re: the cupboard kicking video....
Is it abuse?
Or delusion induced by cannabis psychosis?
Is it abuse?
Or delusion induced by cannabis psychosis?
You do piranha I wanna do that really big slimy one at the endthanks so much for sharing this.. absolutely love Palin.. such a sweet guy.. met him several times I still say I'm willing to lose a hand to slap Heard with a pirahna...
My YT just autoplayed me a Popcorned Planet on MM and Evan Rachel Wood... no sorry thats one can of worms that I am not opening
see when you say wee krankie. I see Nicola SturgeonThe wee Krankie doesnt just remind me of a wee krankie actually, she also reminds me of the wee red dwarf in 'Dont Look Now'.... bloody great film.
Can I phone I friendSo on the plane did Johnny....
a) do nothing.
b) humiliate Amber by tapping her playfully on the bottom with his foot.
c) violently kick her in the back, so that she was sent sprawling to the floor.
Oh my. That explains a lot. I hate to hear that for him. Thanks for explaining that Now that drunk live from the other day makes a lot more sense now.No he was nearly in tears the other week when saying she had health issues that meant it wasn't working out between them.
It seemed more significant than her modding his chat.
I remember hearing Emily state during one of her live streams that she never thought that Depp could win this case and then she said now it makes how once Amber started testifying and her lack of evidence of the Domestic abuse came to light. I also remember that Emily had stated before the trial even started that she thought that both parties were going to look bad after the trial. Depp isn't a saint but now the true is out about Amber so that's good and Depp won the trial.I don't know about that. I know he was getting flack about some of the things he said about Camille, and he probably was one of the last holdouts in being persuaded into the Depp camp.
But what everyone forgets is at the start of the trial everyone on Legalbytes (except Alyta) thought Depp had no case - and for much the same reasons being touted around the MSM now.
But that it changed piece by piece over the course of the evidence coming out, and the lies being revealed.
It's also somewhat ironic to see the MSM legal experts, and the Amber Stans (like Michele Daubner) calling out Judge Azcarate for decisions made by Judge White.... it's almost like they don't know what they are talking about.
he made some statement about women's time of the month and even Hoeg Law was like just knew instantly was the wrong thing to say even in the joking way that Kurt said it in.I remember him saying something on legalbytes in the trial and the chat went crazy, I think he then went on to giving AH the benefit of doubt just for that reason. (I don't recall what he said)
im going to answer COn that note.....
If you find it triggering why are still here????
That makes me want to vomit! What a slimy, slithering, nasty, nauseating, loathsome, self-righteous, opportunistic parasite is misheard. And they say Depp damaged the me too movement? It was tarnished by her toxic, fraudulent preaching. She is truly vile.absolutely high as a kite... look at those involuntary eyelash flutters
does she say i just fell right before i went out? yes love you were swaying like fudge while on stage too
Forgive me but I thought the WAPO only had servers in Virginia not where its published.. and with the anti slapp laws differing in that state versus say calif where they reside it was more favourable a place to trial this case, also hearsay laws seem to be different there, as I mentioned in an earlier post JD's pa at the time of the kicking on the plane incident has txts apologising for his behaviour saying he didn't remember doing that and was sorry, multiple others back and forth but it was a clear admission of abuse these were shown in UK trial but not allowed in VA citing hearsay.. regarding the op ed , I'm glad you mentioned it, she didn’t write the headline the WAPO did...the ACLU wrote the article with AH lots of lawyers looked over it before it went to press, the consensus being from unbiased lawyers that the case would have been thrown out in most states but not VA, the slamming of kitchen cabinets can be very intimidating believe me I know, and when you're told to get as much evidence as possible when building a case , I applaud her for videoing him, wish I had the wits and nerves of steel to do the same on occasion, as for when the ipad goes in the bin its pure conjecture to say she was sniggering I didn't see that I saw a nervous grimace...we also don't know he walked away as video stops,He sued Heard because she wrote the op-ed. He could not sue the WP because of the “actual malice” hurdle - they couldn’t KNOW her accusation was untrue. If showing actual malice was a requirement in the UK too (it’s not), Depp would have won the Sun claim.
It was held in Virginia because that’s where the WP is published. The rules of evidence determine what’s hearsay and what isn’t not individual judges.
There was no evidence that JD was an abuser…none. In the many, many hours of their conversations he never once admits hitting her and SHE NEVER ACCUSES HIM OF IT. She complains that he keeps “splitting” (leaving) when they argue and he repeatedly says that it’s because she keeps getting violent.
Banging kitchen cabinets is not abuse, in and of itself. It could be if part of an attempt to intimidate someone but that was clearly not the case here. Heard was not frightened of his behaviour in that video, instead she chooses to record it, and then sniggers when he puts her ipad in the bin. A woman who has been through the kind of violence with a man that she claims to have been would have been - at the very, very least - wary of him being drunk, shouting and slamming around the room. But she wasn’t. That’s significant - as is the fact that he walks away from her even though he’s furious she’d been taping him.
If you believe he’s an abuser it’s because he’s a man, and you need to have a word with yourself about that.
EDIT: Ignore what I said about The Sun case, actual malice & whether this would have meant Depp prevailingin the UK (it wouldn’t). It’s Sunday morning & I’m not thinking straight yet, Everything else stands though.
Since Amber's stans are calling out Judge Azcarate they should watch this video. I think that it was well said by Emily D Baker. Emily said that she thought that the Judge was more than fair to Amber's legal team even when they were messing up and doing things that they should know how to do and for having patience with them too.I don't know about that. I know he was getting flack about some of the things he said about Camille, and he probably was one of the last holdouts in being persuaded into the Depp camp.
But what everyone forgets is at the start of the trial everyone on Legalbytes (except Alyta) thought Depp had no case - and for much the same reasons being touted around the MSM now.
But that it changed piece by piece over the course of the evidence coming out, and the lies being revealed.
It's also somewhat ironic to see the MSM legal experts, and the Amber Stans (like Michele Daubner) calling out Judge Azcarate for decisions made by Judge White.... it's almost like they don't know what they are talking about.
I'm sorry but what amount of violence should she have been subjected to???Red Flag No.3. How, in the name of (insert deity of your choice) do you get punched in the face so many times you can't remember, you think your nose maybe broken and you have two black eyes, and then appear on TV the NEXT DAY looking flawless? No swelling, nothing. It doesn't make sense.
She presented photos of her supposed black eyes, etc. If you ignore the two that are identical, yet admitted as two separate occasions, the ones where she actually does have some marks on her face do not in anyway correspond to the amount of violence she claims she was subjected too.
None of her evidence made any sense.
I whole heartedly agree with this ...she came off terribly with the pledge donate business...Red Flag No.4. She blatently and repeatedly lied about donating the divorce settlement to charity.
This is important because the UK judge said that she had no reason to lie, because she had given the money away it obviously wasn't for financial gain, so he couldn't see why else she would lie about abuse.
On the stand in the US trial she avoided giving a straight answer when asked, she tried to make out like pledge and donate are the same thing, just to avoid admitting she lied.
For those that don’t understand why we don’t believe Amber’s version of events this is a really great summary with lots of clips from the trial.. The narrative she was trying to weave just didn’t ring true at all especially when contrasted with her aggression in the deposition/ audios. Also features a very bizarre dress at the end -her stylist obviously hated her!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?