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/

www.thewrap.com/johnny-depp-scores-big-win-concert-brawl-lawsuit-51511/amp/

Seems she didn’t get anything. Maybe she got some shush money out of court after

Misc I don't get it. She's named now so the anonymous bit confuses me. Also it was his bodyguards and the Hollywood Palladium staff that did this. She should of pursued it.

"Seems she didn’t get anything. Maybe she got some shush money out of court after"

Maybe.

You are misreading it - that article states she was told she couldn’t remain anonymous and would have to re-file under her own name.

Which she apparently did, because there are other articles dating from 2014 saying he’d settled the case with her out of court.

She did. She refiled under her own name and JD settled eventually. As he does...

Here’s one article:

www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2533364/amp/Johnny-Depp-settles-lawsuit-woman-claims-security-tackled-ground-Iggy-Pop-concert.html

The judge refused her punitive damages so she settled out of court.

Much more lucrative.

"She did. She refiled under her own name and JD settled eventually. As he does..."

Well good.

He didn't do it though did he? But he has to take responsibility for his employees.

Oh Christ which is it?? 😂

As long as she got compensation. Horrible incident. Did he sack the bodyguards?

@TiddyTidTwo out of curiosity, can you honestly say ,hand on heart, 100% that JD never hit or assaulted AH?

@ldontWanna

I've never ever said he hasn't. I think he's a reactive abuser, with her as the instigator and aggressor.

Well settling out of court sounded to me like court wouldn’t give her money or order Depp to pay but he gave her some out of court for her to not go talk to media because I don’t see any articles of her talking about it which is odd since there must have been people wanting to interview her I bet

“In the UK trial, Mr Stephens said the judge recognised that strategy, and dismissed a lot of the evidence that did not directly address whether Mr Depp committed assault or not.

"Lawyers and judges tend not to fall for it, but it's very, very effective against juries," he said. Men are more likely to believe Darvo arguments, but female jurors are also susceptible.”

"People have a paradigm in their mind of how a victim of abuse might be like and how they might behave, and of course we all know that's often false."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61673676

In my dim and distant past I've also reacted. So technically I'm an abuser too.

I've listened to every second of those audios and she absolutely triggers me. The anger I feel listening to her goading him, laughing and putting him down etc and he doesn't react. He's better than me!

Reactive abuse does not make you an abuser, that’s a misunderstanding of the term.

It’s interesting that you use the word ‘abuser’ for him. Because you’re right on that.

Iris

I used it for me too. Probably as that was I was called when I reacted. And I believed it

It’s been clear from the start that you’ve got very confused between your own abuse and case.

Hypothetical - if you listened to audio of a woman goading a man and you had cast iron proof the man was in fact the abuser in that scenario - what would your response be?

Fair enough, I disagree slightly as in my eyes they were both instigators and aggressors ,in various incidents. Which does make him an abuser and why I disagree with the verdict.
If it was AH instead , I'd also disagree.

As I said before I have personal experience of a truly toxic relationship. One had scratches,one had bruises, one was controlling, one was a cheater, both verbally abusive, one would drag the other by a neck chain, one would drag the other by the hair, they got into a fight ,it got physical and it only stopped when they both crashed,exhausted in the trashed hotel room. They literally fought until they knackered themselves out. Depending on the day , or the incident each one could be called an abuser and for it to be true. And the next day they would honestly be a victim, because sometimes it just came out of nowhere. They would both swear they love each other ,die for each other ,can't live without each other. They'd break it off and get back together crying at how wonderful it all is. Seriously fucked up shit.

That's how I see AH and JD. That's why AH is a victim and JD is an abuser and why the verdict sucks.Same the other way round. Two very unhappy,unhealthy and unstable people that imploded together.

I do blame JD and his staff more , because he had most of the power, he was older, he had the money and resources and his little band of merry men cleaning up (sometimes literally) and covering up for for him. He was controlling and paranoid and jealous. He did kick off over her getting or doing certain roles, which is abusive in it's own right.

And then you saw a woman in the same situation but failed to detect it and demonised her instead.

People have a paradigm in their mind of how a
victim of abuse might be like and how they might behave, and of course
we all know that's often false

I completly agree with with that.

I absolutely agree that Amber and Johnny were both guilty of emotional abuse.
I do not think Johnny was guilty of financial abuse although Amber likes to indicate he did not help her with her career.

Physical abuse is a completely different ball game, when physical abuse enters the relationship it effectively shuts down any communication.
Conversation and arguments about the fairness within a relationship have ended.

No matter if one side is arguing they are being neglected, stonewalled, receiving silent treament, being cheated on etc and the other side is denying those actions, when the boundary of physical assault has been overstepped, it's game over.

Yes victims fight back but when someone has that cruelty about them to first strike out and take the first blow out of frustration of the argument not going their way, then you have a physical abuser.

Amber stating that she cannot promise to not use violence and Johnny stating he cannot 'do this anymore' because it decends into physicality suggests to me he is not the one purpatrating the first blow. He reacts, or defends, he does not go on the offensive first to shut her down by striking, he escapes and runs away.
This angers her more and I can see why that does but he knows any dissagreement will end with her lashing out if she does not get her own way.

And yes Johnny was not letting her have her own way in the end but he should not have to be attacked even if he has been emotionally abusive to her.

No iris I recognised an abuser. The fact she's lied under oath since hasn't changed my mind, funnily enough

I guess demonising her as an abuser is easier for you to deal with.

The fact Depp lied under oath hasn’t changed your mind either, tellingly.

Easier for me to deal with in what way Iris?

At the end of the day folks the evidence (and in AH's case lack of it) has been laid bare for all to see. AH had no plausible witnesses, lied repeatedly including claiming she had donated money and admitting to writing the op-ed to essentially punish a man who has fame. She is a deluded narcissist who has negatively impacted support for victims such as myself when fleeing DV. She needs to be held accountable for her actions and prevented from pushing false narratives or being a public figure again. As stated in our televised discussion and repeating here for everyone. The evidence against her was insurmountable, the UK case is now being reviewed, other action could be taken and for those saying they side with her, you too are spitting in the faces of true victims. There is no possible way for anyone to believe her, had they listened to the entirety of the court proceedings, her only witness to any violence was then discredited in further testimonies supplied to the court. JD's only guilty finding was for a statement his previous lawyer made regarding one of the many instances, where he had incorrectly described the circumstances, JD had not actually said anything slanderous in that instance.

And on marbles note which has nailed it.

Bedtime for me.