Johnny Depp wins defamation trial against Amber Heard

[MortalMarshmallow]

On 6/1/2022 at 10:05 PM, KrisJ said:

manipulative narcissist

When a psychiatrist tells you Amber's two diagnoses but you still fail to get it right, it's no wonder the type of brains that run this pro-Depp zoo express themselves the way they do . 

[ICouldntThinkOfOne]

I watched the six weeks of the trial and I am genuinely surprised at the backlash Depp's win is getting because I feel like it really creates a split between those who watched it and those who haven't. I was in no way a Johnny Depp Fan, nor was I a Heard Fan either, but it was very hard for me to believe Amber was the victim in this case after everything was presented. I did not believe Depp would win all his counts, only because Heard's lawyer presented a very strong legal basis and was suprised he did, but it made perfect sense.

Heard's loss wasn't due to ridiculous standards put on victims, or a lack of photographic evidence; She photographed and recorded plenty, a mountain as she described it, yet nothing lined up with her testimony or the testimony of her witnesses. Photos were clearly edited, timelines didn't make sense and even when others witnessed the situations she was describing, nothing made coherent and clear sense. This is all before we even look at how she blamed everyone from Depp to her own legal team for her inconsistencies, and now, even the judge and the jury are lying.

What is interesting is how the UK case is being used as a fundamental opposite to this case, when they actually line up perfectly from what I've read and heard. The UK case wasn't DEPP V HEARD, it was Depp V The Sun, and the claim was easier to disprove; The Sun just had to disprove the title was defamatory because it was reporting on what a reportable figure said. The Mountain of Evidence wasn't examined in the manner it was here because it wasn't necessary, The Sun just had to prove they were reporting on public figures and their statements.

I do understand the fear that people have that this case will set back movements, but I think blaming Depp is illogical. This isn't an excuse to claim ALL women are lying and it never should be, but ultimately, it was his lived expirience and when it was delivered, people believed him.
 

[IsraeliMatt]

People should never believe all [insert any possible demographic group] to begin with. I'm not going to fault Amber or her lawyer for the comments they're making now implying the loss was because Johnny is so powerful or whatever as if the jury was a group of Captain Jack Sparrow Stans. As if her loss is about her being a woman. Of course they will say what they must to maintain that they are in the right, whether they are or not (and I don't know, I didn't follow this case).  

From the tiny bits of exposure I've had to this case, my impression is that they are both troubled individuals, and I absolutely wouldn't want to be romantically involved with either. 

[Spicechinodiva]

They wanted to include the UK trial stuff, but got denied.

 

Most people are shocked that it's so rare but it's two different outcomes.

 

Amber will appeal it.

 

But her lawyer wants it in a different way, no jury.

 

She said Amber lost cos the jury wasn't separated from their families so it was gonna be easy for them to be persuaded in this verdict and she doesn't want it televised as Amber is vilified and Fears for her life. The fact that Johnny was granted everything and my client got denied anything to help her case proves just how favoritism works.

 

AMBER CAN'T AFFORD THE 10.3 MILLION PAY OUT AS SHE CAN'T FILE BANKRUPTCY AND SHE'S ONLY WORTH BETWEEN 7 MILLION OR 8 MILLION, MEANING, SHE'S LITERALLY BROKE EVEN BEFORE PAYING HIM.

 

She will appeal every time, cos she doesn't want to pay him, she wants it gone but she fears Johnny is on the verge of a comeback and she's gonna be tormented everywhere she goes.

 

[Isla]

I'm happy for Johnny. Amber has made a mockery of actual women who have suffered domestic/s£xual abuse from their partners. She belongs in jail for what she had to put him through.

[blackingouthenegativity]

5 hours ago, Bratz***** said:

This is literally all i've been thinking about during this whole **** show. Like she really single handedly ****ed up years and years worth of building women up and for women to be believed, it's truly sad and frustrating. Now all i see are stupid men saying all women are liars, it's sickening 

Totally get what y'all are saying, but at the same time, wasn't this inevitable then? I mean, I had never heard of Amber Heard until a few months ago. I'm not defending her, it just sounds like opponents of #MeToo will elevate anyone they can to discredit the movement. 

[neko]

On 5/21/2022 at 6:45 PM, Spicechinodiva said:

Defamation lawsuits are never won..

He's not gonna win. They never do

f.ucking armchair lawyer lmaooo

[A.a.A]

3 hours ago, Spicechinodiva said:

They wanted to include the UK trial stuff, but got denied.

 

Most people are shocked that it's so rare but it's two different outcomes.

 

Amber will appeal it.

 

But her lawyer wants it in a different way, no jury.

 

She said Amber lost cos the jury wasn't separated from their families so it was gonna be easy for them to be persuaded in this verdict and she doesn't want it televised as Amber is vilified and Fears for her life. The fact that Johnny was granted everything and my client got denied anything to help her case proves just how favoritism works.

 

AMBER CAN'T AFFORD THE 10.3 MILLION PAY OUT AS SHE CAN'T FILE BANKRUPTCY AND SHE'S ONLY WORTH BETWEEN 7 MILLION OR 8 MILLION, MEANING, SHE'S LITERALLY BROKE EVEN BEFORE PAYING HIM.

 

She will appeal every time, cos she doesn't want to pay him, she wants it gone but she fears Johnny is on the verge of a comeback and she's gonna be tormented everywhere she goes.

 

Johnny Depp won because he was right and she was wrong. Period. Stop trying to spin this in a way where Amber heard lost or that “women” lost in any way. She was a manipulative, toxic person. I have met many people like this. 

She tried to use wokeness and the me too movement to her benefit and it failed. tbh you have literally no legs to stand on in this matter. 

You were wrong. He won. Case closed. She sucks. 

[devilsadvocate]

55 minutes ago, A.a.A said:

Johnny Depp won because he was right and she was wrong. Period. Stop trying to spin this in a way where Amber heard lost or that “women” lost in any way. She was a manipulative, toxic person. I have met many people like this. 

She tried to use wokeness and the me too movement to her benefit and it failed. tbh you have literally no legs to stand on in this matter. 

You were wrong. He won. Case closed. She sucks. 

Okay so I did not watch the trial but I read articles every day.

Her op-Ed imo barely accused him of anything. I recall his career spiraling cause he was heavily using alcohol and ***** and that’s why Disney cut ties with him. I feel and I may be wrong but her article did not defame him. She didn’t mention him by name and didn’t say anything more than she was a victim of domestic abuse. 

his text messages alone were vile, his friendship with Marilyn Manson, and his heavy **** and alcohol use .. like he literally admitted to using his own blood to write awful things about her on the wall …

how is none of that domestic abuse and are we to believe that when he was a drunken mess he never may have hit her and forgot? 

i have no doubt she is not the greatest person and abused him too, but I feel the op-Ed was not that bad … it’s not like she was like I was beaten up daily, the trial brought out details that may have been exaggerated but I still think she is a victim of domestic abuse . 

i also think it’s gross that he promised her that he would ridicule her in front of the world stage and he accomplished that. Another form of emotional abuse … 

she didn’t sue him, he sued her …. He could have said she was a liar etc etc but he wanted to publicly humiliate her and I think that makes him a vindictive jerk … it’s revenge **** .. he smeared her name .. and he’s 20 Years her senior, he destroyed her life, while I do not believe her intention was ever to destroy his and he’s worth millions so like any damage isn’t that detrimental given his health, age, and financial situation . 
 

I am repulsed by the entire thing and whoever allowed it to be on tv

[Spicechinodiva]

8 minutes ago, devilsadvocate said:

Okay so I did not watch the trial but I read articles every day.

Her op-Ed imo barely accused him of anything. I recall his career spiraling cause he was heavily using alcohol and ***** and that’s why Disney cut ties with him. I feel and I may be wrong but her article did not defame him. She didn’t mention him by name and didn’t say anything more than she was a victim of domestic abuse. 

his text messages alone were vile, his friendship with Marilyn Manson, and his heavy **** and alcohol use .. like he literally admitted to using his own blood to write awful things about her on the wall …

how is none of that domestic abuse and are we to believe that when he was a drunken mess he never may have hit her and forgot? 

i have no doubt she is not the greatest person, but I feel the op-Ed was not that bad … it’s not like she was like I was beaten up daily, the trial brought out details that may have been exaggerated but I still think she is a victim of domestic abuse . 

i also think it’s gross that he promised her that he would ridicule her in front of the world stage and he accomplished that. Another form of emotional abuse … 

she didn’t sue him, he sued her …. He could have said she was a liar etc etc but he wanted to publicly humiliate her and I think that makes him a vindictive jerk … it’s revenge **** .. he smeared her name .. and he’s 20 Years her senior, he destroyed her life, while I do not believe her intention was ever to destroy his and he’s worth millions so like any damage isn’t that detrimental given his health, age, and financial situation . 
 

I am repulsed by the entire thing and whoever allowed it to be on tv

State of Virginia allowed it as they only the state that does it. 

 

Her lawyer was against it, but her lawyer has come out and said every single thimg they requested was denied, she even asked for the jurors to be in hotel rooms, and not go to their familes until the trial was over..

 

She said Amber became a victim of DARVO, where the victim gets manipulative into being the culprit into the juries eyes..

 

She even said the UK trial evidence was denied and add the court of public opinion, Amber heard is completely vilified to the point she has no life or is even safe, this is what Johnny wanted and he got it. 

 

 

[Turogue]

1 minute ago, Spicechinodiva said:

State of Virginia allowed it as they only the state that does it. 

 

Her lawyer was against it, but her lawyer has come out and said every single thimg they requested was denied, she even asked for the jurors to be in hotel rooms, and not go to their familes until the trial was over..

 

She said Amber became a victim of DARVO, where the victim gets manipulative into being the culprit into the juries eyes..

 

She even said the UK trial evidence was denied and add the court of public opinion, Amber heard is completely vilified to the point she has no life or is even safe, this is what Johnny wanted and he got it. 

 

 

The UK trial seems to have been very biased in her favor. That judge disregarded a lot of Johnny’s evidence simply because he had trouble with substance abuse and a basis for his ruling was that he believed that Amber had donated her settlement money to charity which this new trial exposed as a lie. The UK judge failed to make a proper background check on her and her claims + people from the UK trial and with ties to The Sun seem to have hung out with Amber at a prior event, but I'm too lazy right now to dig up that info.

[Turogue]

44 minutes ago, devilsadvocate said:

Okay so I did not watch the trial but I read articles every day.

Her op-Ed imo barely accused him of anything. I recall his career spiraling cause he was heavily using alcohol and ***** and that’s why Disney cut ties with him. I feel and I may be wrong but her article did not defame him. She didn’t mention him by name and didn’t say anything more than she was a victim of domestic abuse. 

his text messages alone were vile, his friendship with Marilyn Manson, and his heavy **** and alcohol use .. like he literally admitted to using his own blood to write awful things about her on the wall …

how is none of that domestic abuse and are we to believe that when he was a drunken mess he never may have hit her and forgot? 

i have no doubt she is not the greatest person and abused him too, but I feel the op-Ed was not that bad … it’s not like she was like I was beaten up daily, the trial brought out details that may have been exaggerated but I still think she is a victim of domestic abuse . 

i also think it’s gross that he promised her that he would ridicule her in front of the world stage and he accomplished that. Another form of emotional abuse … 

she didn’t sue him, he sued her …. He could have said she was a liar etc etc but he wanted to publicly humiliate her and I think that makes him a vindictive jerk … it’s revenge **** .. he smeared her name .. and he’s 20 Years her senior, he destroyed her life, while I do not believe her intention was ever to destroy his and he’s worth millions so like any damage isn’t that detrimental given his health, age, and financial situation . 
 

I am repulsed by the entire thing and whoever allowed it to be on tv

It's true that his substance abuse may have contributed to his career having setbacks. But considering that she had tipped off TMZ about the day she would file for divorce and a restraining order against him and would show up with a visible bruise (that had magically disappeared the next day) was enough to get the rumour startet that he caused domestic violence in their relationship. Then two years later right around the time of the release of her Aquaman movie she writes this op-ed about being an abuse survivor and you really think people wouldn't connect the dots and see that it's clear as day that the op-ed was very much about him. She even admitted so in court. She did it all to defame him.

Some of those message were indeed brutal, I agree that he is definitely not a saint by any means. But her messages where she texts him like 60 times in a row and he just wouldn't reply because she was too much for him. When you hold it against him that he wrote in blood with his severed finger then you can't ignore all the audios of her where she admits that she was hitting him and that she has a tendency to become physical. She was always the one who kept following him, taunting him while he tried to remove himself from the situation. 

She even broke her own restraining order against him by demanding that they meet and recorded him again (without his knowledge). You can hear in the audio that he is very irritated by her behaviour and very hurt from her false claims. The whole time she keeps asking for a hug and even crawls into his bed (they were in his room) and wants him to join her. He refuses and just sees that he was married to a disturbed woman.

His friendship to Marilyn Manson is indeed a bit problematic but we don't know the current state of their friendship and what his thoughts are on the situation. Just because someone is problematic it does not mean that their inner circle is too. All of us could have a friend who is running a round with a very ugly secret without our knowledge. Amber defenders keep saying that her violence was in response to what he was doing but they never even imagine that it may have very well been the other way around. But the evidence hints to her being the instigator. 

You also ignore the fact that she was doing a lot of ***** and alcohol as well.

On top of that she had a previous domestic violence charge against her regarding an ex-girlfriend, unlike Johnny.

She tried to ruin his reputation and to further her career and then you are surprised that he had admitted that he would take her down and expose her lies to the world. I mean come on.

 

[devilsadvocate]

42 minutes ago, Turogue said:

It's true that his substance abuse may have contributed to his career having setbacks. But considering that she had tipped off TMZ about the day she would file for divorce and a restraining order against him and would show up with a visible bruise (that had magically disappeared the next day) was enough to get the rumour startet that he caused domestic violence in their relationship. Then two years later right around the time of the release of her Aquaman movie she writes this op-ed about being an abuse survivor and you really think people wouldn't connect the dots and see that it's clear as day that the op-ed was very much about him. She even admitted so in court. She did it all to defame him.

Some of those message were indeed brutal, I agree that he is definitely not a saint by any means. But her messages where she texts him like 60 times in a row and he just wouldn't reply because she was too much for him. When you hold it against him that he wrote in blood with his severed finger then you can't ignore all the audios of her where she admits that she was hitting him and that she has a tendency to become physical. She was always the one who kept following him, taunting him while he tried to remove himself from the situation. 

She even broke her own restraining order against him by demanding that they meet and recorded him again (without his knowledge). You can hear in the audio that he is very irritated by her behaviour and very hurt from her false claims. The whole time she keeps asking for a hug and even crawls into his bed (they were in his room) and wants him to join her. He refuses and just sees that he was married to a disturbed woman.

His friendship to Marilyn Manson is indeed a bit problematic but we don't know the current state of their friendship and what his thoughts are on the situation. Just because someone is problematic it does not mean that their inner circle is too. All of us could have a friend who is running a round with a very ugly secret without our knowledge. Amber defenders keep saying that her violence was in response to what he was doing but they never even imagine that it may have very well been the other way around. But the evidence hints to her being the instigator. 

You also ignore the fact that she was doing a lot of ***** and alcohol as well.

On top of that she had a previous domestic violence charge against her regarding an ex-girlfriend, unlike Johnny.

She tried to ruin his reputation and to further her career and then you are surprised that he had admitted that he would take her down and expose her lies to the world. I mean come on.

 

This was well said. i think you made fair points. I guess I would say is imo they both are victims of domestic abuse and smear campaigns. If you want to say she instigated both, that’s fine, but I still don’t feel the crime was worth the punishment. I still think his whole approach was you think you’re a victim, I’ll make you a victim. At the end of the day, like her op-Ed said she experienced the wrath of speaking up against abuse she received. I just wish both of them could be losers, he’s gonna go on to jump start his career and she is forever going to be a villain, and she was a young girl when they married … it’s all problematic to me . But I hope she somehow comes out of it okay

[Britney'sBish]

Anyone defending Amber clearly did not watch the trial and is missing a lot of info.

[RadicalOptimism]

1 hour ago, Britney'sBish said:

Anyone defending Amber clearly did not watch the trial and is missing a lot of info.

Saw that Jason Momoa liked her Instagram post 

[Bigno]

On 5/21/2022 at 3:45 AM, Spicechinodiva said:

Defamation lawsuits are never won..

He's not gonna win. They never do

This aged like milk.

[Bigno]

10 hours ago, devilsadvocate said:

Okay so I did not watch the trial but I read articles every day.

Her op-Ed imo barely accused him of anything. I recall his career spiraling cause he was heavily using alcohol and ***** and that’s why Disney cut ties with him. I feel and I may be wrong but her article did not defame him. She didn’t mention him by name and didn’t say anything more than she was a victim of domestic abuse. 

his text messages alone were vile, his friendship with Marilyn Manson, and his heavy **** and alcohol use .. like he literally admitted to using his own blood to write awful things about her on the wall …

how is none of that domestic abuse and are we to believe that when he was a drunken mess he never may have hit her and forgot? 

i have no doubt she is not the greatest person and abused him too, but I feel the op-Ed was not that bad … it’s not like she was like I was beaten up daily, the trial brought out details that may have been exaggerated but I still think she is a victim of domestic abuse . 

i also think it’s gross that he promised her that he would ridicule her in front of the world stage and he accomplished that. Another form of emotional abuse … 

she didn’t sue him, he sued her …. He could have said she was a liar etc etc but he wanted to publicly humiliate her and I think that makes him a vindictive jerk … it’s revenge **** .. he smeared her name .. and he’s 20 Years her senior, he destroyed her life, while I do not believe her intention was ever to destroy his and he’s worth millions so like any damage isn’t that detrimental given his health, age, and financial situation . 
 

I am repulsed by the entire thing and whoever allowed it to be on tv

Reading the headlines and actually watching the trial are two.completely different perspectives. MSM are pushing a pervasive narrative. A victim is not limited to be one based on their gender. To suggest,which is what mass media is doing, that the veredict is wrong cause she is a woman who should have won for claiming to be a victim is horrible. The evidence just wasn't there, her testimony was a mess. Being a woman doesn't make all women good and being a man doesn't make you an abiser and that is what the headlines are trying to push. The one who has used real victims to push her narrative was her. I am not a Depp fan, but what the media is trying to push is awful. 

[Grace Kelly]

14 hours ago, blackingouthenegativity said:

Totally get what y'all are saying, but at the same time, wasn't this inevitable then? I mean, I had never heard of Amber Heard until a few months ago. I'm not defending her, it just sounds like opponents of #MeToo will elevate anyone they can to discredit the movement. 

It was not inevitable and defamation has a high bar. Most lawyers thought Johnny Depp would struggle to win due to this. The verdict was not decided by the opponents of #MeToo, it was decided by a jury of her peers who listened to five weeks of evidence. They were not allowed to go on social media during this period. The evidence was largely in Johnny Depp's favour, which I know because I watched most of it on Emily D Baker (who agreed the evidence she was presenting did not stack up and she woud never defend an abuser if she thought Johnny Depp was one). I am massively in favour of the #MeToo movement but this was not a #MeToo case as much as the main stream media wanted to make it one. There are right wing morons out there trying to use this to discredit the movement, but that is why there is annoyance at Amber Heard dishonesty. She has done no favours to the #MeToo movement or domestic violence victims in general with this charade. 

[Grace Kelly]

8 hours ago, Britney'sBish said:

Anyone defending Amber clearly did not watch the trial and is missing a lot of info.

Yep, this.  

[Grace Kelly]

12 hours ago, Spicechinodiva said:

State of Virginia allowed it as they only the state that does it. 

 

Her lawyer was against it, but her lawyer has come out and said every single thimg they requested was denied, she even asked for the jurors to be in hotel rooms, and not go to their familes until the trial was over..

 

She said Amber became a victim of DARVO, where the victim gets manipulative into being the culprit into the juries eyes..

 

She even said the UK trial evidence was denied and add the court of public opinion, Amber heard is completely vilified to the point she has no life or is even safe, this is what Johnny wanted and he got it. 

 

 

You are referring to Elaine Bredehoft? her lawyer who did a series of interviews yesterday? Elaine Bredehoft has had a lot of criticism for some of her comments by legal commentators and may even have some trouble with the bar over this (trying to discredit a jury just because they rule against you after a trial is a frowned upon legal tactic). The reality is both sides had evidence that was not allowed to be presented in court. There was actually more pro Johnny Depp evidence supressed if you look into it in detail. Plus evidence is not allowed into court cases for a reason and it is telling that if this evidence was so convincing she did not just detail it in the interview (she vaguely mentioned "theraphy notes" which is probably hearsay evidence based on what story Amber Heard gave her theraphist). The judge was actully quite measured and fair on both sides (this is also indorsed by most of the lagal commentry I have seen). There is also no evidence that the jury was influenced by social media (that they were instructed to stay off during the case and subject to legal sanction under this) in ruling against her and as this is a civil case it would have been inappropriate for them to be sequestered. Amber and her lawyer are spinning a narrative because she lost, but a jury of her peers spent five weeks looking at the evidence and (largely) ruled against her. If you watched the trial you would see that there was no manipulation, but just a great deal of evidence against her and lack of credibility of her as a witness. These cases have to judge people as individuals. She can't be favoured just because she is a woman in exactly the same way a man can't be favoured just because he is a man.