Johnny Depp Libel Case

[TopCat]

I’m not going to read an article where the title includes that the trial was an orgy of misogyny.

Some people take an ideological view to these matters and try and shift the focus from the evidence to somewhere else that they prefer. This has become increasingly hard to do regarding this case as the evidence is quite clear that AH was repeatedly lying.

This was/is a typical take with that stance.

"When we have a society that experiences a gender power imbalance, we are going to see that reflected in the way people of certain genders are treated. And we do, all the time. The only way to truly combat abuse is to recognise that most of the time it stems from misogyny – and that rooting out such attitudes everywhere they are found is crucial. "

Myth four: ‘abuse has no gender’

While it is certainly true that women can be abusers and that men can be victims of abuse (at the hands of women), saying that ‘abuse has no gender’ is problematic. We know that over 90% of d…

thisviolenceisnotatragedy.com

 

[Athos]

Only going on whats been reported..

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/01/amber-heard-johnny-depp-trial-metoo-backlash

I might be missing something, but I can't see where that article says anything about the suppression of evidence?

 

[Aladdin]

I might be missing something, but I can't see where that article says anything about the suppression of evidence?

Sorry wrong article. I had the orher one open at the same time.

Amber Heard lawyer says ‘enormous amount of evidence suppressed’ in Johnny Depp trial

Attorney Elaine Bredehoft says verdict sends a ‘horrible message’ to survivors of domestic abuse

www.google.com

This is the one

Dont tag me back in. I'm out.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

Only going on whats been reported..

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/01/amber-heard-johnny-depp-trial-metoo-backlash

Didn't see anything there about evidence being suppressed?

 

[Athos]

It seems the "supressed evidence" (her lawyer's characterisation) is actually some medical records which were excluded for being hearsay. They consist of near-contemporaneous reports of physical abuse, made by Heard to her psychotherapist. Presumably they're lining up an appeal on the grounds that the judge erred, and that material should've been admissible under the 'present sense impression', 'excited utterance', 'then existing condition', and/or 'treatment/diagnosis' exceptions.

 

[Red Cat]

I think this has been an interesting discussion.
A lot of participants just went with the party line that women don't lie about abuse from men amongst certain political persuasions and sent Depp to the gallows.
Now you've actually looked into the evidence some of ya'll have had a rethink.

That's a plus, shows people are willing to examine their own views rather than doggedly stick to something cos its the ideological thing to do

Actually, I didn't have that view and I didn't state it here.

 

[Aladdin]

Didn't see anything there about evidence being suppressed?

As already explained.
I posted the wrong article.

See the post #1113 for the article about evidence that was not allowed yet was allowed in the UK court case

And more

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2022/06/02/amber-heard-appeal-johnny-depp-trial/

Just want to be out of this thread...Its on ignore so not tagging..thanks..

 

[Rob Ray]

Very few (if any?) people have taken a view here that AH is a good person, and most people have been careful, even when sceptical of Depp as being an unadorned victim, not to get heavily into the he-said she-said of the (multiple week, in which it is basically impossible for someone who wasn't at the trial to have a full overview of events) trial itself.

Various people criticised D'Wards for being a patronising Depp partisan who wasn't really listening to the points people were making about the way the trial had been handled and its impact on public discourse though. Now the conversation's moved on they think they've "won" and are bragging about it, which itself says quite a lot about their attitude to the whole thing.

 

[cesare]

It seems the "supressed evidence" (her lawyer's characterisation) is actually some medical records which were excluded for being hearsay. They consist of near-contemporaneous reports of physical abuse, made by Heard to her psychotherapist. Presumably they're lining up an appeal on the grounds that the judge erred, and that material should've been admissible under the 'present sense impression', 'excited utterance', 'then existing condition', and/or 'treatment/diagnosis' exceptions.

I understand they also excluded the UK case as it was between different parties, and much of the evidence hadn’t been disclosed in the UK/no real examination. That’s just reported though, I didn’t watch that bit.

 

[Clair De Lune]

I agree he came across as more believable from the bits I've watched (I'm aware they're sped up though) but to me he didn't seem confident at all, he looked like a wreck during parts of it.

Fair. I've certainly not watched as much as a lot of you seem to have.

 

[Athos]

I understand they also excluded the UK case as it was between different parties, and much of the evidence hadn’t been disclosed in the UK/no real examination. That’s just reported though, I didn’t watch that bit.

Yes, although it's unclear what they really mean. It seems they're suggesting they ought to have been allowed to tell the jury the verdict in the English Court, but that'd have been very odd since that verdict was based (in part) on evidence that would be inadmissible in the US (and, incidentally, upon a proven lie she told in those proceedings i.e. that she'd donated the divorce settlement to charity).

 

[frogwoman]

Another thing I didn't know about was that AH was arrested for hitting her girlfriend in 2009 - the police officer who made the arrest said that she saw an assault happen. Amber Heard arrested in 2009 on charge of hitting girlfriend

For me that does change things quite a bit and also shows that violence in same gender relationships isn't taken as seriously. At the very least it raises questions as to why she was being seen as a domestic violence advocate and writing about this for various newspapers etc.

I know I said I wouldn't post about this again but I felt pretty upset reading that and have been quite upset thinking about this trial for so many reasons

 

[8ball]

Another thing I didn't know about was that AH was arrested for hitting her girlfriend in 2009 - the police officer who made the arrest said that she saw an assault happen. Amber Heard arrested in 2009 on charge of hitting girlfriend

For me that does change things quite a bit and also shows that violence in same gender relationships isn't taken as seriously. At the very least it raises questions as to why she was being seen as a domestic violence advocate and writing about this for various newspapers etc.

I know I said I wouldn't post about this again but I felt pretty upset reading that

I mentioned it in passing earlier, but I don’t think I mentioned anything about gender.

Edit: reading back to check, not sure whether I just meant to mention and didn’t, or maybe I deleted part of a post. Anyway, can’t find it…

Edit2: scratch that, I found it - post #814

 

[frogwoman]

I mentioned it in passing earlier, but I don’t think I mentioned anything about gender.

Edit: reading back to check, not sure whether I just meant to mention and didn’t, or maybe I deleted part of a post. Anyway, can’t find it…

Edit2: scratch that, I found it - post #814

Ok I haven't read the whole of the thread

 

[8ball]

Ok I haven't read the whole of the thread

It was after you’d joined the thread but I was replying to Sue so fair enough.

 

[cesare]

I mentioned it too but didn't say much about it, the charges were dropped very quickly. I watched what Beverley Lloyd had to say about the nature of the violence leading to the arrest, she was credible. I've also read that AH said the whole arrest situation was due to homophobia, but apparently Beverly Lloyd (edit not sure if that's the police officers name, apologies) is a lesbian. I've not checked any of that, though.

 

[frogwoman]

It was after you’d joined the thread but I was replying to Sue so fair enough.

Maybe, to be honest my memory is shit

 

[frogwoman]

.

 

[Athos]

Yeah, at the very least it raises questions as to how the decision was made to give her such a big platform having previously been subject to the same allegations. I'm not even saying the decision was wrong or that someone who has been accused of DV shouldn't be able to write about it but it does seem strange.

I don't think it was widely known (she alleged it was only made public by Depp's team after her allegations against him).

 

[D'wards]

Amber Heard-Johnny Depp trial does not undermine the #MeToo movement | Letters

Letters: Nicole Smith, Sally Collins, Pattie Friend and Deana Heath on the potential ramifications of the celebrity courtroom drama

www.theguardian.com

 

[Whagwan]

Interesting podcast detailing how Depp was aided my a massive bot network.

I noticed at the time the massive spam saturation of pro-Depp content.

Inside the podcast exposing the Saudi bot army mobilised to take down Amber Heard

Alexi Mostrous on his new podcast, Who Trolled Amber Heard, and the targeted campaign behind the “trial by TikTok”

www.gq-magazine.co.uk