VA - Johnny Depp's defamation case against ex Amber Heard, who countersued #13

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ugh! The trial had to be televised imo, just look at all the lies and vitriol that were directed at JD after the UK trial against The Sun (also something that seems to have been twisted to suit the AH narrative).
Also, it wasn't a criminal trial,it was a defamation trial so AH need only have testified that a sexual assault took place,she didn't need to go into such graphic (fantastical) detail. IMO

And could they really justify sequestering a jury for 6 weeks for a defamation trial?
No they could not… plenty of legal YouTubers have said stuff like this.

I hope someone does write a REAL article on the topic… what people have said is, ‘in this day and age, sequestering jurors in a hotel for 6 weeks without computer OR cell phone, is basically seen as cruel and unusual punishment for the jury.’

Also, what would these foolish people have them do from Thurs-Mon of every week; plus the 10 days of the judicial conference when court never met?!?
 
One thing that Ben said in the interviews was that Johnny owned up to the disparaging things brought up in court (ie: substance abuse, emails), where as Ms Heard didn’t own up to anything.

For myself, this was a huge factor for me when watching the trial, as I started watching this trial with no pre-conceived opinions.
 
I watched The Today show and recorded GMA. Savannah G gave a "quick disclosure" first thing saying "My husband has done consulting work for the Depp legal team but not in connection with this interview."

Thought that was interesting after how she interacted with EB last week.
 
Here is a link to the GMA interview:


It does annoy me that they got asked about whether a win for Johnny is a setback for women in the Me Too movement. I wish that they had said that Johnny is a DV victim and a survivor and thus him speaking out and winning in a court of law was a good thing.
 
Found a link to the Today show interview as well, haven't watched it yet:

 
Found a link to the Today show interview as well, haven't watched it yet:

This one had me smiling the whole time. So are these filmed live and are they changing outfits each interview. I’m such a fan ❤️
 
I find it interesting that Bredehoft did her interviews solo without Rottenborn immediately after the verdict, until she seemed to be silenced, then opting out of the last interview with CourtTV last minute.

Yes. I think she was told to pull her head in and keep her trap shut, quite possibly by Judge Azcarate.
She has done herself and her colleagues no favours with her TV appearances and accusations IMO.

The contrast between both parties interviews are glaring, Ben and Camille didn't get into anything detrimental and were very professional.
I remember during the trial I posted that BR argument at one point basically came down to "but,but,but ....pirate, wah" and EB and her rants have not changed my opinion
 
I agree. And if you listen to all of the audio tapes you will hear indisputable evidence that JD was also abused verbally and emotionally by AH. AH also attempted to control him via drugs (insisting he, an opioid addict, take Xanax multiple times), tried to control his freedom of movement (multiple examples of her chasing him to various rooms, residences, out of elevators etc), initiating arguments which led to him being late to work, refusing to let him leave/de-escalate. She may be claiming financial abuse now, but he discharged all of their joint debts including that horrendous wine bill, and on the tapes you can hear him trying to pay for her Ubers, but she refuses to take money from him. In fact, she claimed in the UK trial under oath that she remained financially independent throughout their relationship and marriage. So why change that story now? Because she needed the jury to believe she was a poor hapless, helpless, vulnerable, naïve, sober victim who was preyed upon by a powerful, older, richer, predatory man. She needed the jury to see JD as another Harvey Weinstein. Luckily, the jury saw through that act.

Abuse is about power and control. It's pretty clear that AH was the one trying to exert control over the relationship. Despite her claims to the contrary, she was the one who had the most power in their private lives. She was suffering from personality disorders (BPD, HPD) and her own heavy substance/alcohol abuse which exacerbated her need to control him, his behavior, his access to friends and family, his time, his attention. The amount of belittling, taunting and verbal haranguing she subjected him to is proof that she was the aggressor and instigator of much of the toxicity in the relationship. In the audio tapes you can hear him trying many times to de-escalate, talk rationally about the problems in the marriage, to explain as patiently as he could what he felt they needed to work on. He's not the one yelling and screaming abuse when things get heated, in fact it's he who tries to keep things calm and civil for the most part. If he was jealous, those fears were not unfounded. We have proof from video footage, nurses notes and friend's depos that she was bringing men into the PH (into HIS home) and being unfaithful. He was powerless to stop his wife's infidelity. You might not have noticed but she was the one isolating him. He was paying for her friends and family to live with her, vacation with her. She was surrounded by her support network. And yet, as others have testified (in terms of them being aware she was manipulative and jealous, monoploizing his time) and you can hear it on the tapes, she told him only she was genuinely looking out for him, only she was truly in his corner the rest were sycophants. She turned him against his friends and colleagues. He became more withdrawn from his support network. This is all textbook stuff in the DV manual.

Yes, he did lash out verbally sometimes in retaliation. That's true. He did return the insults. This is called reactive abuse, when a DV victim has been so beaten down and attacked that they react negatively themselves, then the abuser uses that to justify their violence "see, you called me names, you were mean, you shoved me back/off of you, you are the abuser!". It's a very common phenomenon. I don't think any abuse victims should be expected to just take the constant abuse for years and never react. DV victims are allowed to be imperfect (as AH's team claimed and ironically this applies to JD). Venting texts to other parties about AH and her cheating/lies/abuse do not constitute abuse on AH. They just don't, and it was ridiculous for the defense team to focus so heavily on this. None of those ugly texts or emails were even directed at her.

It's also rather telling that he gave her many chances to stop her public smear campaign, to try to work things out so that neither them would face public repercussions. He tried to protect her 'credibility' that she was so worried about, but she kept blowing things up in a public way. She instigated the public attacks with her TRO, then couldn't back down from it. Then when the divorce was finally settled, they released a joint public statement where they claimed neither was an abuser. Two years later she broke the divorce contract (where neither was to publicly disparage the other) in order to write the Op Ed. She couldn't let it go. She couldn't let Johnny go. You heard it herself from her own mouth on the stand. She couldn't stand that he still had supporters, that he wasn't completely ruined. Her need for control over her victim caused her to lash out once again. But, thankfully, this time, JD decided to stand up and say enough is enough. He held her accountable her words and her actions. He took her to court and he won. Truth and justice won, in my opinion.

And yet AH still can't let it go. She sends out her lawyer to keep being the attack dog on the morning shows. She publicly announces it was a travesty of justice for women and she will be appealing. Look at her complaints through various spokespeople. How dare JD continue on with his life. How dare he fulfill work obligations and not be there for the verdict. How dare he celebrate getting his life back. How dare he join TikTok and thank his fans.

Again, I need to ask, who is obsessed with and trying to control whom? Who is really the jealous one? Who is still trying to harm the other?

All of womanhood and DV victimhood are being destroyed by JD existing and winning his court case!!! Are you kidding me? The weaponizing of MeToo and domestic violence victims, heck even feminism itself against her ex-partner just makes me sick. She doesn't speak for me or for any righteous cause or movement, imo. She needs to quit with the grandiose statements, her narcissistic tendencies are showing.

JMO but I think AH is most upset by the fact that he won't look at her, he won't talk to her, he won't take her back and he won't allow her to control his life for one second more. The rage is palpable. And it scares me. It should scare you, too. We are seeing a narcissistic abuser melting down in real time and in public due to the celebrity factor. I truly hope that she does move on and try to be the best mother she can be, despite her proven character deficits. I really do. I just don't think the story ends here. I hope I am wrong.
I can’t believe I missed seeing this post yesterday. This morning I was looking forward to the Depp Team interviews and scouted for any comments about them, and saw your wonderfully written post. I can’t put into words how meaningful it is, an excellent summation of the situation of an abuser vs the abused. I hope this trial opened people’s eyes to how it can work either way, a female being abused by a male or a male being abused by a female. Your explanation is so clear and concise, and I thank you so much! This is why I love Websleuths … so many insightful posters!
 
Found a link to the Today show interview as well, haven't watched it yet:

Thank you for both of those links to the interviews. It just amazes me that it was OK with Heards fans that her lawyer was making the rounds far sooner than JD's lawyers. It was ok for Heards lawyer to do interviews but not so for JD's? Double standard. Anyway, in my eyes and the eyes of many it was Amber who started the smear campaign with that OP Ed and maybe before to a smaller extent. Again, Heards team, admirers say it was JD who started the smear campaign. Double standard again.
Even though the relationship with both of them was toxic, JD proved to me without a shadow of a doubt that he was a victim of DV, mental and physical and she was definitely the instigator.
 
Anyone keeping an eye on the eBay auction of The DUI Guy's notes regarding jurors' reactions at the trial? About 13-1/2 hours to go, and bid is $14,369 at this point. Proceeds to go to the CHLA. Pretty neat. Wonder who will win the auction? And will they share information contained in the notes? Can they even read the handwritten notes? I couldn't. Lots of scribbles.

LOL, I wonder if Forman noted sleeping jurors!!
I have been following him. When the bids got past $10,000 he wondered if the defense was interested in the book. Today on Twitter, he said he wasn't going to mail it until after the appeal was filed.
 
Found a link to the Today show interview as well, haven't watched it yet:


I loved the right hook shot from Ben Chew to Elaine B, when he said she impugned the jury with her comments.

I felt that.
BAM ! As @Warwick7 says :cool:
 

The notebook has about 20 pages per day, and covers days 23-26 of the trial. What's interesting is it doesn't just recall what was said in court, but it shows something the cameras couldn't -- reactions from jurors.

The current bid is over $14K, but the sale isn't final yet ... Larry's decided to donate the highest bid to Children's Hospital LA, saying it seemed fitting since it's related to the case.

Remember, Amber testified she had pledged $3.5 million to CHLA, but still hadn't paid up. Larry says hospital reps are aware of the auction and they're pleased about his offer.
 
I have been following him. When the bids got past $10,000 he wondered if the defense was interested in the book. Today on Twitter, he said he wasn't going to mail it until after the appeal was filed.

Who’s notes are they?
This guy has been sketchy. He is the one who said he was having Ambers childhood friend on live. It was a hoax. Just be careful, he doesn’t want the hype to go away and he’s grabbing to stay relevant.
 

The notebook has about 20 pages per day, and covers days 23-26 of the trial. What's interesting is it doesn't just recall what was said in court, but it shows something the cameras couldn't -- reactions from jurors.

The current bid is over $14K, but the sale isn't final yet ... Larry's decided to donate the highest bid to Children's Hospital LA, saying it seemed fitting since it's related to the case.

Remember, Amber testified she had pledged $3.5 million to CHLA, but still hadn't paid up. Larry says hospital reps are aware of the auction and they're pleased about his offer.
Let’s hope Larry is telling the truth… isn’t he one of the people who tried to sell people on the ‘Elaine crying’ story (She hasn’t seemed sorry…)? Then we know he went ahead with the ill advised fake ‘Amber’s childhood friend’… I kind of feel like his inability to vet this faker first, isn’t very professional-lawyer-standards of him….
 
I loved the right hook shot from Ben Chew to Elaine B, when he said she impugned the jury with her comments.

I felt that.
BAM ! As @Warwick7 says :cool:

They are amazing! Everything they said was tasteful, calling it as it was! I’m so proud of them!

Someone got Camille’s face tattooed on their arm! That’s so funny!
 

The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence has experienced an onslaught of hatred from Depp fans since the high-profile case, especially after expressing they stood with Heard.

In a statement posted to their website, NCADV analyzed the implications the case might have, saying, “What spilled out of the courtroom and into the media, including social media, was an abuser exerting control and manipulating the media and a loyal fan base to attack his victim on his behalf.”

The organization claimed that the non-sequestered jury “could have very well been influenced by the well-paid and highly-targeted smear campaign,” which could have a “chilling effect” on women seeking justice.

(IMHO The elephant in the room is that AH did this to herself.)
 
Let’s hope Larry is telling the truth… isn’t he one of the people who tried to sell people on the ‘Elaine crying’ story (She hasn’t seemed sorry…)? Then we know he went ahead with the ill advised fake ‘Amber’s childhood friend’… I kind of feel like his inability to vet this faker first, isn’t very professional-lawyer-standards of him….

That spoke volumes about his credibility! Vetting someone properly is common sense. Now it’s being said that he planned it that way so he could say he is the one who was able to quickly identify the scam. I unfollowed him that night.

He is reaching far to keep his followers. The trial is how he gained a lot of followers and now that’s it’s over he doesn’t like being out of the spotlight.

I would warn anyone not to participate in anything without knowing all details.
 
Who’s notes are they?
This guy has been sketchy. He is the one who said he was having Ambers childhood friend on live. It was a hoax. Just be careful, he doesn’t want the hype to go away and he’s grabbing to stay relevant.
They are his notes from the few days he was allowed in court. The inside cover has signatures from lawyers and reporters. He would write as fast as he could until his hand cramped up. And it's a shame he didn't vet the childhood friend better. It tarnished his credibility.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
179
Guests online
262
Total visitors
441

Forum statistics

Threads
608,687
Messages
18,244,095
Members
234,423
Latest member
hikergirl112
Back
Top