowed into evidence was there were inconsistencies and issues with the evidence that called into question whether it was authentic. This was never questioned in the UK trial, they just blindly accepted everything.
It's also worth remembering that the vast lies that AH told in this trial only came out in this trial. The UK judge did not know that she repeatedly perjured herself when they made the decision. I think it's also worth remembering that only JD agreed to give his phone over to be analysed for the trials - AH refused both times. So yes, we do see the truly awful messages JD sent his friends about AH but whatever was on her phone, she risked being sanctioned rather than handing it over. To me that is quite telling.
The jury were unanimous in their verdict, they did not believe a single word of what she said. I personally don't blame them having seen her on the stand, her 'performance' was shocking.
It saddens me that so-called feminists are using this case to bash out their views about women and poor AH being punished for being a DV victim. It doesn't make you a feminist to blindly believe all women, especially those whose evidence was found to be fabricated and who has considerable evidence pointing towards them as an abuser.
AH will become untouchable in Hollywood now and rightly so. I would however say she clearly has mental health issues that run quite deep and they manifest in a way that makes her violent, calculating, manipulative and damaging. I've said it before and I will say it again, she does not come across as a person who should have the sole care of a baby. I hope there is an intervention there and it's not a cash of she's rich and famous so the US equivalent of SS turn a blind eye.