celeb news Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard Trial

[NausAllien]

25 minutes ago, FOCK said:

• You don't fear for your life and undergo abuse for 5 years to the degree she was espousing, and then go out and party the next morning, let alone attend galas with your abuser, hold televised interviews after a brutal attack or r*pe etc. Victims of abuse return to or stay with abusers out of necessity or fear of repercussion - Amber's place in context of social hierarchy, her access to influential people like Elon etc does not place her in this category of helplessness or lack of alternatives/support.

This comment just tells me you know next to nothing about the dynamics of abuse. I'd strongly suggest that you educate yourself because most of the things you're saying are either sweeping generalizations, speculation or absolute nonsense.

 

A good starting point would be the power and control wheel:

 

If you carefully analyze the basic facts of this relationship (Depp was way older, richer, more powerful, influential, was surrounded by his employees and enablers, have the privilige of being a white cisgender heterosexual male) as well as the incidents mentioned and evidence provided (for example smashing things, putting her down, making her feel bad about herself, threatening to harm himself, preventing her from taking certain jobs, using jealousy to justify his actions, etc), you'll see who the real abuser in this relationship was. It's CRYSTAL CLEAR to me and there's at least one example of everything listed here.

Edited May 17, 2022 by NausAllien

[JoTy]

36 minutes ago, Redstreak said:

Yes some of us are pathetic and more lunatic than the average 4channer.
Next.

 

[brraap]

I don’t understand if he didn’t allow her to take roles how did she get aqua man 

[drsouchan]

28 minutes ago, BobBertran1992 said:

I mean, in terms of the donation, she did say, on both that TV interview played yesterday and in the UK trial, that she donated 7 million dollars (not 1 million, not “pledged”). In one of the UK appeals, one of the lawyers for The Sun pulled the same strategy pulled by Amber Heard yesterday (“a pledge is a donation”), so I honestly don’t know. 
 

There’s enough evidence of Johnny Depp’s violence and terrible behaviour towards her, but to me the whole donation ordeal looks iffy (unless I’m missing some context or information, in which case it’d be appreciated). 

like I said, she lied a lot.

She did lie when she said she HAD donated $7 million when she wasn't done completely.
But I don't think she's evil like she doesn't want to finish donating at all, she's just a celebrity with vanity.
If it wasn't for Johnny's lawsuit, she would have donated it all in 10 years in installments, like he said she would.

 

And remember, even if she doesn't complete the $7 million donated now, she did half of it.
Charitable donations should not be see as a moral kidnapping.

Remember this is charity.

 

Maybe it's hypocritical for her to lie about done donating $7 million for her vanity.
But Johnny, who caused her financial problems that prevented her from finishing her donation and used it to accuse her of dishonesty, is evil.

He dug the trap for her, which she could have finished donating.

[Dark Miracles]

Literally how can you say Vasquez was bad yesterday when there were several instances in which Bredehoft was audibly exasperated by the barrage of questions even when she was off-screen?  I even heard her slamming the table out of frustration

[Redstreak]

16 minutes ago, JoTy said:

 

Once again, if this is the best defense Depp can get online then it kinda speaks for itself

[ConceptD]

28 minutes ago, brraap said:

I don’t understand if he didn’t allow her to take roles how did she get aqua man 

I have a theory on this and it’s wild but we all know how some actresses had to get roles in Hollywood even a couple of years ago, and I’m not saying that’s what was going on, but maybe he didn’t like the idea of that part of ‘auditioning’. 
 

also I’d like to add I wouldn’t blame Amber for this even if it was true. It was what was expected by certain producers and truly a form of rape in my eyes because it was either that or don’t work and starve, but it makes sense in my mind. 

[FOCK]

2 minutes ago, NausAllien said:

This comment just tells me you know next to nothing about the dynamics of abuse. I'd strongly suggest that you educate yourself because most of the things you're saying are either sweeping generalizations, speculation or absolute nonsense.

You know nothing about me. 

 

2 minutes ago, NausAllien said:

If you carefully analyze the basic facts of this relationship (Depp was way older, richer, more powerful, influential, was surrounded by his employees and enablers, have the privilige of being a white cisgender heterosexual male) as well as the incidents mentioned and evidence provided (for example smashing things, putting her down, making her feel bad about herself, threatening to harm himself, preventing her from taking certain jobs, using jealousy to justify his actions, etc), you'll see who the real abuser in this relationship was. It's CRYSTAL CLEAR to me and there's at least one example of everything listed here.

Those may certainly be examples of abusive behaviour. And for every example you listed, there's an equal example of Amber behaving similarly. They've both displayed abusive behaviour, I haven't doubted that. Though the leap from those examples to "wife beater" is significant in this case, even with the recognition that they often go hand-in hand. In context, only one has a history of documented spousal abuse. Only one has solid evidence of significant physical harm. Only one can be heard actively attempting to physically remove themselves from a heated situation, whilst the other antagonises, belittles, threatens or begs them to stay, and one doesn't have glaring inconsistencies in their recounts, to my recollection. 

 

I personally identify elements in Amber that I relate to a narcissistic partner. The delusion of grandeur, performative empathy, lack of accountability, gaslighting and guilt-tripping, inconsistent stories, exaggerated showmanship, calculated nature mixed with charm. Her behaviour has only solidified my support of Dr. Currie's mental health diagnosis and has zero to do with her gender nor Depp, who hasn't been of any significance to me in my life. I understand why this is may difficult to recognise for some, though it's an uncanny ability to spot it in people, if you've lived with it. 

 

Of course, that doesn't mean she can't be a victim of DV, but it also heightens Depp's likeliness of victimhood too. I'm open to being wrong, but nothing presented at this stage has convinced me this was one-sided. I unfortunately can't make the same detailed assessment about Depp, but unlike some, I'm not concluding the innocence of either party, simply weighing what I've seen so far, against my own experience. No one is obliged to agree, but you're in no position to label me clueless or misogynistic. 

[brraap]

12 minutes ago, FOCK said:

I personally identify elements in Amber that I relate to a narcissistic partner. The delusion of grandeur, performative empathy, lack of accountability, gaslighting and guilt-tripping, inconsistent stories, exaggerated showmanship, calculated nature mixed with charm. Her behaviour has only solidified my support of Dr. Currie's mental health diagnosis and has zero to do with her gender nor Depp, who hasn't been of any significance to me in my life. I understand why this is may difficult to recognise for some, though it's an uncanny ability to spot it in people, if you've lived with it. 

Spill. That user has been spouting the same thing for 20 pages. 

[brraap]

1 hour ago, NausAllien said:

This comment just tells me you know next to nothing about the dynamics of abuse. I'd strongly suggest that you educate yourself because most of the things you're saying are either sweeping generalizations, speculation or absolute nonsense.

 

A good starting point would be the power and control wheel:

 

If you carefully analyze the basic facts of this relationship (Depp was way older, richer, more powerful, influential, was surrounded by his employees and enablers, have the privilige of being a white cisgender heterosexual male) as well as the incidents mentioned and evidence provided (for example smashing things, putting her down, making her feel bad about herself, threatening to harm himself, preventing her from taking certain jobs, using jealousy to justify his actions, etc), you'll see who the real abuser in this relationship was. It's CRYSTAL CLEAR to me and there's at least one example of everything listed here.

Not to mention this example is quite sexist and only identifies that a male can be an abuser 

[NausAllien]

@FOCK

 

First of all, you don't even know the basic facts of this case. Dr. Curry didn't diagnose Amber Heard with NPD, she diagnose her with BDP and HPD. Dr. Hughes didn't diagnose her with any personality disorder and questioned Dr. Curry's conclusions since they weren't backed up by data, including a lack of T-scores above 65 in the MMPI-2 test, which, according to the way MMPI-2 Scores work, falls within the "normal" range. 

 

Second, the supposed history of domestic abuse has been denied many times by the person he was supposedly abusing. So for the sake of keeping this arguments civil, I'd appreciate if you stopped spreading FAKE NEWS.

 

Only one side has solid evidence of physical harm? What are you even talking about? I sure hope you aren't talking about Depp cutting his own finger, something he admitted to MULTIPLE people before changing his story. And no, he wasn't trying to protect her. He in fact went on a rant about how bad she was, and then said nonchalantly that he had cut his finger:

 

So once again, you're showing your true colors and agenda but lying about the facts of the case, spreading disnformation that has been debunked, and taking what Depp's side said at face value, while doubting everything Amber's side presented. So go ahead, keep deying your misogynistic agenda. I will keep calling you out for your lack of knowledge regarding this case and your ignorance when it comes to domestic abuse, psychology, etc.

 

[BobBertran1992]

17 minutes ago, brraap said:

Not to mention this example is quite sexist and only identifies that a male can be an abuser 

I google searched this image and this came up, answering your question:

Quote

 

Why are the original Power and Control Wheel and Equality Wheel gender specific?
The Power and Control Wheel represents the lived experience of women who live with a man who beats them. It does not attempt to give a broad understanding of all violence in the home or community but instead offers a more precise explanation of the tactics men use to batter women. We keep our focus on women’s experience because the battering of women by men continues to be a significant social problem–men commit 86 to 97 percent of all criminal assaults and women are killed 3.5 times more often than men in domestic homicides.

When women use violence in an intimate relationship, the context of that violence tends to differ from men. First, men’s use of violence against women is learned and reinforced through many social, cultural and institutional avenues, while women’s use of violence does not have the same kind of societal support. Secondly, many women who do use violence against their male partners are being battered. Their violence is primarily used to respond to and resist the controlling violence being used against them. On the societal level, women’s violence against men has a trivial effect on men compared to the devastating effect of men’s violence against women.

Battering in same-sex intimate relationships has many of the same characteristics of battering in heterosexual relationships, but happens within the context of the larger societal oppression of same-sex couples. Resources that describe same-sex domestic violence have been developed by specialists in that field such as The Northwest Network of Bi, Trans, Lesbian and Gay Survivors of Abuse, www.nwnetwork.org

Making the Power and Control Wheel gender neutral would hide the power imbalances in relationships between men and women that reflect power imbalances in society. By naming the power differences, we can more clearly provide advocacy and support for victims, accountability and opportunities for change for offenders, and system and societal changes that end violence against women.

 

https://www.theduluthmodel.org/wheels/faqs-about-the-wheels/

[FOCK]

2 minutes ago, NausAllien said:

 

First of all, you don't even know the basic facts of this case. Dr. Curry didn't diagnose Amber Heard with NPD, she diagnose her with BDP and HPD.

 

I didn't say she was diagnosed with NPD. I said I recognise elements of her behaviour with an NPD partner.

• NPD has a high rate of concurrence with BPD
• Both have several overlapping symptoms, even if both aren't present or are often mistaken for one another.
• Both BPD and NPD deal with conflict in a way that's unhealthy to themselves and those around them. 
• Both people with BPD and with NPD deal with an intense fear of abandonment. 
• They can both display all the characteristics listed in my previous post.

 

2 minutes ago, NausAllien said:

your ignorance when it comes to domestic abuse, psychology, etc.

 

Lol ok, Nauseating Alien. 

[BobBertran1992]

2 hours ago, FOCK said:

• One typo in a document is not an example of a "glaring error", she was still examined. Had her recounts been even the slightest bit honest, I fail to see any possible way that they weren't documented in any medical context - what she described was horrific, violent and regular. 
• Camille did not display any "internalised misogyny". She did her job, asking questions then presenting evidence to point out Heard's contradictions. 
• I watched the entire court session. Amber and her team failed to present any evidence of said fractures or checks - which one would assume would be pertinent to include.
• The pronunciation comment is about as silly as pointing out Amber's lawyer called her therapist the wrong name 3 times in the span on 10 minutes. Semantics. 
• Texts aren't evidence of physical violence.
• The photos all either contradict her testimony, call it into question or lack meta-data to substantiate their legitimacy, time and date. It's highly unusual that she so avidly documented mirrors, phone calls, and Depp's binges, yet nothing irrefutable about any of the horrific injuries she's describing, that even the police and medical documents deny. And the photos she did provide, were sold to a magazine during a divorce settlement, again, with no way to substantiate their legitimacy.
• I'm only commenting on what I've seen so far, so if her witnesses make convincing arguments, great. 
• I of course sympathise with victims, I come from a home of domestic abuse and it's a shame that the burden of proof rests on them so heavily, but she has made things infinitely more difficult for herself by over-exaggerating and cherry picking information that if presented (or existed), would put to rest doubts of her recounts. When she was put on the spot about not being able to provide certain evidence, she didn't deny having it, she blamed her lawyers for not presenting it...  
• You don't fear for your life and undergo abuse for 5 years to the degree she was espousing, and then go out and party the next morning, let alone attend galas with your abuser, hold televised interviews after a brutal attack or r*pe etc. Victims of abuse return to or stay with abusers out of necessity or fear of repercussion - Amber's place in context of social hierarchy, her access to influential people like Elon etc does not place her in this category of helplessness or lack of alternatives/support.
• I know painting me out to be a Depp sympathiser is suitable for the narrative you'd like, but there is such a thing as impartiality, believe it or not. 

There is, but impartial you are not.

[simon_xcx]

Thoughts?

[brraap]

1 hour ago, NausAllien said:

This comment just tells me you know next to nothing about the dynamics of abuse. I'd strongly suggest that you educate yourself because most of the things you're saying are either sweeping generalizations, speculation or absolute nonsense.

 

A good starting point would be the power and control wheel:

 

If you carefully analyze the basic facts of this relationship (Depp was way older, richer, more powerful, influential, was surrounded by his employees and enablers, have the privilige of being a white cisgender heterosexual male) as well as the incidents mentioned and evidence provided (for example smashing things, putting her down, making her feel bad about herself, threatening to harm himself, preventing her from taking certain jobs, using jealousy to justify his actions, etc), you'll see who the real abuser in this relationship was. It's CRYSTAL CLEAR to me and there's at least one example of everything listed here.

The way you call for this user to educate themselves on the "dynamics of abuse" but use an incredibly out dated example to orchestrate your point. The Duluth model that was created in the 80's and has been massively criticised since its conception. 

 

Quote

Criticism of the Duluth Model has centered on the program's insistence that men are perpetrators who are violent because they have been socialized in a patriarchy that condones male violence, and that women are victims who are violent only in self-defense.^[17] Some critics argue that "programs based on the Duluth Model may ignore research linking domestic violence to substance abuse and psychological problems, such as attachment disorders, traced to childhood abuse or neglect, or the absence of a history of adequate socialization and training."^[11][18] Others criticize the Duluth Model as being overly confrontational rather than therapeutic, focusing solely on changing the abuser's actions and attitudes rather than dealing with underlying emotional and psychological issues.

You also told the user not to make "sweeping generalisations" when this model does exactly that. It's not a one size fits all. Using this model would completely disregard Heard's behaviour, as someone who suffers from BPD and Histrionic, as being abusive because she is a woman and therefore can only act in self defence. It would also disregard Depp's abusive childhood and current substance abuse issues. Both of these factors which would have played a huge part in the dynamics of their relationship. 

[brraap]

12 minutes ago, BobBertran1992 said:

I google searched this image and this came up, answering your question:

https://www.theduluthmodel.org/wheels/faqs-about-the-wheels/

From Duluth wheel . org  

[brazil]

32 minutes ago, brraap said:

Not to mention this example is quite sexist and only identifies that a male can be an abuser 

 

[brazil]

The fact that Dr. Curry diagnosed Amber with BPD just shows what a bad therapist she is tbh, nobody with BPD would manage to keep such emotional composure and be so level-headed under such a stressful situation. The fact that Depp's fans were trying to use Dr. Curry's statements as the biggest argument against Heard just shows how ludicrous their arguments are.

 

As for Depp's lawyer interview tactics, isn't it funny she tried to argue that they didn't produce any evidence of a broken nose, but when they argued that they did produce it, she abandoned the question? She either was very ill prepared or was doing it in bad faith. 

Edited May 17, 2022 by brazil

[C-Amber]

3 hours ago, drsouchan said:

like I said, she lied a lot.

She did lie when she said she HAD donated $7 million when she wasn't done completely.
But I don't think she's evil like she doesn't want to finish donating at all, she's just a celebrity with vanity.
If it wasn't for Johnny's lawsuit, she would have donated it all in 10 years in installments, like he said she would.

 

And remember, even if she doesn't complete the $7 million donated now, she did half of it.
Charitable donations should not be see as a moral kidnapping.

Remember this is charity.

 

Maybe it's hypocritical for her to lie about done donating $7 million for her vanity.
But Johnny, who caused her financial problems that prevented her from finishing her donation and used it to accuse her of dishonesty, is evil.

He dug the trap for her, which she could have finished donating.

You can never be sure that she will donate it, EVER. But you just painted her as saint. All you have is a women that went everywhere saying she already donated all the money, just for it years later to be showed she didn't. 

[MARTYN]

Now she’s flat out saying all the witness’ are wrong  This isn’t looking good for her 

[drsouchan]

5 minutes ago, C-Amber said:

You can never be sure that she will donate it, EVER. But you just painted her as saint. All you have is a women that went everywhere saying she already donated all the money, just for it years later to be showed she didn't. 

You can never be sure that she won't donate it, EVER. But you just painted her as sinner. All you have is a man caused a woman's financial problems so she can't finish paying her donation.

Edited May 17, 2022 by drsouchan

[NausAllien]

7 minutes ago, MARTYN said:

Now she’s flat out saying all the witness’ are wrong  This isn’t looking good for her 

Those are Depp's (the plaintiff's) witnesses. She will have her own witnesses afterwards that will likely corroborate some of the things she's claiming, just like it happened in the UK trial. Just like they both have therapists give completely different testimonies and assessments.

[Looolqueen]

Camille is having a smash examination today.

[MARTYN]

Just now, NausAllien said:

Those are Depp's (the plaintiff's) witnesses. She will have her own witnesses afterwards that will likely corroborate some of the things she's claiming, just like it happened in the UK trial. Just like they both have therapists give completely different testimonies and assessments.

I totally get that, but let’s not act like she’s coming across well or even slightly likeable which plays a huge part. The jury need to believe her. Didn’t her own therapist also testify that Amber was starting physical fights with Johnny too? That’s something she continuously said she never did too. 
 

There’s too many inconsistencies and differences between all of her statements and they’re getting pointed out enough that it casts doubt on her entire story. She doesn’t have evidence for a lot of the things she claimed happen (which is understandable in this type of situation) but for all the major stories she’s not got evidence and there’s numerous witness’ just flat out denying what she’s testified to. 
 

As someone who watched domestic violence happen when I was young to my mother, the fact she has no photos of most of the apparent injuries anywhere despite being photographed in the days after is the biggest sign for me. The things she’s describing would leave too many marks for makeup to sufficiently cover. She’s a disgrace to real victims.