Amber Heard&Johnny Depp post verdict

[Miscfeminista]

Continuation of previous thread:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/feminism/4560089-amber-heardjohnny-depp-verdict?page=1

and the one before(during trial):

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

Also, refresher on DV:

www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/recognising-domestic-abuse/

Oh dear. But they did rely entirely on police data. How did the authors of the study analyse how accurate the police designations were? By evaluating what the police said was the basis of their decision…which is police data. Secondly, did the authors of the study analyse the reports designated by the police as true? No they did not. They relied entirely on those designations. All they did, was look at the ones designated false by the police, analyse why the police decided that, read the reports the police wrote and then applied their own additional (equally subjective) criteria which naturally further reduced the number designated as false. That’s what happens when you add criteria…you create new wickets the data has to pass through. But, at core, all they did was analyse and refine already existing police data. They did no follow up investigation, they gathered no new data.

You are all trying to read into black hole data. This back and forth that has taken up more than 24 hours on this thread is meaningless to every individual. Until you understand the black hole, nobody is right.

Snap! @TiddyTidTwo although I was thinking “black box” but black hole is near enough.

Discover. I really don't want to send you down my route. 😂🤣 I'm autistic) high functioning)

A trial is not complainant vs defendant, but the crown vs the defendant

i think a lot of people get confused with this, the ched evans case is an example…loads of people having a pop at her when it was all out of her hands

Crown? My arse

Chef Evans? He can kiss my arse too

When are we women going to pursue truth and fuck them?

Chef 🤣. Ffs mn

Oh ignore that comment on another thread

But fufus

She knew. She's sold Kate out. A real DV then sold Kate's stodgy as her own. It's in testimony. Amber heard is a nasty, horrible bitch as and as horrible bitch myself. Don't believe her bullshit

stodgy😂

Why can't we edit

Going forward

Do people think that many in the industry will still distance themselves from Johnny.
Regardless of the two different trials and the two different conclusions, will his peers and the industry feel he is too hot to handle.

Essentially not wanting to be involved either way.

Only a handful of people supported him two years ago maybe this will not change, finding the whole buisness distasteful.

I do wonder how his health has been over the past 6 years, he looked bloated and unwell during the trial, his drinking probably spiralling in those years. Amber in the those years looked stronger.

tiddy

im not talking about amber specifically….just the crown v defendant in general

Its a pain

ive just given up 😀

I turned off grammar and punctuation checks on my ipad cos i feel they are judgy

On

No those that stood by her were scared.

WB testified for him in the trial.

She's done. Buried

She relied on me too and men are shit. She forgot about real people. Thosei millions of real people who she took the piss and rode on our broken wings. And on that trial she still tried to gaslight us.

She's disgusting

@RufustheFloralmissingreindeer
😂

The CPS can’t go round prosecuting its principal witnesses just because the crown can’t prove its case. It doesn’t mean the report is false.

The chief rape defence is reasonable belief in consent - so even if the jury believes the complainant did not consent, if they also believe the defendant believed they had consent they have to find them not guilty.

The point at which the CPS prosecute people for making a false allegation is as a result of the police investigation not after the trial.

If cast iron evidence was sprung by the defence at trial that an allegation was intentionally false, might the CPS prosecute the complainant - it’s possible I guess but I don’t know if its ever happened.

The rules around disclosure are designed to prevent such a circumstance.

Defendants have the right to know the evidence in their favour as well as against them. And there is also a duty of disclosure of the defence, so that in certain circumstances defendants are required to notify the prosecution their defence to a charge in addition to notifying the prosecution of the witnesses they intend to rely on in the trial.

Investigating bodies have access to the material that demonstrates guilt, but may also have access to the material which demonstrates innocence.

Cases do collapse over disclosure failures - ie key pieces of evidence that undermine the entire case.

Technically yes they have that right, but if someone’s gotten a not guilty in a criminal trial, it does significantly affect the chances of winning against them in a similar civil trial regarding the same events. And to lose in civil court is prohibitively expensive, so not many will choose to launch a civil case after losing in criminal court.

it doesn’t really work like that - a civil case would be for damages. A criminal conviction could serve as evidence to prove that the attacker is responsible for your damages but you may still be able to win your civil case even if they had been found not guilty. In the cases of Stephen Coxen, Sean Diamond - damages were awarded in spite of their ‘not proven’ verdicts (they were in Scotland).

"Do people think that many in the industry will still distance themselves from Johnny."

Ok back to bejng sensible and not talking about black holes. No. They're all about the bottom line and money. He's now a gold mine. I hope he tells Disney and Warner brothers to fuck off.

Iris. Did Amber lie her arse off and throw other women under the bus,including Kate james who amber spat in her face?

Pick the woman you side with.

And come ketsbstop bullshitting now what woman on this thread has spat in another woman's face??

I'll wait

Still waiting.

Who on here thinks it's acceptable to spit in woman's face, especially when this woman you spat on was your employee and you were in power

I wonder what she did, spitting on someone sounds a little much just for asking for a pay rise.

So again we are left with he said, she said.

Were there any witnesses ?

But of course my opinion here means I'm drunk lol. Gaslighting and DARVO at its finest.I dont give a shit if any of you believe me. I'm proud after all I've been through, I have a voice. I've given you my story

On. We can believe Kate or Amber.

The entire point of that study was to analyse the high attrition rate of rapes reported to police compared to the number that result in prosecution and end in conviction.

So of course they were analysing police data as that was the aim of the research! But there were many other data sources if you read the report.

did the authors of the study analyse the reports designated by the police as true? No they did not.

Of course they did - they tracked cases in their progress through the CJS to identify “attrition points” at which complainants dropped out and why.

The “false allegations’ issue comes under “Attrition point 2” along with evidential issues:

Attrition point 1: reporting to the police
Attrition point 2: no evidence of assault and false allegations
Attrition point 3: insufficient evidence
Attrition point 4: early withdrawal by victim
Attrition point 5: CPS decision making
Attrition point 6: court and trial

Both women.

Amber a proven liar or Kate who has gained nothing.

As I'm drunk (I'm not but the Uber feminists on her said I am so must be true) all women are right, always..

Guess what, not one of you have even considered anything I've said about my life, or even attempted to empathise.

You're Angry, bitter and do you now what? You are NOT helping women and survivors move forward. You want to keep everyone back

Shame on you all