celeb news Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard Trial

[NausAllien]

26 minutes ago, suburbannature said:

No one with knowledge of IPV litigation was confident in a win for Heard based on the jury information and because of how rarely that perpetrators of abuse are held accountable in court.

I have to admit I was quite confident that if the jury followed the facts and the law as it's written, there was no way they could award Depp anything in damages. Not only he failed to prove those three claims were false, but he also failed to prove that they had damaged his career and make him lose money. He was already on the decline before the op-ed came out, and it was decided months before the op-ed that there wouldn't greenlight a new pirates movie.

 

I guess I underestimated how biased and bad at their job the jury could be. I'm not so used to jury trials. In my country, Argentina, most trials are bench trials, because our legal system is mostly based on Roman Civil Law rather than Common Law. I thought the jury was supposed to be impartial and put their personal feelings aside, but the result clearly indicates they didn't. What they did is OJ Simpson 2.0 (which I thought it was a fluke and it wouldn't happen again). They completely ignored the facts and the law and did whatever the hell they wanted.

 

From now on, I'll probably use this trial as an argument as to why jury trials, especially for civil matters, are a TERRIBLE idea.

 

[suburbannature]

Just now, NausAllien said:

I have to admit I was quite confident that if the jury followed the facts and the law as it's written, there was no way they could award Depp anything in damages. Not only he failed to prove those three claims were false, but he also failed to prove that they had damaged his career and make him lose money. He was already on the decline before the op-ed came out, and it was decided months before the op-ed that there wouldn't greenlight a new pirates movie.

 

I guess I underestimated how biased and bad at their job the jury could be. I'm not so used to jury trials. In my country, Argentina, most trials are bench trials, because our legal system is mostly based on Roman Civil Law rather than Common Law. I thought the jury was supposed to be impartial and put their personal feelings aside, but the result clearly indicates they didn't. What they did is OJ Simpson 2.0 (which I thought it was a fluke and it wouldn't happen again). They completely ignored the facts and the law and did whatever the hell they wanted.

 

From now on, I'll probably use this trial as an argument as to why jury trials, especially for civil matters, are a TERRIBLE idea.

 

It's very clearly going to be appealed. I don't know whether or not that will be successful, but there are several grounds that warrant it. Crucial evidence was not allowed, the gallery became a circus and cameras should not have been allowed in, the jury was not sequestered despite enormous public interest, and the jury findings were incongruent with expectations set forth.

[NausAllien]

9 minutes ago, suburbannature said:

It's very clearly going to be appealed. I don't know whether or not that will be successful, but there are several grounds that warrant it. Crucial evidence was not allowed, the gallery became a circus and cameras should not have been allowed in, the jury was not sequestered despite enormous public interest, and the jury findings were incongruent with expectations set forth.

It's my understanding that the Court of Appeals won't look at the facts of the case and whether the fact finders came to the "right" conclusion, but if there was evidence that was excluded that could have led to a different result, they will consider that. A lawyer also said that the trial should have never taken place in Virginia in the first place and the rationale that was given (the servers of the WaPo are in Virginia) is very weak. 

 

It is a long shot, but I hope she doesn't give up and fights until the end to right this wrong.

[Gaia]

The way the Heard fanatics are constantly talking about Depp supporters "ignoring evidence" while they do the EXACT same thing  

 

I just feel sorry at this point. I believe someday they'll look back and realize they're one in the same breed as overzealous, self-righteous, religious freaks who believe they're morally righteous and everyone who doesn't share their beliefs is morally bankrupt and will "regret" their actions/beliefs. 

The fact that devout religious people throughout history have tried to silence/kill their “opposition” and Heard fanatics in here were asking for ZTP to be exerted on people who didn’t support Heard

Nothing but extremists who somehow view themselves as the objective ones who are coming to honest and valid opinions. 

The parallels are disturbing   

Edited June 6, 2022 by Gaia

[Raiden]

Herders continue to show their true colors. For days now they are out there harassing an innocent woman. Completely out of order attack on the court stenographer named Judy Bellinger — she has been nothing but fair and neutral to all. Her job didn't require her to take any side so she didn't have to and she didn't! Yet, toxic AH stans have decided that she needs to be attacked — an innocent woman who did 100% nothing wrong. Shows you the massive gap between their bogus "believe all women" rhetoric and their actual extremely toxic and misogynistic practices.

 

 

 

[suburbannature]

Just now, Gaia said:

The way the Heard fanatics are constantly talking about Depp supporters "ignoring evidence" while they do the EXACT same thing  

 

I just feel sorry at this point. I believe someday they'll look back and realize they're one in the same breed as overzealous, self-righteous, religious freaks who believe they're morally righteous and everyone who doesn't share their beliefs is morally bankrupt and will "regret" their actions/beliefs. 

 

The parallels are disturbing   

If that's the case then please look back to my lengthy posts citing evidence, legal standards, and IPV trends (as an expert myself) and respond accordingly. 

 

Again, you skip over any substance to make sweeping statements like "overzealous freaks" without wanting to engage in actual analysis of the evidence.

[Communion]

18 hours ago, Chris said:

Without biting my head off, can someone elaborate on the sexual assault?

 

The reason why I am asking is because she said she was assaulted with a glass bottle and then the next day she took some picture of the same bottle or something?

 

Can someone fill me in?

Also to give you an answer that isn't from right-wingers who think rape is funny - Amber never said that the bottle broke inside of her or anything else they claim, but that she didn't know if the bottle he had grabbed was broken or not since he had smashed one of the bottles while they were previously arguing; she was describing the thoughts that were racing through her mind that made her terrified as he kept pressing it against her pubic bone - what if the bottle is jagged? What if he shoves the top part of the bottle in deeply? etc.

 

She even said on the stand that she tried calming herself down the next morning and rationalize that it was fine what happened because he "only" pressed the tip of the Maker's Mark bottle against her labia into her vaginal opening when pushing her back against the fridge.

 

This is the epitome of where people criticize Heard not on the basis that Depp did not do as she said but that her reactions and recollections of them are "overly-dramatic" or "histrionic" and thus argue that, whatever Depp did that they often can't defend as not happening, was justified simply for not being as bad as she claimed.

 

People like the right-wingers and reactionaries in here like @Gaia and others treat this like a fun sports event when the discussion Is essentially on if it was fine or not for someone to squeeze or touch their partner's genitals in a way that feels threatening while making physical threats to them.  People posting on social media them buying Maker's Mark as a way to mock the idea that Depp pushed the tip of the bottle against Amber's ****** cause it's "funny" is so ????? 

Edited June 5, 2022 by Communion

[Weld_E]

1 hour ago, Gaia said:

They actually think they’re some heroic and morally righteous people because they support Heard. But hey, unaware and uneducated religious people who exhibit the same behaviors are also the same trump supporters. I guess the analogy is spot on!

It’s amusing how you don’t see the irony in you writing this, lol.

[Weld_E]

11 minutes ago, Raiden said:

Herders continue to show their true colors. For days now they are out there harassing an innocent woman.

Suddenly you have a problem with harassment when you have been silent on the online and offline harassment Amber was and continues to receive from Deppsters? If anyone is showing their true colors with their clear and ridiculous bias, it’s you.

[Rogue_Redux]

1 hour ago, Daydream said:

https://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/actors/amber-heard-net-worth/

 

Her net worth has been updated to -$6 million

Congratulations, if you’re reading this you are likely worth more than Amber Heard

 

 

[Weld_E]

19 minutes ago, Gaia said:

The way the Heard fanatics are constantly talking about Depp supporters "ignoring evidence" while they do the EXACT same thing  

 

I just feel sorry at this point. I believe someday they'll look back and realize they're one in the same breed as overzealous, self-righteous, religious freaks who believe they're morally righteous and everyone who doesn't share their beliefs is morally bankrupt and will "regret" their actions/beliefs. 

 

The parallels are disturbing   

You have literally been ignoring every single valid argument thrown at you and responding with the same  condescending analogies about “Heard fanatics” over and over again. Several posters have rationally responded to you and the only thing you have to say back is “ZOMG Heard fanatics are crazy!!111”

 

If you don’t have the intellect or ability to engage in a civil and mature argument, and are only here for the memes and the laughs that are being ruined by “Amber fanatics”, just say so and go.

[Raiden]

2 minutes ago, Weld_E said:

Suddenly you have a problem with harassment when you have been silent on the online and offline harassment Amber was and continues to receive from Deppsters? If anyone is showing their true colors with their clear and ridiculous bias, it’s you.

Ah so AH cult is now even shamelessly admitting that they are bullying an innocent woman.

 

We have descended to the level of justifying harassment of the innocent by the preposterously flawed logic that "my side was harassed first"........... completely ignoring the fact that the person they are harassing is not on ANY side. Everyone including AH's own team clapped for Judy.  AH alone refused to clap — that was evidently taken by her fans as a sign and a green light to pound on her).

 

 

[Weld_E]

9 minutes ago, Raiden said:

Ah so AH cult is now even shamelessly admitting that they are bullying an innocent woman.

No one admitted to anything nor condoned harassment of any kind.

 

It’s you who is suddenly expressing how appalled you are by the idea of a woman getting harassed, but had nothing to say the last two weeks when it was Amber getting a disturbing level of harrament we haven’t seen in a long time. But way to deflect from your embarrassingly contradictory sentiments.

[Rick]

5 hours ago, Gaia said:

The way the Heard fanatics are constantly talking about Depp supporters "ignoring evidence" while they do the EXACT same thing  

 

I just feel sorry at this point. I believe someday they'll look back and realize they're one in the same breed as overzealous, self-righteous, religious freaks who believe they're morally righteous and everyone who doesn't share their beliefs is morally bankrupt and will "regret" their actions/beliefs. 

 

The parallels are disturbing   

Thank you

[suburbannature]

and, as expected, it’s crickets in response to my attempt to engage in a dialogue about actual evidence.

 

—-

There’s a 30-day deadline for an appeal in VA, right? @NausAllien

[manuelalex9810]

John Legend liking tweets supporting Amber 

 

[NausAllien]

27 minutes ago, manuelalex9810 said:

John Legend liking tweets supporting Amber 

I bet a lot of celebrities secretly support her but are afraid of the backlash if they say so publicly. Depp has some of the most deranged and aggressive fans I've seen. The way they attacked Jason Momoa recently just because he MIGHT HAVE stood up for Amber for Aquaman 2 was disgusting. They're a very scary bunch.

 

Amber too has some fans that are a little bit aggressive. Coming after the stenographer was NOT cool. But that's one incident, compared to DOZENS I've seen from Depp's fans. They are, by far, the most toxic group of people I've seen in my life.

[My Tears Ricochet]

17 hours ago, Daydream said:

Her net worth has been updated to -$6 million

Congratulations, if you’re reading this you are likely worth more than Amber Heard

[manuelalex9810]

Hopefully Amber appeals, this can’t be real. 

 

[Guest]

Airing this was a huge mistake, regardless if you believe one side or the other, people making fun of someone sharing their abusive past will just bring more shame to future victims of abuse trying to denounce their agressors. 

[Ferret]

10 hours ago, suburbannature said:

and, as expected, it’s crickets in response to my attempt to engage in a dialogue about actual evidence.

 

—-

There’s a 30-day deadline for an appeal in VA, right? @NausAllien

Most of people are on Depp’s side. Get over it. 

[suburbannature]

5 minutes ago, Ferret said:

Most of people are on Depp’s side. Get over it. 

Using public opinion as a barometer in an IPV case is both faulty and nonsensical. It's also irrelevant to the point being made.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 7, 2022 by suburbannature

[Ferret]

1 minute ago, suburbannature said:

Using public opinion as a barometer in an IPV case is both faulty and nonsensical. It's also irrelevant to the point being made.

 

 

 

 

??? Im just trying to say that you should stop trying to change peoples mind by arguing here. Everyone has picked a side, most of us have chosen to be on Depp’s side for obvious reasons and not to believe amber for obvious reasons too. Move one, most of us have already

[suburbannature]

Just now, Ferret said:

??? Im just trying to say that you should stop trying to change peoples mind by arguing here. Everyone has picked a side, most of us have chosen to be on Depp’s side for obvious reasons and not to believe amber for obvious reasons too. Move one, most of us have already

And the point here is that you all don't understand these "obvious reasons" (i.e. TikTok videos and edited audio) and refuse to even entertain any of the massive amount of evidence of Depp's abuse brought forth. There's deflection each time.

[Raiden]

11 hours ago, suburbannature said:

And the point here is that you all don't understand these "obvious reasons" (i.e. TikTok videos and edited audio) and refuse to even entertain any of the massive amount of evidence of Depp's abuse brought forth. There's deflection each time.

lulz — "massive" my foot.

 

You have as much evidence as a flat earther.

 

I suspect what you keep calling evidence is what ended up as being classified as hearsay during the trial. Arguing with you point by point would require one sift thru every objections called by Camille & co and also follow up which of those were sustained by judge Penny Azcarate, and vice versa (the overrules in case of objections by Elaine, Rotten born & co. This is a job best left for a lawyerly type person, someone who not only followed the case but also either studied law or otherwise has grasp of the field and all the nuances of what counts as evidence and what has to be dismissed as conjecture or hearsay or whatever. These specialist type of people overwhelmingly agree with the verdict.

 

And it's ironic that you mentioned Tiktok as being at fault for misleading ordinary people. The only ones who got confused and believed jokes and memes as if they were real are elite mainstream journos who didn't properly do their job and follow the case — like that LA Times hack who wrote that Jason Momoa testified in the trial — which of course never happened (it was a Tik tok meme that the agenda-driven pro AH journo decided to believe on his own, exposing that he didn't follow the case like the sleuths did). In other words it's all projection: they are the ones who can't distinguish between memes and facts, not the ordinary folks they accuse condescendingly.

 

And besides, all that court stuff is only half the work. One also have to labour thru the tedious internal logic (and lack thereof) of each accusation on its own, piece by piece. And besides any debate about evidence requires both sides to agree on a minimum of certain basic principles, like rejecting quackery / magic and respecting science (that for example real wounds don't heal within 24 hours, only the fake ones do):

 

https://i.postimg.cc/0NgZ11jc/image.jpg

Edited June 7, 2022 by Raiden