Johnny Depp Libel Case

[Cloo]

Twitter is depressing as fuck this morning, with lots of men posting sneering memes about MeToo as if it was a charter for false accusations and this has proved once and for all that all, or at least a significant number of women are liars when it comes to abuse.

 

[Cloo]

Apparently abusers are already calling their victims 'Amber' and 'Ms Heard' when they complain or threat to do something about it, to undermine and gaslight them.

 

[Cid]

And you appear to have placed your faith in a majority male US jury, which you wouldn't have done if they'd found the other way. As you note yourself, your loyalty to the legal system is based on your personal interpretation of what you saw.

You also can't go forum shopping in the UK. There's a reason this was heard in Virginia.

There are a lot of problems with the UK justice system, but once you start digging into shit like appointment of justices, jury selection/voir dire, SLAPP laws etc it starts to seem almost good.

 

[Thora]

Depressing but unsurprising outcome.

 

[belboid]

Most of us who have caned it have behaved as bad,

You’ve smeared your partners menstrual blood over the wall? Indulged in murderous fantasies?

No we fucking haven’t.

 

[IC3D]

She used metoo to lie about being abused to cover up her own violent actions.
JD wanted to clear his name. Simple.
I'm sure most male DV enthusiasts have emotional problems too, diddums to them too, hope they all get the help they need and can reflect on the consequences of their actions

 

[D'wards]

I kind of suspect when all the #metoo etc was kicking off that Heard just wanted to join in.
She didn't make any specific allegations at the time but refered to herself as a "domestic violence survivor" in vague terms. Didn't even name Depp.

When it kicked off she was caught in a lie and it probably spiralled out of control for her.
Like when a kid is caught fibbing and when questioned on it they panic and provide too much evidence and it all gets a bit fantastical.

 

[bimble]

Hi D'wards, its a whole six months since i asked you this & you ignored the question which is fair enough but I'm still (genuinely) curious.

Can you explain what it is that has made you so invested in this whole story and the wrongdoings of jonny depp’s ex wife ?
Are you a big JD fan or is it something else that's made you follow the story with so much interest?

 

[D'wards]

Hi D'wards, its a whole six months since i asked you this & you ignored the question which is fair enough but I'm still (genuinely) curious.

Can you explain what it is that has made you so invested in this whole story and the wrongdoings of jonny depp’s ex wife ?
Are you a big JD fan or is it something else that's made you follow the story with so much interest?

I'm not a huge jd fan but think he's alright. The footage of him at GOSH etc etc always warned me cockles.

Its more examining the evidence carefully and being convinced hes innocent.
I'm not an apologist for wife beaters- two people who are well loved and I should love can get to fuck- Mike Tyson and Gazza.

If I don't engage its cos sometimes I catch myself, and realise that arguing with strangers on the Internet who you'll never find common ground with is one of the most pointless things a person can do, and a complete waste of time. Its not personal.

So if things get a bit heavy on threads, as they do on urban 75, I disengage and go and clean the toilet or something.

 

[bimble]

ye ok but i still don't understand it, what made you and millions of other people so keen to "examine the evidence carefully" , for hours and months.
Its ok i'll just add it the big pile of things about my fellow humans that i don't understand and find depressing.

 

[D'wards]

Hi D'wards, its a whole six months since i asked you this & you ignored the question which is fair enough but I'm still (genuinely) curious.

Can you explain what it is that has made you so invested in this whole story and the wrongdoings of jonny depp’s ex wife ?
Are you a big JD fan or is it something else that's made you follow the story with so much interest?

Plus you are implying that my support of Depp is weird or indicative of something more sinister.

I can only assume you live in a happy little u75 bubble/echo chamber.

He has so much support from people- mostly women .
Just look at twitter

 

[D'wards]

ye ok but i still don't understand it, what made you and millions of other people so keen to "examine the evidence carefully" , for hours and months.
Its ok i'll just add it the big pile of things about my fellow humans that i don't understand and find depressing.

Love a juicy courtroom drama, innit.

Me and me pals used to visit the gallery of the Crown Court in those happy unemployed days occasionally. Fascinating

 

[bimble]

no its ok thanks. i saw a thing on tiktok just now, over 220 thousand people 'liking' a vid that says he had every right to kill her. That's a lot of support its true.

 

[D'wards]

no its ok thanks. i saw a thing on tiktok just now, over 220 thousand people 'liking' a vid that says he had every right to kill her. That's a lot of support.

Don't believe everything you read in comment pieces in the Guardian...

 

[bimble]

 

[D'wards]

View attachment 325154

Well that is vile. People are disappointing largely

 

[Yossarian]

Good piece here on what the jury got wrong - one of the three statements they deemed defamatory was a headline that wasn't even written by Heard.

Opinion | How the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard jury got it wrong — twice

No one should have won. Everyone should have lost.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Petcha]

Good piece here on what the jury got wrong - one of the three statements they deemed defamatory was a headline that wasn't even written by Heard.

Opinion | How the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard jury got it wrong — twice

No one should have won. Everyone should have lost.

www.nbcnews.com

Well yes that would have been the sub-editor. if that wasn't pointed out to the jury by her lawyers then she needs to change lawyer.

 

[Red Cat]

Plus you are implying that my support of Depp is weird or indicative of something more sinister.

I can only assume you live in a happy little u75 bubble/echo chamber.

He has so much support from people- mostly women .
Just look at twitter

So what? People's hatred is easily amplified when given well-established targets, especially in groups.

 

[Petcha]

I also dont understand how the compensation thing is capped at £350k in Virginia but they got millions

 

[Pickman's model]

I also dont understand how the compensation thing is capped at £350k in Virginia but they got millions

Punitive damages

 

[Pickman's model]

Plus you are implying that my support of Depp is weird or indicative of something more sinister.

I can only assume you live in a happy little u75 bubble/echo chamber.

He has so much support from people- mostly women .
Just look at twitter

I'm not sure any of these supporters came to the trial with no prior knowledge of depp

 

[belboid]

Punitive damages

350k is the maximum allowed in punitive damages - that's why the judge reduced it from the jury's $5m to 350k

 

[Petcha]

350k is the maximum allowed in punitive damages - that's why the judge reduced it from the jury's $5m to 350k

So how much are they actually getting? It sounds like the jury just threw some darts at a dartboard to come up with these numbers

 

[cesare]

350k is the maximum allowed in punitive damages - that's why the judge reduced it from the jury's $5m to 350k

Max in that county, but yes.

 

[cesare]

Well yes that would have been the sub-editor. if that wasn't pointed out to the jury by her lawyers then she needs to change lawyer.

The statement that the jury had to find on, was whether she made or published the statement. She didn't make it, it was written by someone else. But she re-published it in her tweet.

 

[Pickman's model]

350k is the maximum allowed in punitive damages - that's why the judge reduced it from the jury's $5m to 350k

My mistake, compensatory damages

 

[Jeff Robinson]

The statement that the jury had to find on, was whether she made or published the statement. She didn't make it, it was written by someone else. But she re-published it in her tweet.

Good to know that anybody who retweets an article that says Amber Heard is a victim of domestic violence might be liable to being sued for tens of millions

 

[cesare]

Good to know that anybody who retweets an article that says Amber Heard is a victim of domestic violence might be liable to being sued for tens of millions

If she'd just retweeted it she would have been fine. But she didn't just do that. She quoted the op-ed and said amongst other things "today I published this op-ed ..." Which amounted to re-publishing with intent to reach a wider audience etc.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

Good to know that anybody who retweets an article that says Amber Heard is a victim of domestic violence might be liable to being sued for tens of millions

On the other hand it's good to know that people who retweet lies are liable to be held accountable.