Johnny Depp Defamation Lawsuit

[fraidycat]

JD's lawyers came out swinging on cross today. And just like that, I'm now hooked on watching AH destroy any small bit of credibility she might have still had last week.

I had only seen random clips prior to today, but happened to catch the live about 5 minutes after cross-examination got started this afternoon. It was a sight to behold.

[LuvToRead]

6 hours ago, fraidycat said:

JD's lawyers came out swinging on cross today. And just like that, I'm now hooked on watching AH destroy any small bit of credibility she might have still had last week.

I had only seen random clips prior to today, but happened to catch the live about 5 minutes after cross-examination got started this afternoon. It was a sight to behold.

Me too.  I listened to her entire cross examination.  I cannot figure out why AH said she had already donated all the money when earlier she admitted she hadn't paid it all.   I was very confused by that.  I think that really made her look bad.  That of course doesn't mean she defamed JD but it does show her true character. 

[Catwoman]

4 hours ago, LuvToRead said:

Me too.  I listened to her entire cross examination.  I cannot figure out why AH said she had already donated all the money when earlier she admitted she hadn't paid it all.   I was very confused by that.  I think that really made her look bad.  That of course doesn't mean she defamed JD but it does show her true character. 

I don’t think she ever intended to donate the money. I suspect it was a PR stunt to improve her image, and she never thought anyone would follow up on it and see that she hadn’t made the donation. Her excuses are pathetic.

Honestly, if she really wanted to keep the money, she should have just kept it and never promised to donate any of it — and it was a lot of money, so I wouldn’t blame anyone for not wanting to donate all of it. She was so busy crafting her fake image for the media that she didn’t consider the consequences.

I also believe that she seriously overestimated her acting abilities throughout all of this mess, and I hope it comes back to bite her. 

[gardenmom5]

Did anyone watch the 20 sustained objections in. a. row. against elaine from yesterday? (camille is definitely up to this game.)  Elaine then stated she had no more questions and AH was dismissed from the stand.  AH stormed off instead of going back to sit with her counsel.  (a deputy had to quickly catch up to her to escort her out of the room.) and she did this in front of the jury. 

- this video, as she heads out the door - there is supposition she's actually crying because things went so poorly for her case.  (someone on JD's team had to leave the room because he couldn't stop laughing.)

*another channel had a running counter in the corner for each objection.

Edited May 18, 2022 by gardenmom5

[Vintage81]

34 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

Did anyone watch the 20 sustained objections in. a. row. against elaine from yesterday? (camille is definitely up to this game.)  Elaine then stated she had no more questions and AH was dismissed from the stand.  AH stormed off instead of going back to sit with her counsel.  (a deputy had to quickly catch up to her to escort her out of the room.) and she did this in front of the jury. 

- this video, as she heads out the door - there is supposition she's actually crying because things went so poorly for her case.  (someone on JD's team had to leave the room because he couldn't stop laughing.)

*another channel had a running counter in the corner for each objection.

I saw that…it was wild! Elaine was so flustered. I kind of felt sorry for her. Not only does she have a difficult client, it doesn’t seem like her team is helping her. She had papers scattered all over her desk and appeared very unorganized. At one point, she was trying to figure how to ask a question, and she said to herself “I’m trying, I’m really trying.” (or something like that) 🤦🏼‍♀️

Camille’s face during the objections was amusing too. She started out frustrated but then I think she just thought it was so ridiculous. She just kept her finger planted on that microphone button so she could turn it on after pretty much every question. 

I can’t see how the jury would have gotten much out of Elaine’s redirect with all of those interruptions. I think it did more harm than good. I thought it was also interesting to see AH’s demeanor change. To her credit, she was very stoic during cross examination (and I think Camille did a really good, methodical job of showing the jury the inconsistencies in AH’s stories). AH didn’t seem to get too flustered and remained pretty steadfast in her answers. But then when Elaine came back, she became a lot more emotional with her answers. It was a bit strange how quickly she went from one to the next. 

[Chelli]

I thought when she walked straight out of the courtroom after the redirect instead of allowing the judge to leave first was extremely rude. I actually gasped when I saw her do that. 

[gardenmom5]

21 minutes ago, Vintage81 said:

I saw that…it was wild! Elaine was so flustered. I kind of felt sorry for her. Not only does she have a difficult client, it doesn’t seem like her team is helping her. She had papers scattered all over her desk and appeared very unorganized. At one point, she was trying to figure how to ask a question, and she said to herself “I’m trying, I’m really trying.” (or something like that) 🤦🏼‍♀️

Camille’s face during the objections was amusing too. She started out frustrated but then I think she just thought it was so ridiculous. She just kept her finger planted on that microphone button so she could turn it on after pretty much every question. 

I can’t see how the jury would have gotten much out of Elaine’s redirect with all of those interruptions. I think it did more harm than good. I thought it was also interesting to see AH’s demeanor change. To her credit, she was very stoic during cross examination (and I think Camille did a really good, methodical job of showing the jury the inconsistencies in AH’s stories). AH didn’t seem to get too flustered and remained pretty steadfast in her answers. But then when Elaine came back, she became a lot more emotional with her answers. It was a bit strange how quickly she went from one to the next. 

I think Elaine is disorganized.  I'm not impressed with her as a lawyer, and I think she did a poor job during discovery.  (and she's paying for it now.) - her line of questioning (that was blocked) indicated she was trying to present an argument on nothing but hearsay by AH.  she was trying to bring up medical "facts" - with NO doctor reports, etc. etc. etc.    

 An actress with a broken nose would have rushed to have it properly treated as it would likely affect her appearance, which would affect her ability to get roles.

It was interesting that at the end of the day - no one on AH's legal team went near her.  Vs JD's team - they were all smiles and hugging each other.

[Vintage81]

There was this moment too 😬…

 

[gardenmom5]

9 minutes ago, Vintage81 said:

There was this moment too 😬…

 

No wonder AH hired her.  Two peas in a pod.

[fraidycat]

11 minutes ago, Vintage81 said:

There was this moment too 😬…

 

Did you see JD's response to his lawyer (and the world, because cameras). It was 🏆🏆 great!

[Spryte]

16 minutes ago, Vintage81 said:

There was this moment too 😬…

 

If you scroll down in that thread, there’s a video of a man with the giggles that absolutely cracks me up. 

[Jean in Newcastle]

Can someone tell me what AH’s lawyer should have done?  Questioned the actual doctor?  Was that not possible because there wasn’t an actual doctor to question?  Or were the lawyers negligent in not having him subpoenaed?  

[gardenmom5]

34 minutes ago, Spryte said:

If you scroll down in that thread, there’s a video of a man with the giggles that absolutely cracks me up. 

He couldn't stop laughing and had to leave.

[Idalou]

It's weird how so many people online are watching this and talking about it as entertainment, complete with lols about abusive behaviors and making tik toks miming AH. What are you all getting out of it? I mean some of your comments show you've spent a good bit of time listening or reading. I suppose it has taken on the circus freak show aspect of the OJ trial

[gardenmom5]

18 minutes ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

Can someone tell me what AH’s lawyer should have done?  Questioned the actual doctor?  Was that not possible because there wasn’t an actual doctor to question?  Or were the lawyers negligent in not having him subpoenaed?  

The lawyer never should have brought up injuries with no medical records to back them up.  don't rely upon hearsay evidence, especially when it is so easy to prove it's fake.

AH appeared on the James Cordon show the very next day.  With her little button nose, and no swelling on her face.  When she claimed she had a broken nose and two black eyes.  Her makeup artist was with her for hours and said there wasn't any indication of injuries.

1 - I don't think she had a broken nose, or black eyes.  There was NO swelling the very next day - when it should have been very swollen based upon her description of the injuries.

2 - non-existent injuries wouldn't be treated by a dr. - so no medical records exist to submit into evidence.  AH claiming she had those injuries - but NO medical reports, means they're just hearsay.

 

just like I don't think she ever ran across broken glass in bare feet - and never sought medical care.

 

[gardenmom5]

1 minute ago, Idalou said:

It's weird how so many people online are watching this and talking about it as entertainment, complete with lols about abusive behaviors and making tik toks miming AH. What are you all getting out of it? I mean some of your comments show you've spent a good bit of time listening or reading. I suppose it has taken on the circus freak show aspect of the OJ trial

I desire to see an abuser held accountable.  I haven't been watching it, and only seen headlines - but the video of the 20 sustained objections in a row was entertaining.   Camille is a good lawyer.

[Corraleno]

5 minutes ago, Idalou said:

It's weird how so many people online are watching this and talking about it as entertainment, complete with lols about abusive behaviors and making tik toks miming AH. What are you all getting out of it? I mean some of your comments show you've spent a good bit of time listening or reading. I suppose it has taken on the circus freak show aspect of the OJ trial

If you read the comments on these videos, on YouTube or other sites, a huge proportion of the people commenting are actually victims of abuse who have personal experience in being abused, manipulated, and gaslit by a narcissist like Amber, so they feel a sort of vicarious vindication that this narcissist is being exposed for who she is, because they often did not get that in their personal lives. 

[Indigo Blue]

9 minutes ago, Idalou said:

It's weird how so many people online are watching this and talking about it as entertainment, complete with lols about abusive behaviors and making tik toks miming AH. What are you all getting out of it? I mean some of your comments show you've spent a good bit of time listening or reading. I suppose it has taken on the circus freak show aspect of the OJ trial

I know. I hope justice is served. I’m convinced they are both abusers and very messed up. However guiltily she may be, it’s still hard to watch all the dog piling on her when JD is put up on a pedestal. (I’m not speaking about these threads, just generally in the media and everywhere). No one knows with complete certainty that she is lying, and it’s sad to watch this. I’m not convinced that JD is innocent. I’m not convinced that AH is totally lying. I just don’t get the harsh treatment. If she’s telling the truth, personality disorder or not, this has to be just so damaging and hard. I think they’re both abusive. Hopefully the jury will make the right choice. After watching today’s testimony, I’m convinced JD did his fair share of abusing. The whole point of it all is to determine whether there was defamation. If he in fact abused her, there was none. I know this is an unpopular opinion. It’s okay if others disagree. 
 

I just see a damaged man who had a rough childhood (abusive mother) end up with an abusive partner. This happens all the time. He’s been  on drugs a long time and at some point became abusive himself. Does/did drugs in front of his children, passing out on the beach, etc. I have no respect for that and don’t see him as someone who should be put up on a pedestal. 
 

Ok. I’m done. Feel better now. This has been bothering me for several weeks.

[Jean in Newcastle]

29 minutes ago, Idalou said:

It's weird how so many people online are watching this and talking about it as entertainment, complete with lols about abusive behaviors and making tik toks miming AH. What are you all getting out of it? I mean some of your comments show you've spent a good bit of time listening or reading. I suppose it has taken on the circus freak show aspect of the OJ trial

I wasn't following this at first.  Just the occasional headline that came across my newsfeed.  At first the headlines made me feel one way.  Then the headlines made me feel the opposite way.  (Which I never had during the OJ trial or the Weinstein trial or. . .  other celebrity trials that I only "followed" as it came up on the news.)  So the inconsistencies made me take a closer look.  Not as entertainment but because I do want truth to prevail in the world.  My closer look (which has not included sitting through a trial seeing all evidence like an actual juror) has made me feel like Johnny Depp (as much as I abhor his general lifestyle) has been falsely accused by a narcissist. 

[shawthorne44]

43 minutes ago, Idalou said:

I suppose it has taken on the circus freak show aspect of the OJ trial

My dad used to be really into Court TV and both my parents like the ones with crime re-enactments like that one that looks for escaped bad guys.   They also used to really like the Cops shows.  The OJ trial about the theft was fascinating because everything was on video.   It was like a crime re-enactment only with the real people.  There was videos of OJ and his posse walking down the hotel hallway Kill Bill-style.    There was video of the crime.   There was video of the cops and the crime scene people, and video of the camera being discovered.   I remember one part I reacted "No one would really say that!  ...   Oh, yeah, I guess they really did"   

Years ago, pre-CourtTV, Dad was on a jury in a rape trial.   There was an old couple watching that seemed to have to have no relationship to anyone.   Dad talked to them after the trial.  They were retired and this was what they did for entertainment.   They said it was much better than TV.    Dad asked if they usually agreed with the jury verdicts.    They said almost always, unless they got to see things that the jury didn't.   


 

[KungFuPanda]

9 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

The lawyer never should have brought up injuries with no medical records to back them up.  don't rely upon hearsay evidence, especially when it is so easy to prove it's fake.

AH appeared on the James Cordon show the very next day.  With her little button nose, and no swelling on her face.  When she claimed she had a broken nose and two black eyes.  Her makeup artist was with her for hours and said there wasn't any indication of injuries.

1 - I don't think she had a broken nose, or black eyes.  There was NO swelling the very next day - when it should have been very swollen based upon her description of the injuries.

2 - non-existent injuries wouldn't be treated by a dr. - so no medical records exist to submit into evidence.  AH claiming she had those injuries - but NO medical reports, means they're just hearsay.

 

just like I don't think she ever ran across broken glass in bare feet - and never sought medical care.

 

The only part I got to see today was a bit of the make-up artists testimony. (Might have been prerecorded from January) She said there was some discoloration around the eyes and nose, and that she had to correct the color by using a different foundation color. She also said the lip was injured, they had to use a red lip since nude wasn’t an option, and that she could see the swelling on the James Cordon show. 
 

I didn’t see anything else today so I only have this snippet for now. 

[mommyoffive]

Watching a little from today.   How is Elaine still not getting how to use the microphone??

[Danae]

12 hours ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

has made me feel like Johnny Depp (as much as I abhor his general lifestyle) has been falsely accused by a narcissist. 

He’s suing her.  Based on an op-Ed she wrote for the Washington Post where she didn’t even mention his name or make any accusations.
 

[Jean in Newcastle]

30 minutes ago, Danae said:

He’s suing her.  Based on an op-Ed she wrote for the Washington Post where she didn’t even mention his name or make any accusations.
 

So?  I answered a question about why I am following this case. And what my (totally inconsequential) opinion is. A jury will decide whether his suit has merit. 

[gardenmom5]

7 hours ago, Danae said:

He’s suing her.  Based on an op-Ed she wrote for the Washington Post where she didn’t even mention his name or make any accusations.
 

The op-ed where she did a "woe is me, I'm a victim of domestic violence"? (Irony considering she has three previous partners who've accused her of DV)  - the one that caused Disney, and other producers to fire JD because "johnny's an abuser"?  (He's been fired from further PoC movies, and from his role in fantastic beasts.)

[Vintage81]

10 hours ago, mommyoffive said:

Watching a little from today.   How is Elaine still not getting how to use the microphone??

It is baffling. 🤦🏼‍♀️

[Danae]

7 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

The op-ed where she did a "woe is me, I'm a victim of domestic violence"? (Irony considering she has three previous partners who've accused her of DV)  - the one that caused Disney, and other producers to fire JD because "johnny's an abuser"?  (He's been fired from further PoC movies, and from his role in fantastic beasts.)

This Op-Ed.  Where the only thing she said that could be referring to JD is that when you accuse a prominent Hollywood man of abuse his supporters rally to mock and harass you.  Hard to see how that’s not an obviously true statement at this point.

[Scarlett]

16 minutes ago, Danae said:

This Op-Ed.  Where the only thing she said that could be referring to JD is that when you accuse a prominent Hollywood man of abuse his supporters rally to mock and harass you.  Hard to see how that’s not an obviously true statement at this point.

I don’t think people are mocking her because she accused DP of abuse. I think people are mocking her because she comes across as a very obvious liar and terrible actress. 

[Wheres Toto]

I thought it was over an article in the Sun or some other British rag?

[Danae]

59 minutes ago, Wheres Toto said:

I thought it was over an article in the Sun or some other British rag?

Different case.  He sued the Sun in 2018 for calling him a wife beater.  He already lost that one. 

[Scarlett]

From the little I have heard JD wasn’t  a perfect gentleman.  He reacted badly to her taunting many times. I mean *I* wouldn’t want to be married to him.  Honestly she seems a little psychotic to me, but the biggest thing is she appears to be a liar.  I can tolerate a lot of things but lying just is too much.  
 

 

[gardenmom5]

1 hour ago, Danae said:

Different case.  He sued the Sun in 2018 for calling him a wife beater.  He already lost that one. 

The latest is they're opening an investigation into AH for perjury for the trial in the UK.   She does play very fast and lose with "facts".

[Jean in Newcastle]

I will say that while I have developed opinions on the case, I don’t have a particular “desired result”. Other than a general wish for justice. I would assume that JD and AH fans have stronger opinions on what the desired outcome should be. 

[popmom]

I want justice to prevail. I personally have never mocked AH, and I have NEVER mocked anyone claiming to be a victim of domestic violence. In this case it seems to go both ways. 

I do really identify with those victims of narcissistic abuse. JD’s “sins”, aggressions, abuse, what ever it is… I personally believe she provoked it. Does that make it okay? No. But it is an extenuating circumstance. This type of provocation is a classic tactic of narcissistic/bpd sufferers. They subtly dig, poke, prod, and stab until the victim explodes. And then the narcissist comes out smelling like a rose. Just my non expert opinion based on personal experience. 
 

And yeah I know this is overly simplistic as it pertains to BPD which is why I described them as sufferers. 

[Carrie12345]

4 hours ago, popmom said:

I want justice to prevail. I personally have never mocked AH, and I have NEVER mocked anyone claiming to be a victim of domestic violence. In this case it seems to go both ways. 

I do really identify with those victims of narcissistic abuse. JD’s “sins”, aggressions, abuse, what ever it is… I personally believe she provoked it. Does that make it okay? No. But it is an extenuating circumstance. This type of provocation is a classic tactic of narcissistic/bpd sufferers. They subtly dig, poke, prod, and stab until the victim explodes. And then the narcissist comes out smelling like a rose. Just my non expert opinion based on personal experience. 
 

And yeah I know this is overly simplistic as it pertains to BPD which is why I described them as sufferers. 

It’s all had me thinking a lot about the differences/similarities/overlap of abuse vs. toxicity.  Abuse is toxic, of course.  Is toxicity automatically abuse? Is it if the other person engages?

Substance abuse makes people intolerable. It doesn’t always make them abusive toward others. I have limited experience with substance abusers myself, but I’ve seen a range of behaviors from a non-live-in position. And I’ve personally never engaged.  I have seen a substance abuser be an easy target for bad people.

In the bits I’ve seen from this trial, I haven’t really caught anything that I would identify as *abusive* from JD.  Toxic, yes. Erratic, yes. Intolerable, yes. Crushing my teenage self, yes.

My personal feeling right now, with complete freedom from having to judge based on laws, is that he was taken for a ride by someone who saw opportunity. And might not have been if not for his own issues.

[Scarlett]

1 hour ago, Carrie12345 said:

It’s all had me thinking a lot about the differences/similarities/overlap of abuse vs. toxicity.  Abuse is toxic, of course.  Is toxicity automatically abuse? Is it if the other person engages?

Substance abuse makes people intolerable. It doesn’t always make them abusive toward others. I have limited experience with substance abusers myself, but I’ve seen a range of behaviors from a non-live-in position. And I’ve personally never engaged.  I have seen a substance abuser be an easy target for bad people.

In the bits I’ve seen from this trial, I haven’t really caught anything that I would identify as *abusive* from JD.  Toxic, yes. Erratic, yes. Intolerable, yes. Crushing my teenage self, yes.

My personal feeling right now, with complete freedom from having to judge based on laws, is that he was taken for a ride by someone who saw opportunity. And might not have been if not for his own issues.

That sums my feelings up very well.  Except my teenage self had no idea who JD was.  But I am old.  Lol.  And I only had a vague sense of who Amber Heard was….mostly that she was married to JD.  I had no idea they had been divorced so long. Or married for such a short time.  
 

Is a 7 million dollar settlement normal for a 15 month marriage?

[Corraleno]

2 hours ago, Scarlett said:

Is a 7 million dollar settlement normal for a 15 month marriage?

In addition to the $7 million in cash, which she insisted he also pay the taxes on, she demanded another $6 or 7 million to pay off their joint debts, $500K for her lawyers, the Range Rover, and exclusive use of JD's three penthouses for herself and all her friends, which he would continue to pay all the expenses for. And even that wasn't enough, she also had to destroy his career, which had the bonus of making her look like a sympathetic victim who deserved the settlement she got instead of a gold-digging narcissist punishing someone for daring to leave her.

[Scarlett]

1 hour ago, Corraleno said:

In addition to the $7 million in cash, which she insisted he also pay the taxes on, she demanded another $6 or 7 million to pay off their joint debts, $500K for her lawyers, the Range Rover, and exclusive use of JD's three penthouses for herself and all her friends, which he would continue to pay all the expenses for. And even that wasn't enough, she also had to destroy his career, which had the bonus of making her look like a sympathetic victim who deserved the settlement she got instead of a gold-digging narcissist punishing someone for daring to leave her.

That’s how I am reading it too. 

[goldberry]

Re: JD's behavior (and I have no way of knowing if this is actually the case) Two close friends of mine who eventually left abusive relationships talked about how it turned THEM into someone they didn't want to be.  That in future relationships they saw themselves engaging in toxic behavior that they had gotten used to while they were in the previous relationship.  It doesn't matter if you are a person who communicates in a healthy way, etc.  The abusive person provokes and provokes until eventually you are responding in like manner and becoming someone you no longer like to see in the mirror.

[gardenmom5]

13 minutes ago, goldberry said:

Re: JD's behavior (and I have no way of knowing if this is actually the case) Two close friends of mine who eventually left abusive relationships talked about how it turned THEM into someone they didn't want to be.  That in future relationships they saw themselves engaging in toxic behavior that they had gotten used to while they were in the previous relationship.  It doesn't matter if you are a person who communicates in a healthy way, etc.  The abusive person provokes and provokes until eventually you are responding in like manner and becoming someone you no longer like to see in the mirror.

People like to claim it's mutual abuse - but it really isn't.   I caught myself doing to my grandmother (and ONLY her) what she would do to me. Its' reactionary and self-defensive at the same time.  When I realized I was doing it - I stopped.  I didn't want to be like her.   

[gardenmom5]

reports are Camille used "Law and Lumbers" post/information about the broken bed, and how AH's description of how it was broken is just not possible.

He's a lawyer, who does woodwork as a hobby.  - Anyway, he did a thorough demonstration, talking about type of wood, grains, how to split it, etc.  The only way that bed could have been broken in the manner AH had shown in the photos - was with a knife or similar sharp object. NOT someone's boot.  Not even a steel toe boot (she didn't claim he was wearing steel toe boots) is sharp enough to wedge between the grains and split them.

He has also attended the trial (he wasn't there when his video was talked about, but his lawyer friend was), and gave some information on the jurors (demographics are OK e.g. sex, race, age. - and he wanted people to be very clear on what constitutes jury tampering, and what would happen to them if they did.)  Many of the jurors had turned their chairs away from AH most of the time she was talking.  Occasionally they would turn back, but mostly they weren't facing her at all.

The people in line for the gallery were overwhelmingly in favor of JD.    

[gardenmom5]

Someone stated AH dropped out of high school?  (eventually got a GED/similar) - does anyone know if this is correct?

It might explain why she's uneducated enough to not know there is a big difference between "pledge" and "donate".  (after arguing with camille while being questioned on the stand, she finally admitted she used the terms interchangeably.) 

[Farrar]

I am really uncomfortable with a lot of the stuff surrounding this whole trial. Like, regardless of who's in the right between JD and AH and who abused who and who's the chicken and who's the egg... I am uncomfortable with the growing "this is what toxic femininity" and "men are the real victims" narratives that seem to be surrounding this whole affair. Which is not to say that some women aren't toxic (they definitely are, and AH, whether she's the victim or the perpetrator or both, would definitely seem to be a pretty toxic individual) and that men can't be abused (because they can, whether JD is really a victim of abuse or a victim in general or perpetrator or something else). But that line supports a narrative and perception that women are more likely to be perpetrators than victims or that women have the real power in relationships... both of which is just not true on an overall scale. Like, I was reading that conservative publications have been spending a boatload on anti-AH ads. Like, ugh.

[Jean in Newcastle]

16 minutes ago, Farrar said:

I am really uncomfortable with a lot of the stuff surrounding this whole trial. Like, regardless of who's in the right between JD and AH and who abused who and who's the chicken and who's the egg... I am uncomfortable with the growing "this is what toxic femininity" and "men are the real victims" narratives that seem to be surrounding this whole affair. Which is not to say that some women aren't toxic (they definitely are, and AH, whether she's the victim or the perpetrator or both, would definitely seem to be a pretty toxic individual) and that men can't be abused (because they can, whether JD is really a victim of abuse or a victim in general or perpetrator or something else). But that line supports a narrative and perception that women are more likely to be perpetrators than victims or that women have the real power in relationships... both of which is just not true on an overall scale. Like, I was reading that conservative publications have been spending a boatload on anti-AH ads. Like, ugh.

You must read very different sources than I do. Everything I have seen has been pretty factual:  this is what happened in the trial today. Opinions have been stated as opinions:  usually as representative of supporters of one side or the other but still focused on them as individuals- not as representative of “womankind “ or “mankind “. 

[shawthorne44]

1 hour ago, gardenmom5 said:

Someone stated AH dropped out of high school?  (eventually got a GED/similar) - does anyone know if this is correct?

It might explain why she's uneducated enough to not know there is a big difference between "pledge" and "donate".  (after arguing with camille while being questioned on the stand, she finally admitted she used the terms interchangeably.) 

She can't be that stupid.   Really.   If she is, lack of a high school diploma doesn't explain it.  

I think it is more that she has the idea that you don't have to follow through when you make a promise.  

 

[gardenmom5]

6 minutes ago, shawthorne44 said:

She can't be that stupid.   Really.   If she is, lack of a high school diploma doesn't explain it.  

I think it is more that she has the idea that you don't have to follow through when you make a promise.  

 

The person talking has a Masters in social work, and was focused on the BPD and Histrionic PD diagnosis..  She read off the DMS5 definition of each.  She said it was possible they explained her equating the two terms.  Pledge and donate absolutely mean different things.

[Corraleno]

42 minutes ago, Farrar said:

I am really uncomfortable with a lot of the stuff surrounding this whole trial. Like, regardless of who's in the right between JD and AH and who abused who and who's the chicken and who's the egg... I am uncomfortable with the growing "this is what toxic femininity" and "men are the real victims" narratives that seem to be surrounding this whole affair. Which is not to say that some women aren't toxic (they definitely are, and AH, whether she's the victim or the perpetrator or both, would definitely seem to be a pretty toxic individual) and that men can't be abused (because they can, whether JD is really a victim of abuse or a victim in general or perpetrator or something else). But that line supports a narrative and perception that women are more likely to be perpetrators than victims or that women have the real power in relationships... both of which is just not true on an overall scale. Like, I was reading that conservative publications have been spending a boatload on anti-AH ads. Like, ugh.

This is exactly the reason that so many women who couldn't give a flip about JD are so angry at her — she used the rise of the Me Too movement, and the public's increasing willingness to believe women, to vindictively destroy her ex and make herself look good, which is an incredibly callous slap in the face to all legitimate victims of abuse, who are now less likely to be believed because of her lies.

 

Edited May 20, 2022 by Corraleno

[Ceilingfan]

The MeToo movement started in 2017, though. Amber Heard filed the restraining order in 2016, claiming abuse then.

So it's not like she saw the rise of the metoo movement, thought "oh! I'll make up a lie that he abused me!" and then started telling people she had been abused. She first claimed abuse a year before MeToo was a thing.

 

It's that kind of misunderstanding of the situation (along with the ridiculous equivocation about how bad Johnny Depp was or wasn't) that makes me distrust the prevailing narrative.

 

[Catwoman]

2 minutes ago, Ceilingfan said:

The MeToo movement started in 2017, though. Amber Heard filed the restraining order in 2016, claiming abuse then.

So it's not like she saw the rise of the metoo movement, thought "oh! I'll make up a lie that he abused me!" and then started telling people she had been abused. She first claimed abuse a year before MeToo was a thing.

 

It's that kind of misunderstanding of the situation (along with the ridiculous equivocation about how bad Johnny Depp was or wasn't) that makes me distrust the prevailing narrative.

 

I think Amber Heard was after Johnny Depp's money all along, and she thought he could help make her very famous and advance her career.

I think she took full advantage of the MeToo movement when it became popular, but I firmly believe it was just a happy coincidence for her, and that she'd had her plans in place well before then. 

[Catwoman]

1 hour ago, gardenmom5 said:

Someone stated AH dropped out of high school?  (eventually got a GED/similar) - does anyone know if this is correct?

I read that, too, but I don't know whether or not it's true.