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?

I read somewhere that only one juror has to have found that one allegation was true and she wins.
That's what the defense attorney said.
It's because the burden of proof is on Johnny and the context of the article counts. Basically his case is she implied he's abusive and he's not so his reputation has been damaged. He has to prove that he's not abusive. So if they believe he's been abusive even once, he can't do that, implying he's abusive is the truth and she wins.

It isn't saying she wasn't also abusive, or she didn't exaggerate.

It's possible to believe she's abusive and that she didn't defame Depp in the op ed because he's also abusive.

Based on that, she'll win.

But this is where I don't get defamation.

There is a world of difference between different levels of abuse. Who defines what abusive is?

I think they were both abusive and toxic, I just don't believe he was the victim who beat her up regularly and she was a victim, whereas OP thinks you can't have two abusers.

So is it down to personal opinion of the jurors?

I'm sorry too .
I wish there was more of a move to inquisitorial trials for this kind if thing because the adversarial system just forces it to be black and white. Its so hard for victims to get justice and there must be a better way to do it

@AdamRyan , you're starting to win me round in terms of looking at things from her point of view here - ie the changes of stories re the OP ed. oh god, just let it end.

They have to answer these 7 questions about specific parts of the op ed (for depp) and what waldman said (for heard)

mobile.twitter.com/cathyrusson/status/1530201214666690563/photo/1

faced culture's wrath?
she's won on q1.

wasn't Kate categorical for the first time that he wasnt abusive?

I’m not on Twitter and a bit suspicious of Rottenborn but he has quite few retweets that I haven’t seen. Some of them are good, some plain odd(like retweeting a pic of a woman with who JD supposedly cheated AH on…yikes)

mobile.twitter.com/imReactingNow

I hope I can be helpful on some of the legal stuff.
This isn't a criminal trial. In a criminal trial there are charges brought forward, which have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt in order to find the defendant is guilty. If the jury aren't sure, the defendant is not guilty.

A civil trial is different. There are no charges brought, and the standard of proof is lower: it is 'on the balance of probabilities' which means is it more likely that not that this is proven?

What's happened in this case is Depp has brought a claim against Heard, and his claim is she has defamed him. This is a tort: a civil wrong. And the remedies for this don't involve anyone going to prison or getting a criminal record, but compensation.

Defamation is basically where you say/write something about someone else and it hurts their reputation. It means they suffer loss, or it makes society look down on them.

When Depp and Heard win/lose this will be the end of the line for this civil claim unless it goes to appeal. You can't sue someone for the same thing twice.

If Amber wins it doesn't necessarily mean he's a 'rapist'. For one thing, he isn't a proven 'rapist' in the criminal sense, or to the criminal standard. If Amber wins it means the jury thought she didn't defame him in her writing. That could be for many reasons, and we won't necessarily get to know them. They might thing one thing has been proven true. They might think the statements aren't defamatory - that they don't ruin Depp's reputation. They might think that Amber didn't publish them maliciously - that is, she didn't publish them knowing they were false.

The jurors are the one's who get to decide what the statements Amber said mean, whether they are defamatory, and if they are true.The standard is what a reasonable person would take the statements to mean.

Thanks @WeeBisom

Based on that - who do you think will win this?

I don't think he'll win. I've neen very consistent in saying I can't see how he could win. The only bit he might win on is sexual violence. But I think he'll struggle there as well.

@minutesturntohours

I read somewhere that only one juror has to have found that one allegation was true and she wins.

In Virginia the jury must all agree and come to a unanimous decision for each issue being sued over. If one jurist disagrees, then the judge declares a mistrial so that neither side wins or loses. To win Depp must get all the jurists to agree. So it's not that Depp loses if one jurist believes his claim unproven, it's that he can't win if one jurist finds his claim unproven.
He's suing over three issues and each issue is separate. He doesn't have to win on all three. He might only win on one issue.
And the same applies to Amber Heard's suit.

I agree.

Shes done tbe opposite of what she set out to do.

But ultimately, nobody wins. This sad mess has been played out on camera for the whole world to watch. They loved each other once.

They loved each other once.

I doubt it. I suspect JD was infatuated and AH saw an opportunity to advance herself.

I haven't really followed this that closely but I was bullied when I was younger and she just sets me of with reminders of manipulative bully.

Thanks for posting this, I hadn't actually read it. I don't mean to be naive but if I had read that, I wouldn't have understood it to mean that she was accusing Jonny of abuse, but as with many other women, she has experienced it in at stages her life. It is concerning that this can set a president, individuals scared to refer publicly in any way to historic experience (rape,harassment etc) at risk of an ex partner trying to sue them for any link to themselves. Bearing in mind the level of evidence needed to get a rape prosecution for example, it could leave many victims feeling silenced about their experience and unable to raise awareness or offer support to others. There is a lot of grey between someone's experience of something which they feel is abusive, something which is abusive but without hard evidence and something which can be objectively prosecuted. And the media tends to overstate the risk of women making false allegations and underplay that popular, successful men can do those things.

Both trials have been such an unedifying circus, Jonny must have gambled that exposing their dirty laundry could boost rather than damage his image.

Thanks for posting this, I hadn't actually read it. I don't mean to be naive but if I had read that, I wouldn't have understood it to mean that she was accusing Jonny of abuse, but as with many other women, she has experienced it in at stages her life

that’s exactly how i read it

“Then two years ago, I became a public figure representing domestic abuse, and I felt the full force of our culture’s wrath for women who speak out,” Heard wrote

That's garbled and badly written and a bit self-aggrandising but to make any sense of it, this is referring to Depp. Unless she is saying that she was somehow set up as some sort of representative figurehead for survivors of domestic abuse ?

the majority of people are either of the opinion they were equally bad

from the little on here that ive read i think a lot of posters accused of being AH fans are saying that they think she is guilty of abuse as well

I’m not an amber fan but i agree with them

I read it as she is referring to public reaction when she filed for a restraining order. The fact she filed for a restraining order on Depp is a matter of public record. She's talking about the death threats etc she got afterwards.

This is about her life, not about Johnny. She can still have lied about the abuse and what she wrote in the article be true. She did get a restraining order and she did suffer public wrath after that.

Women shouldn't have to face legal action if they talk about events that have happened to them in their own lives.

Not in court where they run the risk of perjury if they lie under oath. They've given quotes to the media which is different.
In the trial Kate Moss said "“He never pushed me, kicked me or threw me down any stairs, no"
That is hardly saying he was never abusive to her.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I'm sure Johnny would have taken full advantage if one of his ex partners was prepared to stand up in court to say he was never abusive.