Board 8 > Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard Trial 2

(+) Yeah! (+)

BlueCrystalTear posted...

I think there's a fine line between the trial itself and the verdict.

The trial was not something I took seriously and I took great pleasure in watching it because of how wild it was. This was the best new reality show in years. It was hilarious constantly and thus I was just watching it for the entertainment.

The VERDICT is a different thing. The fact that the victim triumphed over the abuser will give confidence to others to go forward. If they aren't going forward because of this trial, it may be because they don't have evidence and they now see how it works. But they still shouldn't be afraid to speak up like Johnny did.

Yes the verdict is significantly more important than the trial which is why George Zimmerman is known as an upstanding citizen and O.J. Simpson clearly didn't kill his ex-wife.

I hear Casey Anthony is trying to have another kid.

Do you believe this case really has anything to do with those?

CassandraCain posted...

Glad Johnny won. Hope they can remove Amber from Aquaman 2.

Or worse, force her to act in it

TheRock1525 posted...

there are reports of actual abuse victims who are now not moving forward with their own trials due to how this played out

TheRock1525 posted...

it basically turned into clout-chasing clickbait online frenzy

Do you see how these two things might directly relate?

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Do you believe this case really has anything to do with those?

I'm pointing out how the cultural weight of the trial usually takes precedence over the actual verdict. This idea that domestic abused males will only come out of the woodwork if there was a guilty verdict is nonsense.

Team Rocket Elite posted...

Weren't they both recording each other?

Yes. Johnny recorded arguments they had with consent of Amber through advice from their couples therapist.

Amber recorded him in private, without his consent, so that she could present audio for when they were going to get divorced.

TheRock1525 posted...

I'm pointing out how the cultural weight of the trial usually takes precedence over the actual verdict. This idea that domestic abused males will only come out of the woodwork if there was a guilty verdict is nonsense.

When did I say males here? I was talking about ANY abuse victims.

And the two examples you cited were criminal cases. This was a civil case. One that showed that if the law can't beat your abuser, you can.

TheRock1525 posted...

I'm pointing out how the cultural weight of the trial usually takes precedence over the actual verdict. This idea that domestic abused males will only come out of the woodwork if there was a guilty verdict is nonsense.

Male victims of abuse that are usually the butt of a joke or ridiculed and disbelieved routinely will not come out about their abuse now that there is a mainstream case of just that.

But a liar who was treated like a heinous liar for alleging false allegations of abuse wrongfully while she admitted to abusing her partner on audio and actively tried to ruin his life during and after their relationship will prevent women from coming forward.

Aight.

Team Rocket Elite posted...

Weren't they both recording each other?

I don't recall that there was ever any suggestion that Depp was recording her surreptitiously; they both agreed to record their arguments at some point in their relationship, but additionally, Amber had made multiple secret recordings of him (like the video of him slamming cabinets for example).

I just know that when someone shows a bit of deceit or manipulation, believe them in their intent to gaslight. Congratulations to Heard on her performance of a lifetime.

I'm not suggesting that Depp did anything wrong with his recordings (and it sounds like he wasn't). But, they were ultimately useful in the trial. Other cases won't necessarily have evidence like that.

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Male victims of abuse that are usually the butt of a joke or ridiculed and disbelieved routinely will not come out about their abuse now that there is a mainstream case of just that.

You do realize several male celebrities came forward with stories of being abused in the early stages of #metoo, right?

And my argument is about how largely irrelevant the verdict was. Pretty much all polling sided something like 90% with Johnny. You really believe that had the verdict come back not guilty, there were all these male domestic abuse victims that were prepared to come forward but now will wilt back into the darkness?

Depp had already won the trial long before any verdict.

BlueCrystalTear posted...

The VERDICT is a different thing. The fact that the victim triumphed over the abuser will give confidence to others to go forward. If they aren't going forward because of this trial, it may be because they don't have evidence and they now see how it works. But they still shouldn't be afraid to speak up like Johnny did.

I don't have many thoughts on the verdict itself, because I frankly don't wanna make myself miserable by looking deeply enough to get an incredibly accurate verdict on an abuse case. That said... I think it's very naive to think this will make abuse victims more likely to speak up. The only thing that most people know about this trial was the absolute farce that was the news coverage of it. The vast majority of people and media are not poring over the evidence to find out what the precise truth of an abuse case. They are finding a narrative and running with it for engagement: whether that popular narrative is correct or incorrect is almost irrelevant in its wider meaning.

if a celebrity claims to have been abused and it is as messy as most abusive relationships are, they must now be incredibly aware that the whole world will swarm on it. Regardless of whether Heard was the abuser or not (and to be clear, I wouldn't look particularly kindly on either before or after this, and there's also something to be said for the garbage that is celebrity and Hollywood culture which led to this shitshow), there is absolutely no guarantee that the target of the most ire is not going to be the abused the next time something like this comes up. The biggest impact here was in the court of public opinion. If a celebrity is genuinely the victim of abuse in future but doesn't have an overwhelming amount of evidence or it is messy as is the case in abusive relationships, they'd probably think harder about reporting it. The sheer amount of gross coverage around the trial (particularly the body language "experts" and misogynistic under and overtones in some circles) would make anyone second guess whether it's worth it. The systems for dealing with domestic abuse are fundamentally fucked and one verdict, whether accurate or not, won't change that.

TheRock1525 posted...

You do realize several male celebrities came forward with stories of being abused in the early stages of #metoo, right?

And my argument is about how largely irrelevant the verdict was. Pretty much all polling sided something like 90% with Johnny. You really believe that had the verdict come back not guilty, there were all these male domestic abuse victims that were prepared to come forward but now will wilt back into the darkness?

Depp had already won the trial long before any verdict.

If this verdict didn't go in his favor when the evidence on his side was so strong, then absolutely people are going to wilt back into the darkness because they would see that the evidence can be strong and you can still lose in a court of law.

Team Rocket Elite posted...

I'm not suggesting that Depp did anything wrong with his recordings (and it sounds like he wasn't). But, they were ultimately useful in the trial. Other cases won't necessarily have evidence like that.

If we're talking about other cases, I mean, yeah, Amber Heard could have easily won this trial on a more technical argument of what she meant in the op-ed if she stuck to that, but all of that went out the window when she insisted on telling outlandish rape stories and stories of brutal beatings that were contradicted by her own photos, talk show appearances, and public appearances - not even getting into any of the many other obvious lies like her charity donation claims.

This case only worked because Amber likely has the personality disorders Dr. Curry diagnosed her with, or at the very least, has severe mental issues that prevented her from covering up her deceit in a way that a slightly more rational person looking to exact revenge on an ex would have.

TheRock1525 posted...

You do realize several male celebrities came forward with stories of being abused in the early stages of #metoo, right?

And my argument is about how largely irrelevant the verdict was. Pretty much all polling sided something like 90% with Johnny. You really believe that had the verdict come back not guilty, there were all these male domestic abuse victims that were prepared to come forward but now will wilt back into the darkness?

Depp had already won the trial long before any verdict.

Yeah and do you remember how these male celebrities who came out were treated? They were ridiculed and made fun of and disbelieved on the basis they were men. And then no other male celebrities came out about abuse again after that.

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Yeah and do you remember how these male celebrities who came out were treated? They were ridiculed and made fun of and disbelieved on the basis they were men. And then no other male celebrities came out about abuse again after that.

Okay who specifically are you talking about because Terry Crews became an internet hero for years and Kevin Spacey was taken down by a male accuser

It's still very hard in general for abuse victims to come forward but I have no idea why this narrative about male victims uniquely not being believed is still persisting considering that we went through a huge cultural shift about that at the same time as the rest of the #MeToo movement. And there are more and more male celebrities comfortable with speaking about being abuse victims, it is just generally not these big Hollywood scandals that blow up this way.

While I don't know what Biscuit is specifically referring to, those examples are pretty blatantly not directly comparable.

The Corey Feldman situation is wildly different, the mom of his deceased co-victim denounced him, which makes the whole situation extremely sticky.

kevwaffles posted...

While I don't know what Biscuit is specifically referring to, those examples are pretty blatantly not directly comparable.

What? Why? I'm genuinely not sure what you're getting at.

The claim being made was that the Depp case will finally allow male victims of abuse to be taken seriously. Rock points out they already were during #MeToo. Biscuit refutes that, so I point out specific cases.

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

What? Why? I'm genuinely not sure what you're getting at.

The claim being made was that the Depp case will finally allow male victims of abuse to be taken seriously. Rock points out they already were during #MeToo. Biscuit refutes that, so I point out specific cases.

I would imagine because those examples are all male abusers.

The bigger issue comes from men who are abused by women. That is far more likely to be ignored, excused, mocked, and/or dismissed than male victims of male abusers.

The examples I were thinking of were Crews and Matthew McConaughey, although I couldn't quite remember if Crews assailant was a man or woman.

Maniac64 posted...

The bigger issue comes from men who are abused by women. That is far more likely to be ignored, excused, mocked, and/or dismissed than male victims of male abusers.

The irony being that some of the biggest far right commentators cheering on this decision would absolutely ignore, excuse, mock, and/or dismiss Depp if not for it allowing them a cudgel against the #metoo movement.

TheRock1525 posted...

The irony being that some of the biggest far right commentators cheering on this decision would absolutely ignore, excuse, mock, and/or dismiss Depp if not for it allowing them a cudgel against the #metoo movement

That's why I expect you will see them fully focusing on Heard as a liar and not talking about her as an abuser/Depp as a victim.

Basically they can do both attack Heard and ignore Depp's victimhood.

This is the day you will always remember as the day you almost caught Captain Jack Sparrow

when the verdict was read i orgasmed so hard i broke my monitor

Absolutely right outcome.

Justice does exist in the world.

Man, Elaine sure is doing her best to talk about how unfair this trial was because they couldn't tell the jury the bogus UK trial verdict and that she couldn't include certain texts, but she's not talking about everything Depp's team couldn't include like Amber having beaten the shit out of all of her partners before and after Depp.

I mean, I expect it but she's also throwing the Judge under the bus now too which is a bad look when you're probably going to end up litigating with her again. And Elaine isn't stupid. She KNOWS that Amber's claims are bullshit by now. There's no way that she doesn't believe it, but she is either getting another paycheck from Amber to do this media round up or she's just trying to salvage her career.

Amber beat the shit out of all her partners before and after Depp?

I know there was the one ex who later said it was a misunderstanding, but who else?

I heard Elon Musk had some red marks on his face in a picture with Amber Heard

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Amber beat the shit out of all her partners before and after Depp?

I know there was the one ex who later said it was a misunderstanding, but who else?

I tried looking it up but all I found was that two officers in an airport witnessed her grab and hit her gf's arm and then rip a necklace from her neck that left visible red marks. She was booked but not prosecuted and then years later asked for them to drop it from her record. The ex claims it was a misunderstanding. And Turd claims the officers were misogynistic and homophobic because of course she would.

Cops being misogynistic and homophobic is pretty believable even when claimed by Amber Heard, so it's hard to know what to make of that one

Kenri posted...

Cops being misogynistic and homophobic is pretty believable even when claimed by Amber Heard, so it's hard to know what to make of that one

Or she spun that lie entirely so cop hating sheep like you would believe it.

The simple fact of the matter is if the victim said to drop it then it's not really any of our business. Even if a fight occurred that doesn't necessarily make it our business or mean conflict can't be resolved outside of a criminal case, which clearly both parties wanted to avoid by getting the charges dropped.

I understand it's part of this case as part of establishing a history of conflict but I really don't think you can read into it too far.

Lopen posted...

Or she spun that lie entirely so cop hating sheep like you would believe it.

Deranged response

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Amber beat the shit out of all her partners before and after Depp?

I know there was the one ex who later said it was a misunderstanding, but who else?

Elon Musk looked like he had the shit beaten out of him in pictures with her as well.

Also:

Waluigi1 posted...

I tried looking it up but all I found was that two officers in an airport witnessed her grab and hit her gf's arm and then rip a necklace from her neck that left visible red marks. She was booked but not prosecuted and then years later asked for them to drop it from her record. The ex claims it was a misunderstanding. And Turd claims the officers were misogynistic and homophobic because of course she would.

Remember the officer who arrested her testifying? She said she was a lesbian. So Amber and her ex were lying, yet again, about other people. There was no homophobia or misogyny involved.

Also, it didn't come in because there was fuckery involved with Jennifer Howell, but Amber had routinely attacked her sister physically in the past too.

Oh, and also attacked her former best friend Rocky Pennington.

She's abusive scum, to literally anyone who gets close to her.

^ And as such, no one would blame drivers who wouldn't brake for her.

Hardcore_Adult posted...

^ And as such, no one would blame drivers who wouldn't brake for her.

Bruh

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Man, Elaine sure is doing her best to talk about how unfair this trial was because they couldn't tell the jury the bogus UK trial verdict and that she couldn't include certain texts, but she's not talking about everything Depp's team couldn't include like Amber having beaten the shit out of all of her partners before and after Depp.

Why was all that disallowed? Both the stuff Johnny and Amber wanted to present.

Team Rocket Elite posted...

Why was all that disallowed? Both the stuff Johnny and Amber wanted to present.

Because you can't use a ruling in another trial to present it as the truth for another trial. It's supposed to be impartial to other decisions for finding of facts.

Certain texts also weren't allowed because they were confidential discussions between him and his assistant or irrelevant to the matters at all.

It was also agreed upon that they couldn't bring up past relationships to prove facts in this case either about whether or not they've been abusive to one another. Of course, Amber is an idiot asshole and claimed she's never been abusive in any other relationships and said that Johnny was abusive to Kate Moss, so they were allowed to bring those in because SHE made it a factor.

Something also happened with Jennifer Howell's testimony that would have shredded Whitney to ribbons and allowed her to present a letter about how Amber would beat Whitney, how Amber had told Whitney that she was the one who cut off Johnny's finger, and texts in which Whitney was trying to get her to lie for them and Jennifer was begging Whitney to tell the truth to escape her abusive sister.

Oh and a lot of Amber's photo evidence was denied because she refused to pass over her phone to authenticate them until they were entirely too late, they were so clearly altered that they could not be verified, so they were not allowed on that basis as well.

So it's rich they're pretending they were blocked from having evidence unfairly.

Oh, and they want to appeal based on the fact that the Sun won the UK Trial. That will get laughed out of any courtroom. And an appeal is dangerous because they can actually overturn her only judgment she got for the $2 million by having actual judges review it and say "Actually that ruling is bullshit from the jury and we overturn it."

That would be amazing.

Honestly I feel like this is just the work of a sociopath who thinks everyone is really really dumb.

She has a history of violence and is a pathological liar, so it's hard to believe even a single thing out her mouth, so I don't blame people for not believing her or her ex about it.

Lopen posted...

Or she spun that lie entirely so cop hating sheep like you would believe it.

Sure, that's why I said "hard to know what to make of that one".

If sheep hate cops then baa baa motherfucker lmao

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Remember the officer who arrested her testifying? She said she was a lesbian. . . . There was no homophobia or misogyny involved.

You can be a lesbian and still be homophobic or misogynistic. Doubly so if you're a cop tbh

okay i will choose to believe this lesbian cop is a woman hating anti-gay bigot over noted court-proven liar who was willing to lie about the most heinous stories of sexual assault and abuse possible and is wanted for perjury in three countries

My whole point is that neither is trustworthy, but if you want to blindly believe police in 2022 that's your prerogative I guess

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

okay i will choose to believe this lesbian cop is a woman hating anti-gay bigot over noted court-proven liar who was willing to lie about the most heinous stories of sexual assault and abuse possible and is wanted for perjury in three countries

lol come on, dude! She doesnt have to be a woman hating anti-gay bigot who lied in court, she could just be wrong.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

lol come on, dude! She doesnt have to be a woman hating anti-gay bigot who lied in court, she could just be wrong.

Why would a retired cop who literally only got involved because someone reached out anonymously with Depp's lawyer's information lie about this? Like she contacted them the night before the case and they didn't even have time to go over her testimony with her.

Further, she also claimed the other set of cops were lying too while she spun a story that is directly contradicted by their body cam, proving they told the proof there too.

I'm as outspoken as anyone about cops, even on this board. But the stretch in logic to believe this random retired cop was lying about the time she had to arrest Amber Heard is ridiculous, when her own reasoning for why she was arrested was completely and utterly absurd and the sort of thing meant to prey on the feelings of people ACTUALLY affected by discrimination from police force.

Kind of like how she weaponized the feelings of people ACTUALLY affected by domestic abuse to destroy her husband's life and boost her career.

there seems to be a lot of arguing against claims that aren't actually made in these last few posts

Kenri posted...

My whole point is that neither is trustworthy, but if you want to blindly believe police in 2022 that's your prerogative I guess

Blindly disbelieving police is not better than blindly believing them.

I won't take the word of police above a random person necessarily, but I will take the word of police over that of a known liar.

Your attitude towards police is as hateful as the things you accuse them of being. It's basically just comes off as a desire to hate on a group of people moreso than a realistic take on police.