celeb news Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard Trial

[Rob_Matteo]

Amber's team is awful

[suburbannature]

21 minutes ago, for lovers said:

Camille caught her out there with the not knowing how to leak things after Amber repeatedly said she could've leaked it much more effectively if it was her lol

Y'all mischaracterizing the hell out of that.

 

And at the end of the day - regardless of who leaked it - its a small amount of the massive evidence that Depp abused her. Grasping at straws.

[NausAllien]

This wasn't Camille's day. Her uber aggressive style was disguting. She wasn't even asking questions, she was just trying to get a gotcha moment and focusing on the most trivial stuff like the picture of a bottle.

[xfreshkidxx]

16 minutes ago, kawk said:

Amber: "if I leaked information I could have done it in a more effective way and a lot sooner.."

Camille: "but you testified earlier in this trial that you don't know how to leak things" 

Amber: "I DONT!"  

 

This loser 

[for lovers]

Just now, NausAllien said:

This wasn't Camille's day. Her uber aggressive style was disguting. She wasn't even asking questions, she was just trying to get a gotcha moment and focusing on the most trivial stuff like the picture of a bottle.

Let's be honest you would've said this regardless  That was about as good as a cross examination gets, putting pressure on and trying to get under her skin. 

 

Just now, suburbannature said:

Y'all mischaracterizing the hell out of that.

 

And at the end of the day - regardless of who leaked it - its a small amount of the massive evidence that Depp abused her. Grasping at straws.

You miss the point (again). It's about discrediting Amber to the jury, they don't ask these questions for no reason they're building a narrative and Camille did it quite well there.

[kawk]

Camille absolutely DESTROYED Amber

 

Amber: "Johnny has many people that would come out of the woodwork to be in support of Johnny, just to be part of of the Johnny show"

Camille: "so you're saying Kate Moss needs to come out of the woodwork to testify for Mr. Depp?"

Amber:  *long pause*..... "everybody who was in the 90s has heard that rumor I had heard that rumor from multiple people.."

 

[NausAllien]

1 minute ago, for lovers said:

You miss the point (again). It's about discrediting Amber to the jury, they don't ask these questions for no reason they're building a narrative and Camille did it quite well there.

If that was her objective, she did a terrible job. Any reasonable person could understand why she was referring to with that comment, and doesn't change the fact she's saying SHE doesn't know how to "leak" information. It's not the "gotcha" moment you think it is. A "gotcha" would be her admitting to leaking something after saying she didn't know how to. But she didn't do that, did she? She was just talking about a hypothetical. 

 

Just FYI, just because a lawyer is aggressive during cross, it doesn't mean they did a good job. In fact, it could really turn off some jurors if they believe Amber's claims.

[suburbannature]

6 minutes ago, for lovers said:

Let's be honest you would've said this regardless  That was about as good as a cross examination gets, putting pressure on and trying to get under her skin. 

 

You miss the point (again). It's about discrediting Amber to the jury, they don't ask these questions for no reason they're building a narrative and Camille did it quite well there.

The way it's clear which members here have very little understanding of the legal process (you).

[for lovers]

2 minutes ago, suburbannature said:

The way it's clear which members here have very little understanding of the legal process (you).

The irony of this when you and that other overly partisan poster are trying to discredit a top lawyer on how to do their job. Literally the most obvious example of armchair experts you can find lmao.

Edited May 26, 2022 by for lovers

[suburbannature]

1 minute ago, for lovers said:

The irony of this when you and that other overly partisan poster are trying to discredit a top lawyer on how to do their job. Literally the most obvious example of armchair experts you can find lmao.

I have testified for both victims and perpetrators of violence in court as an expert witness. 

[BobBertran1992]

4 minutes ago, for lovers said:

The irony of this when you and that other overly partisan poster are trying to discredit a top lawyer on how to do their job. Literally the most obvious example of armchair experts you can find lmao.

 

2 minutes ago, suburbannature said:

I have testified for both victims and perpetrators of violence in court as an expert witness. 

 

[for lovers]

2 minutes ago, suburbannature said:

I have testified for both victims and perpetrators of violence in court as an expert witness. 

The way you think this is a serve and in any way makes it less ridiculous how you're trying to tell a top lawyer how to do their job. But it's all rooted in partisanship, for you roasting Depp's lawyers is feeding into the "I'M PRO HEARD" campaign you're on. We see the same dumb juvenile **** on Youtube and other social media sites. It's too funny.

[Raw Honey]

1 hour ago, kawk said:

*Amber hyperventilating* "....he'll make me think of him til I'm dead"

 

Queen Camille: "Objection your honor, non responsive"

 

Judge: SUSTAINED. 

 

Amber's 'tears' are gone and suddenly calm and collected 

 

YOU CANNOT MAKE THIS **** UP. 

You treating this thread like it's a pop girl base thread  Tone it down. 

[suburbannature]

1 minute ago, for lovers said:

The way you think this is a serve and in any way makes it less ridiculous how you're trying to tell a top lawyer how to do their job. But it's all rooted in partisanship, for you roasting Depp's lawyers is feeding into the "I'M PRO HEARD" campaign you're on. We see the same dumb juvenile **** on Youtube and other social media sites. It's too funny.

I have not once "told" her how to do her job. I have assessed her performance in an atrl thread based on my knowledge of both IPV and how these cases tend to play out in court. 

[for lovers]

12 minutes ago, NausAllien said:

 

 

Just FYI, just because a lawyer is aggressive during cross, it doesn't mean they did a good job. In fact, it could really turn off some jurors if they believe Amber's claims.

LOL at this condescension attempt. It was a good cross examination by any standards, saying it was a fail because it was "too aggressive" is a bit odd since that's generally the nature of cross examinations. Marie Henein is notorious for extremely aggressive cross examinations, she did it in the Jian Ghomeshi sexual harassment trials and it was a resounding success. Not sure what the "turning jurors off" point is supposed to be, seems like you just pulled it out of your ass honestly. 

[for lovers]

It's the pretend-to-be-objective "that was a bad day for Camille" for me  As if any other performance from her would've had a different response. Partisan af. But it's ATRL where there are stan wars 24/7 so it's par for the course I suppose? Anyway I've subjected myself to this thread for too long today, will be interesting to see what happens tomorrow. I think it will be hung

Edited May 26, 2022 by for lovers

[BobBertran1992]

13 minutes ago, for lovers said:

LOL at this condescension attempt. It was a good cross examination by any standards, saying it was a fail because it was "too aggressive" is a bit odd since that's generally the nature of cross examinations. Marie Henein is notorious for extremely aggressive cross examinations, she did it in the Jian Ghomeshi sexual harassment trials and it was a resounding success. Not sure what the "turning jurors off" point is supposed to be, seems like you just pulled it out of your ass honestly. 

NOT THE BEST EXAMPLE. 

[MARTYN]

Well that was interesting! All her lies exposed one after the other! 

[FameFatale]

I'm just catching up but did Amber admit that she wrote the op-ed and it was about Johnny?  

[Redstreak]

4 minutes ago, FameFatale said:

I'm just catching up but did Amber admit that she wrote the op-ed and it was about Johnny?  

That was never in contention. The question was if the op-Ed was defamatory to his career and the evidence heavily points to no

[FameFatale]

1 minute ago, Redstreak said:

That was never in contention. The question was if the op-Ed was defamatory to his career and the evidence heavily points to no

But she said in earlier testimony she did not write it and that it wasn't even about Johnny, but today she said she wrote the op-ed against Johnny because of his power that he has. 

[Redstreak]

2 minutes ago, FameFatale said:

But she said in earlier testimony she did not write it and that it wasn't even about Johnny, but today she said she wrote the op-ed against Johnny because of his power that he has. 

No we always knew she wrote it, that’s why Depp was even speculated as the person it was about

 

 

 

[NausAllien]

11 minutes ago, FameFatale said:

But she said in earlier testimony she did not write it and that it wasn't even about Johnny, but today she said she wrote the op-ed against Johnny because of his power that he has. 

WHEN did she said she didn't write it?!?!?! 

 

The only thing she claimed she didn't write was the title that was used for the web edition of the op-ed, which was never disputed.

 

And she didn't say now that it was about Johnny. She said that it was about people LIKE Johnny with a lot of power and influence in society.

 

Do you need some hearing aids, sweetie?

 

EDIT:

Found the exact time-stamp:

 

"I know what many people will come out and say whatever for him. That's his power. That's what I wrote the op-ed. I was speaking to that phenomenon. How many people would come out in support of him and would fall to his power. He's a very powerful man, and people love currying favor for powerful men. I know that first hand. I lived it."

 

Edited May 26, 2022 by NausAllien

[FameFatale]

6 minutes ago, NausAllien said:

WHEN did she said she didn't write it?!?!?! 

 

The only thing she claim she didn't write was the title that was used for the web edition of the op-ed, which was never disputed.

 

And she didn't say now that it was about Johnny. She said that it was about people LIKE Johnny with a lot of power and influence in society. Do you need some hearing aids, sweetie?

I had to pause my stream earlier. I'm literally watching it right now and she mentioned Johnny specifically being powerful. She said word for word, "I know how many people will come out and say whatever for HIM. That is HIS power. That's why I wrote this op-ed. I was speaking to that phenomena. How many people will come out in support of HIM and will fall to HIS power. HE is a very powerful man and people love currying favor with powerful men." 

I'm team neither/both toxic, but I think that wasn't the best thing for her to say since this is a defamation lawsuit. 

[Mobility Mary]

4 hours ago, KillingYourCareer said:

Like!! I came here to read some funny lashings directed at her since ATRL is good with sense of humor but this time the disconnection from the real world prevailed

Maybe you’re surronded with misogynists? None of the people in my social circle, men or women, are on Depp’s side.