Amber Heard - trial by social media

[DysmalRadius]

I have to admit, I haven't been following this case, but what little I do know about it has been filtered through the prism of social media and I have noticed that Facebook seems to be serving me a LOT of pro-Johnny Depp stories. I've already seen a couple this week (from film-based sites that I do not follow, coming up as 'suggested for you') and have just had another.

I am not a huge film fan, so have never interacted with these film sites, but they are coming up in my feed regularly now, including one page (I just blocked it at the time as it was one of the first) that included a long rant about how 'If these accusations were made about a man, everyone would be crying abuse'.

As I say, I'm not really following the case, but I am finding it sinister how there seems to be a paid PR campaign to promote Johnny's innocence in the wider world, presumably paving the way for him to return to Hollywood relatively unscathed once the dust settles and the trial is over. Am I only just noticing this now or is this becoming a more common method of manipulating the public over relatively trivial (compared to elections, covid misinformation etc) matters?

@LetitiaLeghorn

I think I’ll take the opinion of the UK judge over someone on JD’s payroll. Especially when that same person (Jenkins I believe his name is) has a history of changing his story to suit his boss. There’s also this-

“In his cross-examination, Mr Depp accepted that his sense of humour was 'niche'. It also had a lavatorial streak. On 11th October 2013 he had sent a text to Stephen Deuters which said (see file 6/119/F697.14), 'Will you squat in front of the door of the master bedroom and leave a giant coil of dookie so that Amber steps in it and thinks that one of the dogs, primarily Boo, has a major problem. It'll be funny!!!'”

Sounds like pooping on things is Johnny’s idea of a practical joke, not Amber Heard’s.

In regards to the charity money I know she said she intends to donate the full amount but can you link me to where she said she had already donated the full amount? I’m not accusing you of being wrong, I just can’t find where she said it.

@inkworks273
Of course you're entitled to believe whoever you like. It's a free world. 🙂

You said you believed the judge so do you not believe him when he says she said it?

Also I saw her saying it somewhere. On a discussion panel or something.

@LetitiaLeghorn

Yes I will believe him if he said she said it. I just can’t find it anywhere which is why I was asking if you had a link.

There's no court transcript, I don't think. But I have definitely seen her say it. Would that be enough?
Haha. I feel mean now. I do this to my husband, "Isn't my word enough?!" I'm a random stranger. Of course you don't believe me. You need proof. And quite right too.

Letitia - She said it on a french night-time entertainment show.

inkworks - Re: the pledge.
I've said this before, but it got no play with the 'stans 🤔.
It is my understanding that if you go bankrupt in the US and can be shown to have made charitable donations in a close time-frame before your court loss, it can be seen as deprivation of assets, and is a crime.

@ThrowawayBerna Thanks. Yes, it a was European show as I remember.

Are you saying she didn't make the donations because if she did she'd go bankrupt?

Are you saying she didn't make the donations because if she did she'd go bankrupt?
No. She's saying if the court costs bankrupt Heard, and she had donated money to charity shortly before, ot could be deemed she'd broken the law by hiding assets.
Heard has probably been advised not to make any donations until this is over to avoid that. Does not mean that she won't, once this is done.

But she got the divorce settlement in 2016. She wasn't sued til 2019. If she had in fact given the $7m in 2016/17 as she claimed to have done in a 2018 interview, it would have gone long before she had any knowledge of being sued. There would be nothing fraudulent about it.

I'll bet she doesn't.

people.com/celebrity/amber-heard-donates-full-7-million-divorce-settlement-to-charity/

This is her statement in August 2016. Depp started proceedings in February 2019.

I don't think we know when Depp paid her- although if he had been dilatory in doing so, I'm sure she would have said so. The divorce settlement would have set a time limit for payment.

Of course there are rules about giving away money or assets to put them beyond capture in a bankruptcy situation, but she wasn't facing bankruptcy in 2016.

Heard is now saying the payments were to be made over a 10 year period. The children's charity said that to date they’ve received $100,000 and have contacted Heard to find out what’s going on. So presumably they weren't aware it would be paid over 10 years.

I don't think we know when Depp paid her- although if he had been dilatory in doing so, I'm sure she would have said so.

The two parties agreed a schedule of payments set up to pay Amber Heard her settlement. They were paid by her business manager Edward White and if you listen to him, you wouldn't doubt him when he says they were paid before or on the due dates. By August 2017 she had received $4m. By 1 Feb 2018, she had received the full amount of $6.8m

Heard is now saying the payments were to be made over a 10 year period.

This cannot have been the arrangement because in 2018 Heard did an interview where she said she had paid the full amount to both charities.

The children's charity said that to date they’ve received $100,000 and have contacted Heard to find out what’s going on. So presumably they weren't aware it would be paid over 10 years.

That initial $100,000 was actually paid by Edward White. Depp requested that he make the first payment to each of the charities on Heard's behalf. So White paid $100,000 to the ACLU and to the hospital. After that Heard requested the money be sent to her and she'd pass on the money herself. Of course, we know now that she didn't pay it despite telling everyone she had.

@inkworks273
I didn't think you really believed me so have a look at this. Sorry if it's not clicky.

Ouch - setting aside everything else in this mess, that's bad, really bad.

I'm not sure what to believe but I do think there has been abuse on both sides. However I really find it worrying I couldn't find any support for AH on the social media platform I use, nothing and I tried to find it. It seems very one sided and I don't think JD is as innocent as he is trying to make out at all.

I feel sorry for her and for him to some extent too. They seem to have brought out the worst in each other. Winona Ryder and Vanessa Paradis have strongly denied he was violent. His relationship with Kate Moss is described as turbulent but she hasn't said he was violent towards her.

They're both opening themselves to ridicule. I feel sorry for her that he has chosen to pursue court action- rather than just putting out his version of events. She has been dragged into that.

The lying about the charitable donations bothers me. The court awarded her a payment- she's entitled to it. I would not have thought any ill of her if she'd kept it.

@LetitiaLeghorn

Thanks for that. I’d never seen it before.

The court awarded her a payment- she's entitled to it. I would not have thought any ill of her if she'd kept it.

agree.

Amber brought the trial.

The fact it is now not going her way (and her legal team tried to have it dismissed) isnt suiting her.

She accused him of a heinous crime.(not in a court of law, in an article).

Hes defended himself

Ironically, he probably would never have worked again.

It's the public response to the trial that will relaunch his career.

Otjer on Mn, in life, on social media, (and I have watched the trial) I have not seen one single comment in support of amber.
Not one.

Unfortunately because of the nature of this board people believe you have to support her as shes a woman.

Are you familiar with Roxanne pallett?

Theres no support because shes the one in the wrong.

Pretending it's some kind of conspiracy wont help.

Johnny has never, ever pretended to be innocent.

Amber brought the trial.

That's incorrect. Johnny sued the Sun and now he's suing her for the op ed.
She tried to get it thrown out and when it wasn't she counter sued for malicious allegations - if she's successful he will have to stop taking her to court.

www.reddit.com/r/Deuxmoi/comments/ukgxe8/list_of_ahjd_abuse_myths_debunked/?utm_source=share&utm%3Cspan

Amber brought the trial.

The fact it is now not going her way (and her legal team tried to have it dismissed) isnt suiting her.

She accused him of a heinous crime.(not in a court of law, in an article).

Have you actually read the Op ed this is all about? I didn’t have an opinion of JD at all after the op ed, but things that have come out of the trials he keeps bringing have really soured how I see him. All his doing and nothing to do with AH’s article.

www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ive-seen-how-institutions-protect-men-accused-of-abuse-heres-what-we-can-do/2018/12/18/71fd876a-02ed-11e9-b5df-5d3874f1ac36_story.html

She brought it by writing about him in the first place and it has completely backfired.

I have zero, zero sympathy. She has not got a chance of winning, and ultimately she's sunk her own career as she will never work in film again (but Johnny just might).

I think she might win the case but whether she'll win in the publics mind, I have severe doubts. I think she has been abused but it sticks in my throat that she made out she was a spokesperson vor DA victims when sge herself was perpetrating violence. And that she took credit and acclaim for supporting these charities financially while actually stiffing them. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth. I wonder who her advisors are or whether she's ignoring others and making these ill thought out decisions herself.