Amber Heard&Johnny Depp trial

[Miscfeminista]

I wanted to hear more thoughts from women who actually don't accuse Amber for being"a faker". I don't want to tip toe around it or argue with people over same thing over and over while they pretend they are unbiased when in fact they just support Depp.

A lot has already been said and I know you need to have diverse opinions for better conversation etc but on the other thread I am, I'm so tired of people victim blaming and chewing over stuff with little substance so I wanted to make a separate one where we can follow the rest of the trial and outcome with our comments and observations(without constantly arguing about feminist basics).

My last thought was that AH witnesses have been consistent so far and have been wondering if they pulled away from her because they didn't want the drama surrounding it(instead of actually finding her guilty, like Depp fans are suggesting).

I'm following it over Sky over ones with commentary(every day around 1-2 afternoon UK time, 9 in the morning US time I believe..trial ends next week, think someone said 27th)

All observations welcome. What stood out to you so far?

But we know that some of these things did not happen now and if the judge had the evidence from this trial he certainly would not have found all those incidents proved. He found Depp at fault of incidents without evidence but said it followed a pattern. But the pattern consisted of incidents that weren't true (we now know) and other incidents that were not proven and were part of a pattern. Its a bit like a house of cards.

The judge also had a favourable opinion of AH because he believed that she'd donated $7m.

nailed it.

bias is real and everyone suffers from their own blind spots to some extent and in some situations so with that acknowledged

Decades ago I read an interview/puff piece about JD which left me a little uncomfortable. His partner of 23 years was a recluse, she never left their farm in France. She was an unstable alcoholic and JD was a hero for staying with her, which he did for the sake of the children (of course). And I had a bit of a chin stroke, not that I knew the journalist was wrong but that JD's narrative of his partner was so critical and was accepted as absolute truth by the journalist without question or investigation. I suppose that the truth of my feelings at that time is "that's exactly how abusive men get away with it" / "That's exactly what an abusive asshole would say".

So I was happy when he left and had a new girlfriend and my mental maths was like that was probably 6 or 7 years ago I guess the kids are more grown up now. Cool.

But the second AH went public with 'no everything's not ok' I remembered and was 100% LTB before he does the same thing to you.

I think everyone should watch rottenborns summing up. It's not arguable that he abused her.
Vasquez said "common sense says either it's all true or all lies" and "he may have hit her but that doesn't mean he's sexually violent" which I found abhorrent.
I really really hope the jury find in her favour but I'm not hopeful.

I am thoroughly embarassed for Vasquez. No way in this world would I ever defend an abuser like this for any money in the world-she literally has no proof of anything at all just keeps repeating probabilites on things that don't add up according to her version. I don't know if she think she'll get a medal for it or what but the fact is she is personally in this. I can see she's elbowing to put herself out there in her style and it's unfortunately nothing else but being star struck. This is what faux feminism did to women with lean in bs and"be confident do it like a man"mantra. Awful

Unfortunately it's her job to represent his point of view. I don't blame her because justice is important. I kind of admire her for standing up to talk such bollocks.
The end justify the means and that is to do justice. I just hope the jury see what I see

The things she was saying-she had a choice not to go there. She stooped really low when she went for"but she only claimed physical and sexual abuse and everyone said they didn't see it-besides do you trust her?". She went for rape, which she knows no one would see nor would you tell to many if anyone. No matter what her job is this was inhumane as a woman to woman. I don't ask women to all be friends and"nice"to each other but some things should be off limits and those are calling someone a liar when you have no way of knowing what happened. She could have phrased it differently to show some respect but she went straight there"she made up that he assaulted her with a bottle". How the fuck do you know that Camille where you there?? It just makes her arguments look bad as well as completely distasteful to anyone out there who been raped no matter what they think of AH. Solidarity is not niceness or approving of everything women do, it's just not doing the same inhumane shit that can be done to you tomorrow-even if you hate that woman from bottom of your heart

How people welcome AH ... and how people welcome JD. This trial was bought. He bought more abuse toward her.

I'm apalled at people sending threats to her baby. What makes this situation even more bizzare is that while AH claims to be a feminist, she still opted for surrogacy.
Even tho feminism is not a lifestyle, I would be surprised that someone who makes such profoundly anti woman action as paying to rent a woman's womb could not have questionable views that would in turn result to action that would(not)benefit to liberation of all women. As someone said, nothing is black and white. Feminism means standing up for all women when needed, even for those who have used their privilege against other women at one point. Unlike on some other threads, this still does not make me reject the whole fact that she was 99% likely abused. It's so easy to do the perfect victim checklist on anyone, I thought I'm over that but I have to question and keep myself in check every now and then

Elaine's closing statement isn't bringing anything useful or concrete to the case. She is just saying what AH or someone else said and saying that equals x and y. Does it? In your opinion but is there actually any real evidence to show that. She hasn't actually put any actual evidence to back it up. It's all just she/he said. It's too random. She shouldn't have spoken. She's deleted all the actual evidence the previous lawyer talked about.

What the hell is she talking about? She's cancelling out all the actual evidence.

AHs lawyers have really talked about slamming cabinet doors, verbal abuse and very offensive texts and emails. That does not equal domestic abuse. I think they should have clearly defined what abuse counts as.

They have successfully disapproved every single incident AH reported imo.

She's doing her job. Do you think the same about lawyers who defend rapists and murders and child abusers? Maybe she actually believes him.

I watched her closing statement and I don't recall her saying that about the hitting. That would be incriminating him big time. She's questioning AHs credibility which let's face it is a problem.

His behaviour is terrible. I will never what another thing he is in.

However, texts messages, emails and videos of him slamming cabinets do not imo add up to the physical abuse she describes. AHs lawyer says this is domestic violence- is it? Are they only proving physical violence? I think they should have put a definition on domestic abuse. I am it sure I agree.

This whole”she’s just doing her job”is a no for me. As she herself said-words have meaning. She could have focused on what she perceives as inconsistencies without potential victim blaming-it would make her look more credible and frankly more mature. It was not part of her job to talk about her in the way she has-she took the easy way and went to prove that she can be”just as tough on women as the boys”. It is not being fair, it’s trying to join the boys club you’ll never be part of(no matter what you do)

It does counts as domestic violence. He has been proven to intimidate, threaten, demean and insult on numerous occasions. These are all consistent behaviours with goal of controlling the victim of abuse and just by those behaviours you can be quite certain that it will escalate to physical at some point(as it did)

exactly.

@AdamRyan what a load of total and utter nonsense.

I also didn’t realise that this judge allowed cameras. She had her reasoning of course as in that it would be safer to allow the camera instead of potentially having crowd of journalists or whatever outside but I’m not convinced. I feel like she dismissed the fact that she put potential rape victim on TV because”it hasn’t been proven yet”sort of logic(she gave a reason that actually, it doesn’t apply in civil cases for SA witnesses to be televised…ok). Could she have hoped for some justice to be seen in favour of DV victims or she just doesn’t give a f?

www.google.com/amp/s/variety.com/2022/film/news/johnny-depp-amber-heard-cameras-courtroom-penney-azcarate-1235280060/amp/

I do think both are as bad as each other but....
The Kate Moss lie Amber said about.
The trashed the room, it was a $62 light.
The pictures said for 2 incidents were the same .
The bruise making kit?
She admitted she wrote the Op-ed about Johnny.
The tape of her saying she hit Johnny.
She hit her ex in an airport.
She sent the tape to the company, and edited out her staging it.
Pledged does not mean donated. Show them the money.

Perhaps it's what she believes herself. I guess they have say and do absolutely everything they can and are allowed to to represent their client. It's probably the trial of her life. It's probably the biggest trial she's ever done and she wants to do well. They certainly pulled at the jury's heart strings.

Threatening, where? If you count that as domestic violence then they have proven he was. If you don't count those things as domestic violence- which I think many of the jury will not do then they haven't.

Imo- AHs lawyers missed vital information. They missed the two things where there is more concrete evidence of violence. They didn't talk about the texts about the kick on the plane. Is that because they weren't allowed. They didn't play the audio of him saying he head butted her and that doesn't break a nose. I thought they would. If I was AH I would be very disappointed about how I was represented by my lawyers.

Also- why were these texts not brought up in the closing arguments? The one of him saying disco bloodbath several times and the audio where he says something like- I have to split before it gets physical on both sides. These are some of the best evidence they had that verbal abuse turned to physical.