Board 8 > Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard Trial

(+) Yeah! (+)

Yeah responding with all lives matter is simply missing the actual point. They're saying black lives matter too. But I guess BLMT is too many letters.

If you typo BLMT it just makes you look hungry and confused

bacon lettuce mayo tomato

like god intended

BlueCrystalTear posted...

I am that kind of person, but we're not gonna get into that (BAD idea to bring that up).

Oof, why would you tell on yourself like this

Believe All Women is inherently shit branding. 'Believe Women' would've gotten the point across without sounding like an ultimatum. Black Lives Matter is not inherently shit branding, but conservatives wouldn't hated it no matter what it was called.

KamikazePotato posted...

Believe All Women is inherently shit branding. 'Believe Women' would've gotten the point across without sounding like an ultimatum. Black Lives Matter is not inherently shit branding, but conservatives wouldn't hated it no matter what it was called.

The problem with discussions like this is people hear a version of the phrase they dislike, laser focus on that one, and then dont even realize the fucking thing theyre saying would be better is the bigger phrase:

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/6/7/2/AAGQPmAADO84.jpg

I was gonna say, I thought "Believe women" WAS the slogan, and "believe all women" was basically what detractors tried to turn it into in order to make it easier to attack.

My only hope from this is that it also helps men of abuse speak up as well. It's not easy for many reasons on their end as well, but a lot of times because they also aren't believed. #MenToo was trending, and not in any sort of derogatory way, during this trial at multiple points, and while I'm sure that slogan would also be attacked and misused (like practically every slogan nowadays it seems like), I just hope that awareness from this will come up.

The worst part about this entire debacle is that Amber Heard will likely set back Believe Women a bit to a point where people can point and say "Oh she's just saying that like Amber Heard." Part of the reason that her testimony makes me angry is that it's just a mockery of actual abuse victims. You'll notice most people who have been a victim of abuse have been trashing on her because of this. She literally tried to be the spokesperson for abuse when she has beaten the shit out of every partner she's had. She's disgusting. I'm just hoping that abuse, regardless of gender, is taken seriously still after this.

But this picks back up tomorrow, with Amber giving the rest of her testimony, and her getting cross-examined and picked apart of every lie she told. I don't anticipate they'll miss with the cross. I'll probably make a new topic for it since this one is heading towards filling up and this is essentially the second part of the trial now.

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Not believing Ulti about his wife has literally nothing to do with gender.

I know I did and still believe he's a real victim. While I can't stand him, I still don't wish harm on him. Hope he left her before it was too late, abuse tends to escalate to murder.

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

My only hope from this is that it also helps men of abuse speak up as well.

Me too(No pun intended), but there are two hurdles.

1. The belief that men who are abused by their wives are "weak".
2. The belief that if a woman is beating up her husband, he must have done something to "deserve it", like cheating, for example. Nevermind that cheating doesn't justify violence, regardless of gender.

Just look at this video. It's old by now, but still...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFAd4YdQks

I just started watching today's testimony (they're starting an hour earlier so they're even longer days now rip), and this is already a complete disaster. She's just retconning things she said during the testimony and she clearly spoke with her attorneys, which she isn't allowed to. This is completely bizarre.

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

I just started watching today's testimony (they're starting an hour earlier so they're even longer days now rip), and this is already a complete disaster. She's just retconning things she said during the testimony and she clearly spoke with her attorneys, which she isn't allowed to. This is completely bizarre.

What do you mean she's not allowed to speak with her attorneys? She is allowed to speak with her attorneys during breaks.

red sox 777 posted...

What do you mean she's not allowed to speak with her attorneys? She is allowed to speak with her attorneys during breaks.

Sorry, I should have been more clear.

I meant that she wasn't allowed to speak with her attorneys about her testimony, during her testimony (which extends to the break). For instance, Johnny also wasn't allowed to talk to his attorneys about his testimony during the weekend break in the middle of his testimony too. But it's clear that they had discussed it because they went back to make "corrections" and then "clarify" things.

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Sorry, I should have been more clear.

I meant that she wasn't allowed to speak with her attorneys about her testimony, during her testimony (which extends to the break). For instance, Johnny also wasn't allowed to talk to his attorneys about his testimony during the weekend break in the middle of his testimony too. But it's clear that they had discussed it because they went back to make "corrections" and then "clarify" things.

Tbh thats a stupid rule and not consistent between states. Unless the break occurs mid-question, theres no reason a client shouldnt be able to talk to their lawyer.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Tbh thats a stupid rule and not consistent between states. Unless the break occurs mid-question, theres no reason a client shouldnt be able to talk to their lawyer.

It isn't a stupid rule.

Your testimony is supposed to be an honest telling of the situation in your own words. You shouldn't be allowed to talk to your attorneys during it ABOUT the testimony because it muddies the testimony and alters how they present it.

Clearly, it's significantly altered her testimony today, so that's why the rule is there.

I've never heard of that extending to breaks lasting say, a whole weekend, just while a question was pending.

red sox 777 posted...

I've never heard of that extending to breaks lasting say, a whole weekend, just while a question was pending.

I mean, it's very much the case when court is on recess for even 15 minutes in the middle of testimony. When are they going to break to talk when a question is pending? They aren't cutting off a testimony for a break after a question is asked.

Seems like one of those "rules" that's more of a suggestion, since it can't really be enforced I guess. Considering how clear it is that Amber broke said rule...

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

I mean, it's very much the case when court is on recess for even 15 minutes in the middle of testimony. When are they going to break to talk when a question is pending? They aren't cutting off a testimony for a break after a question is asked.

It's a state by state thing, the states who allow conversing with your lawyer during breaks are the correct ones tbh.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

It's a state by state thing, the states who allow conversing with your lawyer during breaks are the correct ones tbh.

Ok tony

I mean it is!

A lot of people are reading this topic and taking your word on everything, and I think it's important that people know that.

I mean the thing you're trying to avoid is the following:

Opposing Attorney: Question.
Attorney: Let's take a break.
~Break, during which Witness and Attorney discuss how to answer~
Witness: Repeats answer given by Attorney.

If there's no question pending, this scenario can't happen.

Correct, which is why I said this:

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Unless the break occurs mid-question, theres no reason a client shouldnt be able to talk to their lawyer.

It's not up to the attorney to decide when breaks happen anyway, it's up to the Judge.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I mean it is!

A lot of people are reading this topic and taking your word on everything, and I think it's important that people know that.

Ok tony

red sox 777 posted...

I mean the thing you're trying to avoid is the following:

Opposing Attorney: Question.
Attorney: Let's take a break.
~Break, during which Witness and Attorney discuss how to answer~
Witness: Repeats answer given by Attorney.

If there's no question pending, this scenario can't happen.

This actually doesn't happen. Every judge alive is going to say "Okay we'll break after this line of questioning." They just don't break in the middle of questions. It doesn't happen.

Like ultimately this isn't a big deal and they're not going to get in trouble for it and it does happen and I wouldn't be totally shocked if Depp did it during his, but it's just extra egregious in this case that they went back and literally reconned things.

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Ok tony

This actually doesn't happen. Every judge alive is going to say "Okay we'll break after this line of questioning." They just don't break in the middle of questions. It doesn't happen.

Like ultimately this isn't a big deal and they're not going to get in trouble for it and it does happen and I wouldn't be totally shocked if Depp did it during his, but it's just extra egregious in this case that they went back and literally reconned things.

I mean the retconning is on the record and apparent to the jury so they are only hurting themselves anyway.

Won't this just backfire spectacularly on cross, even if discussing this gets objected to?

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Ok tony

This actually doesn't happen. Every judge alive is going to say "Okay we'll break after this line of questioning." They just don't break in the middle of questions. It doesn't happen.

Like ultimately this isn't a big deal and they're not going to get in trouble for it and it does happen and I wouldn't be totally shocked if Depp did it during his, but it's just extra egregious in this case that they went back and literally reconned things.

It might happen if there wasn't a rule against it. Although even if there wasn't, this still would look super bad to the jury.

I'm sure Johnny's lawyers are rejoicing at how easy Amber's making their jobs. They are going to absolutely eviscerate her and murder her credibility. Just gotta remember that the jury is people of below average intelligence and explain to them how she's contradicting herself and changing her story.

This trial has already made Heard way more famous than anything else in her career has. That would be sad if she wasnt such a vile person

And for the record, they went to lunch and like literally every break in the middle of testimony, the Judge looked directly at Amber and said "And again, as you are under oath and still testifying, you cannot discuss this case with your attorneys."

Amber's testimony is over. After the break, she gets cross examined and it's sure to be a Disco Bloodbath.

Dr. Curry is supposed to help with the cross examining right? I'm excited to see her again!

CassandraCain posted...

Dr. Curry is supposed to help with the cross examining right? I'm excited to see her again!

No she will be a rebuttal witness appearing after Amber rests her case.

I am watching this.

First attack was that she's able to look him in the eye, but he can't look into hers. Abuse victims can't look into the eyes of their abusers without feeling pain.

The character assassination has only just begun. And she continues to lie through her teeth. "You can look up who's being abused online." - the Internet has more than enough evidence to indict her and... virtually nothing to condemn him. How tone-deaf can she be?

BlueCrystalTear posted...

"You can look up who's being abused online."

She actually said this during her testimony? Wow.

CassandraCain posted...

She actually said this during her testimony? Wow.

Yup. (I may have gotten the wording slightly wrong.)

She legit thinks she's the victim here, when all the photos posted online as potential evidence have been identified as from times where she and Johnny were not together. By the same Internet she says is on her side. NOBODY is on her side. She's living in an alternate reality.

Camille is absolutely destroying her by utilizing the lack of photographic evidence, particularly regarding the nose swelling. She says she has a picture, but it hasn't been shown. GEE I WONDER WHY. No medical records. No pictures to corroborate. No witnesses. No evidence of her getting a nose job. Just "I'm wearing makeup" as an excuse. LOL. She's incriminating herself. BIGTIME. The photos are bad for her case!

The fact that her story is so opposite of Johnny's makes it pretty clear that she's lying, because people corroborate Johnny's story and nobody corroborates Amber's.

Yo guys I donated $7 million to charity.

No, I haven't paid it, but I donated it because I have promised I would.

Today was not a good day for Amber. Like holy fuck. Johnnys attorney, Camille, went straight for Ambers jugular.

https://twitter.com/katkatbutterfly/status/1526325092166287363?s=21&t=AGhsZnMLdBnHdwMFcMB85A

https://youtu.be/lIQJZRxG40Y

^ Watch the last 30 minutes of that video. Ambers face is super red, shes stuttering, and sweating as her lies get exposed.

Amber is cancer. I dont see how anyone with half a brain cell would even want to work with her. She will bring bad press whenever she goes.

Also, her team looks like they completely checked out. They are clearly exhausted.

BlueCrystalTear posted...

"You can look up who's being abused online."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the jury shouldn't have any idea what the internet thinks of the case, right? Like they are supposed to know nothing about the case going in and they aren't allowed to look up the case on the internet as it goes on.

Her team has absolutely not checked out. Elaine tried her damnedest to make sure that they couldn't continue these lines of questioning and failed.

I also have scoops from people who were in the courtroom, but the gist of it is that everyone on the jury clearly does not buy Amber Heard and anything she has to say anymore, and they started to look even more put off when she got on her whole "I donated the money because I said I pledged the money." This was a hard case to win, even with all of the evidence, but I think the jury turning on her now means she's cooked.

Amber Heard put on her whole case and it frankly sucked. She has other witnesses but it's doubtful any of them can help. Camille is going to continue leisurely destroying her and exposing her now. We only got a taste so far, but when they keep breaking down every lie it's just going to get worse.

I'll post a summary later tonight in a new topic but damn, her credibility is gone.

Yeah, the amount of lies she's told is excessive. Camille has a long list of them and she's gonna work on dissecting 80% of them, leaving... absolutely nothing.

Amber's counter-suit, which already had a 1-in-100,000 chance of succeeding to begin with since it has absolutely no grounds, looks even more egregious now. Because of the amount of lies she's told, she's probably gonna have to pay up (that $7 million + the $$ Johnny lost from Pirates) AND her career is destroyed. Her most memorable role will always be the villain in this courtroom drama.

Team Rocket Elite posted...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the jury shouldn't have any idea what the internet thinks of the case, right? Like they are supposed to know nothing about the case going in and they aren't allowed to look up the case on the internet as it goes on.

Well yeah, but it's kind of hard for them to avoid that entirely in this day and age, since Twitter thugs will stalk their identities and send them messages in some shape or form with the intent to lead them to a specific conclusion. They are supposed to report and ignore but it may not change that they saw something.

Even so, Amber told Camille to look online and apparently she thinks that will help her case. I'm pretty sure her making that statement makes it fair game for Camille to say "I did what you suggested and looked on the Internet, and it's pretty clear that you were the abuser and Johnny was the abused. I'd like to present some evidence, Your Honor." The evidence being those "abuse" pictures of Amber being dated to 2012 and 2019, when she and Johnny were not involved.

I fully anticipate the offensive to continue. It's going to be glorious to watch everything continue to unravel. I love a good villain comeuppance, don't you?

Yeah if I was on the jury I could easily look through her testimony and plug "donate and pledge are synonymous" into any one of her claims as her wanting things both ways and come to the conclusion that she is manipulative and full of shit.

And if she wants to consult the internet then all Camille has to do is show her something like this.

Caution: this is a picture of a real abuse victim and it's slightly graphic
https://twitter.com/JamesShala1/status/1525886092217618432

On a separate note Camille has become my favorite character beside Dr. Curry in this show.

Oh, another thing worth mentioning is that we all said we weren't sure if the thing about Amber Heard's screen time in Aquaman 2 being reduced was true or not, but Amber confirmed she got a smaller part, and that small part kept getting reduced to the point where she's barely in it.

She fucked around and found out. Her narcissism got the better of her.

Heard in her own head:
- Charitable (move on over Thomas Wayne, your billion dollar renewal project ain't got nothing on me because I am gonna PLEDGE a trillion dollars to charity, lemme try Elon Musk first)
- Inspiring victim
- Spokesperson (lol)
- The Mary Sue of all Mary Sues (What is a Mary Sue? She sounds perfect. Well that's me)
- Great actor (My dog stepped on a bee?)

Heard in reality:
- Narcisstic sociopath with flat out psychopathic tendencies
- Manipulative and an emotional bully
- Pathological liar
- Exploitative and extorts people for money and fame
- Physically violent and verbally abusive
- Quick to blow a fuse and lose her temper
- Over the top acting that puts the entire og Resident Evil cast to shame

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Oh, another thing worth mentioning is that we all said we weren't sure if the thing about Amber Heard's screen time in Aquaman 2 being reduced was true or not, but Amber confirmed she got a smaller part, and that small part kept getting reduced to the point where she's barely in it.

That's not good enough. They pulled a double standard with Johnny Depp being removed from Fantastic Beasts. Yet decided not to do so when Heard was accused with the same allegations. Why? Because she is a woman? Heard being replaced by say Emilia Clarke or someone else would been for the best. They wouldn't have had to minimize the Mera scenes and that character would have been redeemed by not being portrayed by an abuser. But who am I kidding, there's a good chance Heard could be lying or grossly over exaggerating all that she said about her role in Aquaman 2.

Regardless, as long as this vile dumpster fire of a human being is on it, I am not touching Aquaman 2 with a ten foot pole and boycotting any future company that hires her for any sort of work after this debacle.

I made a new topic with today's summary check it out god bless.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/8-gamefaqs-contests/80023967

Does anyone blame them?

https://twitter.com/juliecourttv/status/1526557273832706051?s=21&t=Z4_HmDxykCWdHaGr0O1LRg

just gonna bump this because I presume that's why it's still here (to be kept alive until a verdict is rendered)

Please continue commenting in the second topic:
<a href="https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/8-gamefaqs-contests/80023967">Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard Trial 2</a>