Poll of the Day > Depp won the defamation lawsuit with $8,350,000

(+) Yeah! (+)

normal guy
https://youtu.be/xsBN_7vUP0U?t=33

Raze_Razel posted...

Nope, I'm not doing your homework for you. You're the one keep calling me wrong, the burden is on you to show me up. Get to Work.

that's not how that works, as i'm sure you know

but even if it was, the burden is still on you since you say that i'm wrong

which loops back around to this quite nicely

Adam_Savage posted...

prove your claim without trying to move the goalpost or deflect. this is the second time i've had to say this.

(eleventh)

streamofthesky posted...

dispelling a lot of the bull shit from the Amber Heard Defense Squad.

is anyone even doing this

What do these three have in common?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/6/3/AAUdByAADS7b.jpg

Adam_Savage posted...

is anyone even doing this

exactly. nobody here has been interested in defending here, just merely...acknowledging that Depp is not of solid character whatsoever.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/6/8/AAM1Q9AADS7g.jpg

They're both abusive pieces of shit that honestly deserve each other. One just had a significantly better legal team. Glad this travesty is over and we can move on to more important things.

If I don't get to see Johnny in another Pirate movie, I'm never going to CUM again!!!

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-44778997

People on this board are extremely idiotic and weird.

has fa always been this weird?

Adam_Savage posted...

has fa always been this weird?

Yes, but I'm satirizing the Deppheads.

If you don't believe that Amber was the instigator and that johnny was trying to avoid confrontation and not hit her back etc, watch/listen to this full clip. It's long, so most probably won't let me give some highlights.

In this Amber admits he hasn't hit her, Johnny literally says he left when she was throwing things at him previously to avoid getting so angry that he might hit her. She admits to having just socked him in the jaw, and that she hit him multiple times. Even in this sound bite alone she pursues him and doesn't let him leave, calling him a coward because he won't fight her.

There is more, and sadly they did not play this in court (just a small part of it) as I think if the jury had heard the whole thing they may have ruled differently. It's very obvious to me that Amber was the aggressor though and while Johnny certainly had problems it seems amazing that even while he was on drugs and often drunk, he never physically abused her (or at least there is no evidence of that) and she seems to acknowledge in this clip that he has not hit her (which is after when she claims he had now in court). Honestly I would consider this enough evidence to prove perjury since she claimed in court he hit her before this, yet doesn't deny that he hasn't hit her while she didn't know she was being recorded. In fact, she calls him a wimp, weak, and pathetic because he didn't hit her.

That totally sounds like someone who has been abused and is scared of the person she is interacting with. The only person who sounds scary in this clip is Amber.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiuUzvZMyro&ab_channel=CrimeTalk

Equality.

LeetCheet posted...

Equality.

The far left doesn't want equality any more. They use "Equity" instead, and it's very intentional.

Equality: equal opportunity
Equity: equal outcome (regardless of circumstances, like ability or experience or hours worked)

wolfy42 posted...

If you don't believe that Amber was the instigator and that johnny was trying to avoid confrontation and not hit her back etc, watch/listen to this full clip. It's long, so most probably won't let me give some highlights.

In this Amber admits he hasn't hit her, Johnny literally says he left when she was throwing things at him previously to avoid getting so angry that he might hit her. She admits to having just socked him in the jaw, and that she hit him multiple times. Even in this sound bite alone she pursues him and doesn't let him leave, calling him a coward because he won't fight her.

There is more, and sadly they did not play this in court (just a small part of it) as I think if the jury had heard the whole thing they may have ruled differently. It's very obvious to me that Amber was the aggressor though and while Johnny certainly had problems it seems amazing that even while he was on drugs and often drunk, he never physically abused her (or at least there is no evidence of that) and she seems to acknowledge in this clip that he has not hit her (which is after when she claims he had now in court). Honestly I would consider this enough evidence to prove perjury since she claimed in court he hit her before this, yet doesn't deny that he hasn't hit her while she didn't know she was being recorded. In fact, she calls him a wimp, weak, and pathetic because he didn't hit her.

That totally sounds like someone who has been abused and is scared of the person she is interacting with. The only person who sounds scary in this clip is Amber.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiuUzvZMyro&ab_channel=CrimeTalk

abuse

is

more

than

just

physical

depp, by his own admission, is an abuser.

anyways, her lawyer said they're appealing

so yes, that is, in fact, a thing she is able to do

whodathunkit

Adam_Savage posted...

abuse

is

more

than

just

physical

depp, by his own admission, is an abuser.

And in that clip she is abusing him while he is trying to flee/defuse the situation. He only admitted to abusing himself, never anyone else, which he has denied multiple times.

Your right, it is more than just physical, and she abused him verbally, emotionally AND physically. She proved that he may have retaliated a few times after being abused by her (verbally), but not that he physically abused her in any way. She has also been convicted of abusing others in the past (which was not sadly let into the trail) while he has no history of it at all.

She is an abuser, it's very obvious that is true. He on the other hand may have reacted to that abuse a few times but there is no evidence at all that he is naturally an abuser or has abused others and if there was any evidence of that, they would surely have brought it forward.

If the genders were swapped and he was a girl and she was a guy there would be no dispute here at all, imagine a guy saying "I didn't punch you, I only hit you" and attacking a girl that caused multiple trips to the emergency room etc over years. That guy would have been arrested and it would have been all over the news if it was a celebrity. If the genders were reversed nobody would be arguing for Amber at all.

wolfy42 posted...

And in that clip she is abusing him while he is trying to flee/defuse the situation. He only admitted to abusing himself, never anyone else, which he has denied multiple times.

Your right, it is more than just physical, and she abused him verbally, emotionally AND physically. She proved that he may have retaliated a few times after being abused by her (verbally), but not that he physically abused her in any way. She has also been convicted of abusing others in the past (which was not sadly let into the trail) while he has no history of it at all.

She is an abuser, it's very obvious that is true. He on the other hand may have reacted to that abuse a few times but there is no evidence at all that he is naturally an abuser or has abused others and if there was any evidence of that, they would surely have brought it forward.

If the genders were swapped and he was a girl and she was a guy there would be no dispute here at all, imagine a guy saying "I didn't punch you, I only hit you" and attacking a girl that caused multiple trips to the emergency room etc over years. That guy would have been arrested and it would have been all over the news if it was a celebrity. If the genders were reversed nobody would be arguing for Amber at all.

Don't forget financially! That's abuse, too. She literally sent him an extortion letter for shit she wanted in exchange for her "silence".

Adam_Savage posted...

that's not how that works, as i'm sure you know

Actually in this case it does. Little did you know other posters have confirmed the steps needed for Heard to succeed in an Appeal case. I took the common sense route, another posters used specific language to detail. Even if I go out of my way to link every law book in the matter, you'll ignore it and keep trolling. While the rest of the world is moving on.....You're alone on this, therefore if you're the one with a hard-on for proving how the appeal process works, despite everything that was said, well good luck to you. Nobody else cares but you (and Jen)...Burden is on you, I got nothing to prove.

prove your claim without trying to move the goalpost or deflect. this is the second time i've had to say this.

reminding you again what a Fuckin' liar you are, because you're the one that tried derailing this topic with your own personal politics defending groomers....you started moving those goalposts first.

(eleventh)

Imagine missing the plot, and no one telling him everyone is long past it.

is anyone even doing this

The entire world?

ReturnOfFa posted...

normal guy

Oh is that the video Heard edited before signing copyrights to TMZ?....yeah, let's see a 'normal guy' get pushed into a corner with Heard's bullshit and abuse before and after what you saw in the video (as was proven by the TMZ EP himself) shall we?

gaslight much?

What do these three have in common?

Better music that the shit you probably listen to, and I'm not even a Marylin Manson fan.

exactly. nobody here has been interested in defending here, just merely...acknowledging that Depp is not of solid character whatsoever.

He didn't need to be. He doesn't hide from his substance abuse problems, and pretty much every Ex from every major relationship he's had vouched for him. ....if Heard is calling him a monster, she failed to prove it. Depp having his moments of anger (because he was constantly cornered by her) doesn't mean he's a monster, it means he's an angry guy at his wits end....again, as was proven during the trial.....Want to know what a Monster is?...What Chris Brown did to Rihanna, that's what monsters do.

Jen0125 posted...

People on this board are extremely idiotic and weird.

...and you're taking one for the team to prove that?

streamofthesky posted...

Equity: equal outcome (regardless of circumstances, like ability or experience or hours worked)

That's why 'women' like Heard play mind-games, it wouldn't be hard for a Chris Brown type monster to break her in half. So her only strength is to lie, lie, and lie more, make pics and videos out of context so she can create her own story, while emasculate a father in front of his children, trash an apartment and blame it on the 'monster of the husband', ...she wanted to break him, to gain a similar outcome she couldn't have achieved as if she was a man with real outmatched physical strength.

Adam_Savage posted...

abuse

is

more

than

just

physical

depp, by his own admission, is an abuser.

Semantics, if that's your logic.

streamofthesky posted...

Don't forget financially! That's abuse, too. She literally sent him an extortion letter for shit she wanted in exchange for her "silence".

One of the most damaging things against Amber is that she attacked him after their relationship was over, trying to ruin his career, while he didn't do anything, or say anything against Amber at all. He even had friends who could have tanked her career etc, and he didn't do anything like that.

She AGAIN abused him even when they were separated, for no reason other than she could, and she had gotten away with it repeatedly in the past with no repercussions. She STILL almost got away with it, and if he hadn't decided to make his life public like he did, she would have gotten away with it scot free. Even now, while there are many who see her for what she is, there are tons who are on her side as well, and more then likely she will actually get some offers etc (they say she is done in hollywood but there are some celebrities on her side etc, and it just takes a few to give her a shot).

She brought this on herself, he did not attack her, he didn't go forth and tell the world what she put him through, he simply moved on with his life after giving her 7 mill in a settlement. SHE wrote that op ad and defamed him, knowing full well what would happen, and she made her own bed and then shat in it.

Adam_Savage posted...

anyways, her lawyer said they're appealing

so yes, that is, in fact, a thing she is able to do

whodathunkit

Don't be disingenuous with the context here.

Their appeal is NOT on the basis that her lawyer were stupid, as Jen was implying should happen. Now the game changed in the short amount of time between the verdict read and before I made this thread, to right now after Heard's lawyer spoke in the interview on the Today show.

They are directly going for the appeal based on social media bias that influenced the jury's decision....that's the OFFICIAL reasoning now.

Except what Heard didn't account for was "Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" ("False in one thing, false in everything.")

Like you Adam, once you lie even a little, you're done in the whole argument....like 'moving goalposts'....

Heard was proven over and over and over again, how she lied. Doesn't matter if the internet picked up on that and ran with it...She's still a fuckin' little liar. Who is just as done.

the point is that amber heard, herself, proved you wrong

next.

Yeah she shit the bed(literally in this case) and now she's not happy how the trial turned out.

She literally lied in front of the court. How is this fraud still being taken seriously?

She's like Trump when he lost the election and he(and the rest of the repubs) started screaming for a recount and that the election wasn't fair and therefore invalid.

What I've seen and heard of her, she really seems to be a pretty shitty person.

LeetCheet posted...

She's like Trump when he lost the election and he(and the rest of the repubs) started screaming for a recount and that the election wasn't fair and therefore invalid.

they're still doing this too

Jen0125 posted...

This is actually false. I already have explained about the UK case Johnny Depp tried against the Sun.

Using your own logic that means he didn't do anything since a court found in his favor over a news article.

Adam_Savage posted...

abuse

is

more

than

just

physical

depp, by his own admission, is an abuser.

She claimed he hit her which would be physical abuse.

Yes. People shouldn't strive to be idiots like Trump who cries foul when things doesn't go their way.

For privileged people, equality might feel like oppression.

Revelation34 posted...

She claimed he hit her which would be physical abuse.

that doesn't change anything about what i said

here is a thought experiment, alright?

lets say, somehow, you get a wife/husband. the love of your life. then you tell them you want to gang-rape their corpse.

do you think that is not abusive? yes/no

Adam_Savage posted...

that doesn't change anything about what i said

here is a thought experiment, alright?

do you think that is not abusive? yes/no

It would be abuse if he actually said it to her in a threatening manner. Talking about somebody else to a third party isn't abuse.

Adam_Savage posted...

anyways, her lawyer said they're appealing

so yes, that is, in fact, a thing she is able to do

whodathunkit

Wow shocking I hope they don't have a hard time working 15 different trials to do their appeal

Revelation34 posted...

Using your own logic that means he didn't do anything since a court found in his favor over a news article.

?

Revelation34 posted...

It would be abuse if he actually said it to her in a threatening manner. Talking about somebody else to a third party isn't abuse.

it absolutely can be abuse, especially when whatever he said made it back to her

there is no good person/bad person in this story. They were both terribly abusive towards one another.

Some career advice for Heard from an expert:

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/6/5/AAR-4XAADTE1.jpg

Well she claimed she was going to donate her divorce money right? And it was 8 million and she's not actually donated any of it. So she should have it!

Adam_Savage posted...

the point is that amber heard, herself, proved you wrong

No, you're just saying that. Because you have no proof.

Jen0125 posted...

Wow shocking I hope they don't have a hard time working 15 different trials to do their appeal

Pay attention will you...... They're appealing for a different reason that you thought they should.... If they appealed your way they would've needed extra trials to prove the lawyers were incompetent. But that isn't what they are going for....

Now for this:

Remember when I said:
Raze_Razel posted... #172

I believe that most of all.... but it's America, everyone has a price....

As I tried to explain earlier, how Pirates 6 would never work with or without Depp in this point in time (until Adam_Savage had to make it all triggering and political)... The first step is to even get Depp to listen to them. Disney is desperate, no doubt. First the shareholders would first have to fire all the "woke" executives who are suckers for fringy social media trends that created these messes in the first place. Replace them all with those who are more aligned with making content that is profitable for the mainstream audience instead of trying to shove tailor-made fringe politics into the mouths of the majority. Once the effect of such changes are seen, it would garner more attention from A-list actors to want in on that action.

I'm sure that when they'll approach him for Pirates 6....or maybe 7, considering the damage to Pirates 6 is already in motion. It'll bomb no matter what. If they learn from that mistake, they'll want Depp to come to save the franchise.

They would grovel to him and offer all those Alpacas and the GDP of Guam to get him to the table... I don't even think Depp would say no to that.

Well...this just happened:
"The Movie Executive Who Fired Johnny Depp Is Officially Stepping Down"
https://insidethemagic.net/2022/06/toby-emmerich-stepping-down-fired-johnny-depp-rwb1/

Granted that this isn't from Disney (yet), it's from WB concerning Depp's firing from "Fantastic Beasts".....but it PROVES the big machine is already turning in favor of Depp, rectifying it's mistakes.

Now, Toby Emmerich, the Warner Bros. executive who fired Depp, has made the decision to step away from his post. Deadline reported:

the chairman of Warner Bros. Pictures Group is segueing to a lucrative five-year production deal on the lot, so hes not going far. He apparently was offered to stay, but would have had to cede oversee on Warner Bros. Animation and DC, an option the former New Line President didnt want.

While it seems that Emmerichs departure from his post isnt directly related to the Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard trial, the executive did take heat for his choice to let Depp go two years ago.
...
At this time, the exact trajectory of Warner Bros. upcoming movies and whether or not Depp or Heard will have roles in them remains unclear.

...so reading between the lines (or just helping Adam_Savage learn how to read, lol). It's basically saying big-time movie EP Toby Emmerich (who had a hand in making movies like Dumb & Dumber, Se7en, Last Man Standing, Boogie Nights, Dark City, Austin Powers trilogy, Blade 2, Rush Hour trilogy, Elf, A History of Violence, The Hobbit Trilogy, It, ...and the new Elvis movie) still had a 5 year contract with WB. It seems Toby couldn't be fired directly, so they offered him a demotion. From making blockbuster movies, to making cheap DC cartoons (which most of them are garbage fluff anyways). But I guess he said screw that and left altogether.

In relation to what I said above, it's a strong and accurate prediction to think Disney would follow the same path as WB has. To get rid of all the "woke" execs, so the studios can be more appealing IF Depp returned to do business with them.

WB is wrestling with the fact that Aquaman 2 is going to bomb no matter what, because of Heard's bullshit lies and Depp getting fired from Fantastic Beasts (which too will be subject to failing as well).....so WB is frantically trying to save face here, it's quite obvious.

So what about Disney? Think the 'wisest' thing to do is the same thing? Junk the "wokeness", and make with the Alpacas?....we'll see....

Raze_Razel posted...

Pay attention will you...... They're appealing for a different reason that you thought they should.... If they appealed your way they would've needed extra trials to prove the lawyers were incompetent. But that isn't what they are going for....

No they wouldn't have. You are still wrong.

Raze_Razel posted...

No, you're just saying that. Because you have no proof.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2022/06/02/amber-heard-appeal-johnny-depp-trial/

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/tv/story/2022-06-02/amber-heard-johnny-depp-verdict-defamation-trial-appeal-bredehoft

https://www.newsweek.com/amber-heard-possible-appeal-requirements-1712273

https://deadline.com/2022/06/johnny-depp-amber-heard-trial-appeal-plans-1235037177/

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2022/06/amber-heard-will-appeal-johnny-depps-defamation-win-her-lawyer-says

Raze_Razel posted...

They are directly going for the appeal

Raze_Razel posted...

Rules of discourse says you need to be consistent, can't flip-flop

Where is she going to get the money to appeal? Gofundme?

Jen0125 posted...

No they wouldn't have. You are still wrong.

Yes, they would've have. As explained a million times now. It would be wrong to think they can approach the Appeal court with zero evidence that it was incompetent lawyers; they would need to prove that FIRST, before speaking to the Appeal court about her trial against Depp.

So you are wrong there. In this, and the fact that she's appealing based on other factors that Adam is yipping on about now...

Adam_Savage posted...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2022/06/02/amber-heard-appeal-johnny-depp-trial/

"Heard lawyer: Actress will appeal, thinks social media influenced jury."

Considering that 'social media' got all their information from the trial. It could've gone both ways if there was actual EGREGIOUS evidence against Depp, proving wHaT a MoNsTeR he was....He would've been thrown to the wolves like Harvey Weinstein had. Which actually was the case for the past 5-6 years, getting fired from Pirates and Fantastic Beasts. But truth prevailed.

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/tv/story/2022-06-02/amber-heard-johnny-depp-verdict-defamation-trial-appeal-bredehoft

"As Amber Heard plans appeal, her lawyer says she cant pay Johnny Depp $10.4 million"

Not anyone else's fucking problem at this point. Heard is done. Done in Hollywood. Dropped by fashion companies (probably, it would be smart of them to since I doubt they don't want Heard advertising for their "bruising kits"). Elon already had her, doubt he'll take her in. ...She's broke, and finished, that was the point....

https://www.newsweek.com/amber-heard-possible-appeal-requirements-1712273

"What Amber Heard Needs to Prove for Successful Appeal"

Heard must first prove that the "judge made a serious error that made the trial unfair to her" as part of any possible appeal. He also said that an appellate court does not review facts, or the credibility of the witnesses, and "does not second guess the jury's determination as which testimony is credible or not."

So Jen listen up, your boy Adam sold you out with this one right here.... You're claiming "incompetent lawyers", was the way to go, except this article says she will be going after the Judge. See that's more simpler path to take, you don't need to go through other trials suing everyone that sucked at their job to prove to the Appeal courts. Except the real problem now is the Judge's directions were pretty cut and dry. Depp was suing for defamation, so the Judge's questions is straightforward. "Did Heard's Op-Ed refer to Depp?" and "Was the comment defamatory?"...yes and yes..... and as said in YOUR article, "an appellate court does not review facts, or the credibility of the witnesses, and "does not second guess the jury's determination as which testimony is credible or not."....so what is an Appellate court to do? Since Heard is basically thinking she can get a do-over on the whole thing, which isn't what they do....she's fucked....as is your whole counter-argument thus far.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2022/06/amber-heard-will-appeal-johnny-depps-defamation-win-her-lawyer-says

"Amber Heard Will Appeal Johnny Depps Defamation Win, Her Lawyer Says"

Sure,...all the leftist, feminist, woke journalist are going to double-down on all their previous statements made against Depp....this article doesn't say anything new.

Suppress how? so what? There were incidents not in Depp's favour about the actions he took, and for the most part proved was purely reactionary to the actual real monstrous abuse she laid on him, and that she lied about any assault too.

Thanks for all the evidence,...you proved nothing.

They are directly going for the appeal

uh huh...and?.....certainly not the way Jen thought before she opened her mouth and blew up the thread with her trolling.

Even I knew Heard would appeal, because she's a fuckin' petualant child pulling a temper tantrum, who's about 2 seconds away from officially being a poor Texan bumpkin trailer trash. She'll do what she can to hold on to whatever swag her Hollywood experiences bestowed on her.

Rules of discourse says you need to be consistent, can't flip-flop

Nothing I've said has been inconsistent though.... Jen thought Heard will appeal based on stupid lawyers, She was wrong about that. And she was wrong about what would need to happen so Heard can prove she had stupid lawyers. Now she's wrong simply because the Appeal court isn't going do what she thinks it's going to do, which is basically giving her another trial...

Revelation34 posted...

Where is she going to get the money to appeal? Gofundme?

Only Fans.

She can show us "how Depp used the wine bottle in her", she can still plead her case to the masses that way. Except I'm not a simp, so I'll probably wait for the clips of her act to show up on EF^KT along with other camgirls who punch themselves in the face for views....

What you're talking about is called a motion. Not a trial. Just fyi.

Jen0125 posted...

What you're talking about is called a motion. Not a trial. Just fyi.

It's a trial,...just 15 minute version of one.

During which the court of appeals is a structured discussion between the appellate lawyers and the panel of judges focusing on the legal principles in dispute.

In that time, according to you're silly "stupid lawyer" angle, is that they would have to have a separate trial over the lawyers to PROVE they were stupid, before forming their argument to the appellate; otherwise, again, what proof would that had that the lawyers were stupid? that's can't be done in 15 minutes, unless it was prepared BEFOREHAND.

But thanks to Adam shooting himself in the foot with all those links, the real reason Heard is appealing is because social media tainted the jury and the judge was unfair in her instructions. The problem is the Appellate doesn't argue with the jury, and the judge's instructions were clear in servicing the scope of the trial.

They're also not going to speak about fact of the case, even evidence that was 'supposedly' suppressed during the Depp's trial.

...so that's three times you two have been wrong.

a motion takes place before the trial, it's not a trial

it would be called a trial if it was

I want some trial mix

Lmfaoooooooooooo omg

moreover, you can ask for a motion during a trial, actually.

because it's not a trial

it's literally just asking the court to make a decision based off of the movants request

however, that's rare and usually not allowed, most courts only hear motions after legal proceedings have been filed, and before trial.

Do you think each side bar is a trial since it's a direct private argument to the judge?

Jen0125 posted...

Do you think each side bar is a trial since it's a direct private argument to the judge?

SInce it's part of the main trial....yes...

But Appealing is another trial altogether.

Nice try.

Lmao

it's not though

an appeal is not a re-trial or a new trial

it is an appeal

it's still the same original trial

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/law_related_education_network/how_courts_work/appeals

An appeal is not a retrial or a new trial of the case. The appeals courts do not usually consider new witnesses or new evidence. Appeals in either civil or criminal cases are usually based on arguments that there were errors in the trial s procedure or errors in the judge's interpretation of the law.