celeb news Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard Trial

[Communion]

12 minutes ago, Ari29 said:

Whatever damages the jury awards him is the verdict…what point were you trying to make?

Let me rephrase my question to you since you're pretending to be confused - you understand that the burden of proof for defamation falls on the prosecution, that defamation cases in the US almost always end in the defendant winning, and that even Depp's most staunch supporters realize there is very little chance of him actually winning this case, just like he lost the case in the much stricter UK, yes? 

Edited May 11, 2022 by Communion

[Ari29]

6 minutes ago, Communion said:

Let me rephrase my question to you since you're pretending to be confused - you understand that the burden of proof for defamation falls on the prosecution, that defamation cases in the US almost always end in the defendant winning, and that even Depp's most staunch supporters realize there is very little chance of him actually winning this case, just like he lost the case in the much stricter UK, yes? 

Cardi B says hello!

[Communion]

28 minutes ago, Ari29 said:

Cardi B says hello!

Are you referencing a Youtuber directly making public accusations where she named Cardi and claimed that Cardi's child was mentally disabled, that Cardi had a multitude of STIs and other infectious diseases, and that she sold drugs? Sis, we're talking about a respected newspaper letting an actress write a pretty formal and vague op-ed; not slanderous Bossip-style headlines made for clickbait.

 

That people were shocked Cardi won despite the claims being so egregious and outlandish in slander should tell you how a case of Depp suing Amber for writing the words "I became a public figure representing domestic violence" will go, especially when the judge in the case you're citing sided with Cardi because none of the claims about Cardi were factually true, while Depp has now been found to have factually been a wife-beater across several lawsuits. The UK case found that The Sun using the descriptor "wife-beater" to describe Depp was not a neglect for the truth since there was reason to believe he did beat his wife (Amber) on over 12 occasions.

 

It's like some of you think this case can be won just by showing Amber was not the perfect victim, but much more of it lies on Depp's team convincing the jury that Depp himself was not abusive to Amber in any way; not that Amber herself engaged in reactionary violence or abuse back. 

Edited May 11, 2022 by Communion

[FOCK]

40 minutes ago, Communion said:

Let me rephrase my question to you since you're pretending to be confused - you understand that the burden of proof for defamation falls on the prosecution, that defamation cases in the US almost always end in the defendant winning, and that even Depp's most staunch supporters realize there is very little chance of him actually winning this case, just like he lost the case in the much stricter UK, yes? 

You’re right in that defamation cases are rarely won & the burden of proof rests on Depp. But that’s all the more reason for why Heard may not be being completely truthful. I don’t see any benefit in Depp pursuing this if the abuse allegations are sincere, especially not when he himself demanded it be broadcast? He must be fairly confident in his case. 
 

The damage to him is done, and regardless of the verdict, I don’t think a legal vindication is going to restore his career losses. I don’t imagine he’s in need of money, nor can I reason that he’s doing this to damage Amber’s reputation, in a sense, to sink her along with him. It just isn’t worth it. 

[Digitalism]

Another thing I learned about this is that Amber is actually a great actress 

And Johnny doesn't care about acting anymore not even in his trial 

[TasteOfYourLips]

3 hours ago, Ari29 said:

Again with the insults…honestly if anyone looks brain dead it’s the people buying Amber’s story full stop with all the inconsistencies and the fact that by her own account of the night she was on a myriad of drugs including freaking hallucinogens…which could be the only explanation for her concocted story. 
 

Verifiable experts in various fields are coming out left and right to explain with facts how far fetched Amber’s account comes across. 
 

Also, you know nothing.  Im as much a fan of Johnny Depp as I am a fan of Amber Heard, I’ve seen the same amount of their movies: 1

 

3 hours ago, Raiden said:

BS you're not addressing our point but constructing strawmen and arguing your own straws

 

No no one is saying that every or most or even many or even ANY domestic abuse victims *must* look like that. We are only saying that Amber alone should look something like that (given the claims that she had made and is still making

The argument you are defending and are making are distasteful, disrespectful and stupid. How many domestic abuse victims have you seen? I personally have seen a high schooler successfully cover a black eye let alone a pro MUA. 

 

Y'all want to believe Johnny and dispute whatever Amber says fine but do better because that **** is absoutely tragic. 

[Ari29]

2 hours ago, Communion said:

Are you referencing a Youtuber directly making public accusations where she named Cardi and claimed that Cardi's child was mentally disabled, that Cardi had a multitude of STIs and other infectious diseases, and that she sold drugs? Sis, we're talking about a respected newspaper letting an actress write a pretty formal and vague op-ed; not slanderous Bossip-style headlines made for clickbait.

 

That people were shocked Cardi won despite the claims being so egregious and outlandish in slander should tell you how a case of Depp suing Amber for writing the words "I became a public figure representing domestic violence" will go, especially when the judge in the case you're citing sided with Cardi because none of the claims about Cardi were factually true, while Depp has now been found to have factually been a wife-beater across several lawsuits. The UK case found that The Sun using the descriptor "wife-beater" to describe Depp was not a neglect for the truth since there was reason to believe he did beat his wife (Amber) on over 12 occasions.

 

It's like some of you think this case can be won just by showing Amber was not the perfect victim, but much more of it lies on Depp's team convincing the jury that Depp himself was not abusive to Amber in any way; not that Amber herself engaged in reactionary violence or abuse back. 

It’s not about Amber being a perfect victim. It’s about things not aligning…from the night of the incident in question there’s only one person who received medical treatment. It wasn’t Amber. 
 

She describes being dragged across glass, yet in the audio no one mentions any injuries to her nor does she seemed concerned with any injuries to herself.
 

This lady said with a straight face that she was violently pushed, fell backwards over a chaise lounge chair and hit her head on bricks upon falling….and she simply got back up to continue the fight. This sounds realistic to you? Someone violently breaks your ribs and you don’t need medical attention? Not worried about internal bleeding? 
 

I tend to believe victims in most cases but these accounts make absolutely no sense to me.

 

[publikcitizen]

When will this be over?

[brraap]

Why would her team use a concealer palette that hadn’t even come out yet as the main opening argument for their case 

[Headlock]

16 hours ago, Patient Zero said:

Or is this more confirmation bias from my side?

...yes 

[brraap]

1 hour ago, Ari29 said:

It’s not about Amber being a perfect victim. It’s about things not aligning…from the night of the incident in question there’s only one person who received medical treatment. It wasn’t Amber. 
 

She describes being dragged across glass, yet in the audio no one mentions any injuries to her nor does she seemed concerned with any injuries to herself.
 

This lady said with a straight face that she was violently pushed, fell backwards over a chaise lounge chair and hit her head on bricks upon falling….and she simply got back up to continue the fight. This sounds realistic to you? Someone violently breaks your ribs and you don’t need medical attention? Not worried about internal bleeding? 
 

I tend to believe victims in most cases but these accounts make absolutely no sense to me.

 

Women bruise like a peach, even at the slightest hint of damage like bumping into the door frame on the way out. Even that’s enough to leave a bruise. Because they have less collagen meaning their skin is thinner and blood vessels burst easier. It also means that their bruises are far more visible than mens.
 

So what I don’t understand is how he supposedly slammed her head into the wall multiple times, knelt on her back etc and there’s no signs of that? Not even any redness which happens straight on impact and lingers before the bruise forms. Unless Amber’s built like an absolute tank 

[Headlock]

The amount of youtube videos being posted in this thread 

[Headlock]

5 minutes ago, brraap said:

Women bruise like a peach, even at the slightest hint of damage like bumping into the door frame on the way out.

Imma need a peer-reviewed citation on this one cause 

[brraap]

16 hours ago, Darkgalord said:

Look how swollen Rihanna's face looks after getting beaten up for real.

Makeup can't cover swelling. 

-

omg

 

 

 

Tmi but I got punched by a man, only around 3 quick blows, but got a bruised rib from that and very visible instant bruising on the areas of impact 

 

So I don’t understand her case at all 

[brraap]

3 minutes ago, Headlock said:

Imma need a peer-reviewed citation on this one cause 

It’s actually a very common problem for us to find random bruises because of small bumps 

 

https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/paed4v/why-women-bruise-more-easily-than-men

 

[Headlock]

1 minute ago, brraap said:

It’s actually a very common problem for us to find random bruises because of small bumps 

 

https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/paed4v/why-women-bruise-more-easily-than-men

 

Quote

There's only one problem with this theory: Not every woman has more subcutaneous fat than every man. It's a common belief that women have an extra layer of fat—one that pops up on weight loss and bodybuilding blogs and even in an episode of Cheers.

As is often the case, gender differences are complicated. "It's hard to make such sweeping generalizations," says Cohen. "It really depends on somebody's BMI." BMI stands for Body Mass Index, a number derived from your total body mass divided by your height. Like gender, humans have an extremely wide range when it comes to BMI.

Literally from the Vice article (lol) you just posted 

You made the most general statement possible about bruising to try and uphold your opinion, that's not how it works.

[brraap]

They need to bring in an actual medical expert at this point 

[brraap]

3 minutes ago, Headlock said:

Literally from the Vice article (lol) you just posted 

You made the most general statement possible about bruising to try and uphold your opinion, that's not how it works.

And what’s amber’s BMI?  
 

The hoops you jump through 

Edited May 11, 2022 by brraap

[Headlock]

8 minutes ago, brraap said:

And what’s amber’s BMI?  
 

The hoops you jump through 

Do YOU know it?  What the hell kind of question 

 

Wanting actual peer-reviewed data and not Vice articles is the opposite of jumping through hoops. Making sweeping generalizations about half of the world's population based on Vice articles though, that would fit your accusation... 

Which is even funnier considering you also just said this:

 

9 minutes ago, brraap said:

They need to bring in an actual medical expert at this point 

Why not just bring up a reader of Vice? 

Edited May 11, 2022 by Headlock

[SamanthaJadeFr]

40 minutes ago, publikcitizen said:

When will this be over?

May 26th.

[brraap]

11 minutes ago, Headlock said:

Do YOU know it?  What the hell kind of question 

 

Wanting actual peer-reviewed data and not Vice articles is the opposite of jumping through hoops. Making sweeping generalizations about half of the world's population based on Vice articles though, that would fit your accusation... 

Which is even funnier considering you also just said this:

 

Why not just bring up a reader of Vice? 

It’s a proven fact that being female is a huge factor when it comes bruising easily. Unless you’re just being obtuse on purpose
 

The only argument that Amber could possibly make is that as a thinner woman, with low BMI, she has less fat so wouldn’t bruise as easily as a larger woman. But she still will bruise easily because she is a woman.
 

The fact that she has pale skin also plays another huge factor. Bruises are more visible 

 

Here’s an article if you want to read some more instead of being annoying 

 

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1556-4029.14294

[Ari29]

2 minutes ago, brraap said:

It’s a proven fact that being female is a huge factor when it comes bruising easily. Unless you’re just being obtuse on purpose
 

The only argument that Amber could possibly make is that as a thinner woman, with low BMI, she has less fat so wouldn’t bruise as easily as a larger woman. But she still will bruise easily because she is a woman.
 

The fact that she has pale skin also plays another huge factor. Bruises are more visible 

 

Here’s an article if you want to read some more instead of being annoying 

 

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1556-4029.14294

They’re just looking to argue, this was also in the first article you posted and they disregarded the whole premise of the article for one small section. 
 

Davis points out one more reason why women may bruise more easily and often than men. "Estrogen weakens blood vessel walls," he says. Scientists are still unsure how exactly, but estrogen prevents blood vessel walls from building. Estrogen is also a vasodilator

 

The article was adding context to something that seems to be already a generally accepted idea.

[Headlock]

3 minutes ago, brraap said:

It’s a proven fact that being female is a huge factor when it comes bruising easily.

That is not what you said  You said all women bruise like a peach. That is not the same thing, that is literally my point 

 

5 minutes ago, brraap said:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1556-4029.14294

This is a study about using ALS as opposed to white light to detect bruises at the site of previously known injury  This literally HELPS Amber's case omfg, her injuries could've been undetectable under white light 

Quote

An alternate light source (ALS) has been suggested by the U.S. Department of Justice as a tool to assist in identifying evidence of “subtle injury”

Quote

Not surprisingly, the ability to detect bruises under any light source diminished generally with time. However, we were able to establish through our repeated measures and modeling that regardless of bruise age in the first 4 weeks postinjury, 415 and 450 nm with a yellow filter outperformed white light in detecting evidence of bruising.

Did you even read this article? 

[brraap]

1 minute ago, Headlock said:

That is not what you said  You said all women bruise like a peach. That is not the same thing, that is literally my point 

 

This is a study about using ALS as opposed to white light to detect bruises at the site of previously known injury  This literally HELPS Amber's case omfg, her injuries could've been undetectable under white light 

Did you even read this article? 

Someone pm this to Elaine real quick 

[brraap]

Not me doing more than Amber’s lawyers