Do we think the defence has Dr Currey?
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I bloody hope not!
Oh man, to be a fly on the wall while she's on the stand.
That was a pretty good read tbf
I ordered the book. however, wish they just leave it now and let JD to move on.
People on X missing the point with this book. JD fans saying he has moved on and this dredges it up etc.
The book has direct quotes from his employees, they’ve been interviewed by this journalist. Everyone who works for him will has signed privacy agreements regards his personal life…the very fact that they’ve been interviewed means he’s approved this. That doesn’t mean he’s approved the end result, just the process of being involved.
The oddity is that it’s taken 3 years to publish. Maybe there have been legal concerns causing a delay. As long as JD himself doesn’t give an interview post the date of the settlement agreement (December 2022) then he is safe from any legal action from AH. It’s possible he was interviewed but it’s all been removed due to legal concern.
There may also have been concern of the risk of AH trying to sue others for defamation for telling these stories outside of court (like she did Doug Stanhope), but I doubt she would bother trying to now as she will look petty and also if JD bankrolls anyone’s defence or they have good insurance, the cost will all fall on her, and they may then also be able to recover legal costs from her.
I don’t think she’s as wealthy as many believe. She has the townhouse in Madrid, but there is no evidence of lavish holidays, she’s even been seen flying commercial and photographed eating outside a cheap cafe. For her daughter’s birthday she called the paps on herself and stood in the street holding basic balloons and a cake. She probably likes the attention, but also she’s clearly calling them and as it’s arranged she may even get a small payment for it. All reeks of desperation.
If Elon isn’t the baby daddy, then money will be running out fast. If he is, he may have stipulations on how the money he pays her can be used to ensure it benefits the children which would exclude petty legal disputes which don’t concern the children at all.
Her fans do her no favours. Many of them say vile things, wish harm on others, say JD deserved to be abused because she is prettier, tell very blatant lies about the legal cases and evidence. Many people on X say these are bots. But that doesn’t make sense, they are making her look worse not better, many are so unhinged.
JD overwhelmingly won on public opinion. Where he really loses out is with the media. The reason they can’t change their stance is because the case threw into question the moral behaviour of the media declaring, or strongly implying, guilt of a serious crime without any evidence or due process. That in itself, if they had to change their ways, would empty their newspapers, if they actually had to check something was true before writing it, is catastrophic for the media industry.
A lot of these feminist journalists who say it was wrong that he could take her to court over spreading unproved accusations via the media, are the same people who make a living out of writing such stories. They don’t want that jeopardised. That’s why, no matter how much proof or how many court cases are won, they won’t back down on the idea that AH was entitled to make accusation via the media, regardless of whether truthful, and face no legal repercussions.
I do find it interesting that the people who want men’s right to sue an accuser taken away, done also want the equivalent taken away for women. AH tried to sue Doug Stanhope, then tried to sue JD, then countersued when he sued her. Either defamation by accusing or denying information about relationships/domestic violence is acceptable in legal terms or it’s not. Imagine if AH had been able to make the progress on suing JD for defamation purely for stating he didn’t do as he was accused and he lost in court. The feminists wouldn’t have any issue with that and indeed would celebrate her victory.
The other thing journalists seem to miss entirely, and intentionally, is the fact that the only reason the trial was streamed is because the court received more requests for journalist access than they could manage fairly. So it was the media that caused it to be streamed, then the media responded to that by claiming that it damaged women’s rights etc.
The book has direct quotes from his employees, they’ve been interviewed by this journalist. Everyone who works for him will has signed privacy agreements regards his personal life…the very fact that they’ve been interviewed means he’s approved this. That doesn’t mean he’s approved the end result, just the process of being involved.
The oddity is that it’s taken 3 years to publish. Maybe there have been legal concerns causing a delay. As long as JD himself doesn’t give an interview post the date of the settlement agreement (December 2022) then he is safe from any legal action from AH. It’s possible he was interviewed but it’s all been removed due to legal concern.
There may also have been concern of the risk of AH trying to sue others for defamation for telling these stories outside of court (like she did Doug Stanhope), but I doubt she would bother trying to now as she will look petty and also if JD bankrolls anyone’s defence or they have good insurance, the cost will all fall on her, and they may then also be able to recover legal costs from her.
I don’t think she’s as wealthy as many believe. She has the townhouse in Madrid, but there is no evidence of lavish holidays, she’s even been seen flying commercial and photographed eating outside a cheap cafe. For her daughter’s birthday she called the paps on herself and stood in the street holding basic balloons and a cake. She probably likes the attention, but also she’s clearly calling them and as it’s arranged she may even get a small payment for it. All reeks of desperation.
If Elon isn’t the baby daddy, then money will be running out fast. If he is, he may have stipulations on how the money he pays her can be used to ensure it benefits the children which would exclude petty legal disputes which don’t concern the children at all.
Her fans do her no favours. Many of them say vile things, wish harm on others, say JD deserved to be abused because she is prettier, tell very blatant lies about the legal cases and evidence. Many people on X say these are bots. But that doesn’t make sense, they are making her look worse not better, many are so unhinged.
JD overwhelmingly won on public opinion. Where he really loses out is with the media. The reason they can’t change their stance is because the case threw into question the moral behaviour of the media declaring, or strongly implying, guilt of a serious crime without any evidence or due process. That in itself, if they had to change their ways, would empty their newspapers, if they actually had to check something was true before writing it, is catastrophic for the media industry.
A lot of these feminist journalists who say it was wrong that he could take her to court over spreading unproved accusations via the media, are the same people who make a living out of writing such stories. They don’t want that jeopardised. That’s why, no matter how much proof or how many court cases are won, they won’t back down on the idea that AH was entitled to make accusation via the media, regardless of whether truthful, and face no legal repercussions.
I do find it interesting that the people who want men’s right to sue an accuser taken away, done also want the equivalent taken away for women. AH tried to sue Doug Stanhope, then tried to sue JD, then countersued when he sued her. Either defamation by accusing or denying information about relationships/domestic violence is acceptable in legal terms or it’s not. Imagine if AH had been able to make the progress on suing JD for defamation purely for stating he didn’t do as he was accused and he lost in court. The feminists wouldn’t have any issue with that and indeed would celebrate her victory.
The other thing journalists seem to miss entirely, and intentionally, is the fact that the only reason the trial was streamed is because the court received more requests for journalist access than they could manage fairly. So it was the media that caused it to be streamed, then the media responded to that by claiming that it damaged women’s rights etc.
It bet he thanks his lucky stars he didn't have a child with her.
I think this issue of whether Elon is the father will come out eventually. What’s interesting about is that neither have denied it, and neither said the issue of Elon trying to use legal action to get AH to destroy embryos didn’t happen either. Purely on security reasons it would be better for Oonagh to have it made public if he isn’t her father, just to reduce any potential kidnap/ransom threat to her as she appears to be attending a local nursery/school in Madrid that will only have the normal basic security measures in place. With Ashley St Clair, Elon started paying child support and specifically asked for his name not to be on the birth certificate even though he wasn’t necessarily going to deny parentage because it meant not having to provide security or move them into his compound with the other mothers and children.
I think if Elon is the father, then he’s agreed to an arrangement of minimum child support (which will still be very large amounts by most people’s standards) and maybe that has been reduced now that he has more babies since. It might take another 10-15 years, but the truth will out…if he’s the father Oonagh is likely to be curious at some point and make contact with him or she’s going to be slagging him off for being absent. AH has lost her place in Hollywood, once her kids are old enough she will be hoping to nepo-baby them into something very well paid, if her earning power is near zero and any child support ends she will be reliant on that.
Another curiosity is the twins. She claimed multiple times she can’t carry a baby, but surrogacy is illegal in Spain, even making arrangements from Spain, things like bringing babies from abroad and having them legally recognised as her own will be technically difficult there. I’m unclear how she has done it. If she had actually been pregnant, I’m certain she would have shared photos or been seen in public, she would’ve used that for publicity. There’s been no sightings of her at all during the pregnancy timeframe, it’s not obvious that she even left Spain.
I’ve always been baffled as well as to why she has the Nanny with her on her papwalks. On one of them they were walking O to nursery…why can’t she do that without hired help? And what does the Nanny do while O is there…maybe she stays there for security reason with her to supervise. She’s not doing any obvious work, and she’s the type to have a cleaner and someone doing her laundry, so what she is doing with her time right now is a mystery…because she doesn’t appear to have been looking after her own child from the start so likely will also have the hired help for the twins as well. She also seems to have essentially given up on her social media, there’s been no posts of vegetarian meals, bookshops, wine or vacations…the stuff she used to fill her page with to garner engagement. The post about the twins just serves to announce it before someone else leaks it to the media.
I think if Elon is the father, then he’s agreed to an arrangement of minimum child support (which will still be very large amounts by most people’s standards) and maybe that has been reduced now that he has more babies since. It might take another 10-15 years, but the truth will out…if he’s the father Oonagh is likely to be curious at some point and make contact with him or she’s going to be slagging him off for being absent. AH has lost her place in Hollywood, once her kids are old enough she will be hoping to nepo-baby them into something very well paid, if her earning power is near zero and any child support ends she will be reliant on that.
Another curiosity is the twins. She claimed multiple times she can’t carry a baby, but surrogacy is illegal in Spain, even making arrangements from Spain, things like bringing babies from abroad and having them legally recognised as her own will be technically difficult there. I’m unclear how she has done it. If she had actually been pregnant, I’m certain she would have shared photos or been seen in public, she would’ve used that for publicity. There’s been no sightings of her at all during the pregnancy timeframe, it’s not obvious that she even left Spain.
I’ve always been baffled as well as to why she has the Nanny with her on her papwalks. On one of them they were walking O to nursery…why can’t she do that without hired help? And what does the Nanny do while O is there…maybe she stays there for security reason with her to supervise. She’s not doing any obvious work, and she’s the type to have a cleaner and someone doing her laundry, so what she is doing with her time right now is a mystery…because she doesn’t appear to have been looking after her own child from the start so likely will also have the hired help for the twins as well. She also seems to have essentially given up on her social media, there’s been no posts of vegetarian meals, bookshops, wine or vacations…the stuff she used to fill her page with to garner engagement. The post about the twins just serves to announce it before someone else leaks it to the media.
I've pre ordered the hardback book....it sounds really well written
Plot thickens. According to ‘Jax’ who def has some connection to the Depp team (she’s socialised with his sister), he gave his consent at the time, but now that 3 years has passed it’s no longer wanted or deemed any reason to want it dredged up again. Still unclear why it took 3 years to publish…it’s possible JD/his team tried to withdraw their comments and prevent publication and there has been a tussle over it behind the scenes.
Adam Waldman has done his normal trick of writing ‘TEST’ on X, indicating he is about to give the JD fans a cryptic clue. The timing appears connected so he’s involved/knows something about this book.
Also, Jax has made reference to a photo of a professional film camera taken on JD’s island which she earlier claimed was a documentary being made (he was photographed leaving the island with a known film director)…Jax captioned ‘wait for this’. Itself odd, because if JD has moved on and doesn’t want it discussed anymore, or if he’s legally bound not to talk about it…then whatever he’s filmed can’t relate to AH.
I think it’s possible he’s making a documentary about how he’s been treated by the media. But given that the media will critique it, that won’t go well for him publicly, but it could reveal some home truths about their lack f accountability for the damage they do with no thought to the truth or the welfare of those the write about.
Adam Waldman has done his normal trick of writing ‘TEST’ on X, indicating he is about to give the JD fans a cryptic clue. The timing appears connected so he’s involved/knows something about this book.
Also, Jax has made reference to a photo of a professional film camera taken on JD’s island which she earlier claimed was a documentary being made (he was photographed leaving the island with a known film director)…Jax captioned ‘wait for this’. Itself odd, because if JD has moved on and doesn’t want it discussed anymore, or if he’s legally bound not to talk about it…then whatever he’s filmed can’t relate to AH.
I think it’s possible he’s making a documentary about how he’s been treated by the media. But given that the media will critique it, that won’t go well for him publicly, but it could reveal some home truths about their lack f accountability for the damage they do with no thought to the truth or the welfare of those the write about.
It reminds me of the Andrew Morton/Diana book. She said she didn't consent and it turned out that every word was her own
Exactly, even just from the extract in the article it’s clear his staff were interviewed, either that or someone who is witness what his staff are saying. I think this was a backup plan for if the trial failed to get the message out in another way.
But turns out it wasn’t needed. Now, JD doesn’t want any of this brought back up in the media and wants the focus back on his work. It’s no longer convenient, the delay in publishing may even be his fault as well if he threw legal obstacles in the way of it. The main risk to him is that the quotes from his staff and other witnesses conflict with details that were aired at the two trials.
The stuff about the wedding doesn’t make complete sense. I thought it was iO, not Witney, who acted as registrar on the island. This is the first I’ve heard of JD’s father being present at the wedding, previously led to believe it was only his son who attended from his family. Then there is no mention in that article of AH spiking Gina with MDMA which she claimed she did when she thought it was a headache pill…that’s a massive ‘crime’ and isn’t mentioned at all. There’s also Stephen mentioning that incident of JD talking about being afraid she would be at his neck with a knife in his sleep….in the UK transcript my memory of it is that JD was pulling his own hair out from stress, he asked him to stop doing it and that’s when he made the comment…but he’s quoted in the book as saying JD had a loose clump and blood and pointed at it as said in interference it happened while with AH. Unless of course, Stephen is conflating two conversations, which is possible as it was his memories from years ago.
Any tiny contradictions are not going to help JD’s cause. There is a lot of mentions of AH’s drug use, but we also know from text messages that Nathan was the go-between in suppling MDMA and c to JD, so his staff really shouldn’t be focussing on AH and her friends using drugs as an angle. That wasn’t the angle JD took in court, his legal tactics were to focus on the evidence of the behaviour of both parties, using eye witnesses and medical records, instead of simply the potential effect of drugs they took. That was always AH’s legal team’s approach…show how much he drank and too drugs…and hope the jury can he convinced that means he had no control over his behaviour, without any real evidence that AH suffered a single injury during the time they were together.
I certainly believe that JD didn’t want to marry her. That’s been well evidenced, even AH herself is on tape stating she ‘had to fight for the wedding to happen’. I also believe the theory that she brought the date forward to ensure the pirates 5 money got captured. It’s not that he doesn’t have the power to say no, or even that he’s being manipulated…I think the issue is that he was used to acting in quite a childlike way in order to get what he wants, you can see that by the way he emails his agent and staff…but with AH that didn’t work because she didn’t respect his wealth or status, she played him at his own game and doing what he didn’t want ended up being all part of that game, so he carried on instead of forcing himself to make the adult decisions of making clear his boundaries.
But turns out it wasn’t needed. Now, JD doesn’t want any of this brought back up in the media and wants the focus back on his work. It’s no longer convenient, the delay in publishing may even be his fault as well if he threw legal obstacles in the way of it. The main risk to him is that the quotes from his staff and other witnesses conflict with details that were aired at the two trials.
The stuff about the wedding doesn’t make complete sense. I thought it was iO, not Witney, who acted as registrar on the island. This is the first I’ve heard of JD’s father being present at the wedding, previously led to believe it was only his son who attended from his family. Then there is no mention in that article of AH spiking Gina with MDMA which she claimed she did when she thought it was a headache pill…that’s a massive ‘crime’ and isn’t mentioned at all. There’s also Stephen mentioning that incident of JD talking about being afraid she would be at his neck with a knife in his sleep….in the UK transcript my memory of it is that JD was pulling his own hair out from stress, he asked him to stop doing it and that’s when he made the comment…but he’s quoted in the book as saying JD had a loose clump and blood and pointed at it as said in interference it happened while with AH. Unless of course, Stephen is conflating two conversations, which is possible as it was his memories from years ago.
Any tiny contradictions are not going to help JD’s cause. There is a lot of mentions of AH’s drug use, but we also know from text messages that Nathan was the go-between in suppling MDMA and c to JD, so his staff really shouldn’t be focussing on AH and her friends using drugs as an angle. That wasn’t the angle JD took in court, his legal tactics were to focus on the evidence of the behaviour of both parties, using eye witnesses and medical records, instead of simply the potential effect of drugs they took. That was always AH’s legal team’s approach…show how much he drank and too drugs…and hope the jury can he convinced that means he had no control over his behaviour, without any real evidence that AH suffered a single injury during the time they were together.
I certainly believe that JD didn’t want to marry her. That’s been well evidenced, even AH herself is on tape stating she ‘had to fight for the wedding to happen’. I also believe the theory that she brought the date forward to ensure the pirates 5 money got captured. It’s not that he doesn’t have the power to say no, or even that he’s being manipulated…I think the issue is that he was used to acting in quite a childlike way in order to get what he wants, you can see that by the way he emails his agent and staff…but with AH that didn’t work because she didn’t respect his wealth or status, she played him at his own game and doing what he didn’t want ended up being all part of that game, so he carried on instead of forcing himself to make the adult decisions of making clear his boundaries.
https://archive.ph/PljjY
Interview with JD
Interview with JD
I wonder who the friends are that he said abandoned him?
I think one of them was Bruce Watkins, who was on Heard side during the trials, and I wouldn't be surprised if it were MM.
I think he was talking about the 3 people in particular who were profiting from him. They were getting a % on all his movie work. They were his agent Tracey Jacobs, his lawyer Jake Bloom and his business manager aone of the Mandel brothers. Those people were personal friends as well as business colleagues and as JD said, did things like attend his kid’s birthday parties. When he was accused and they saw the potential to sign up large new contracts had dropped significantly, they turned on him. That’s why he’s says those people were about the ‘dough’.
It’s not exactly clear what happened with Bruce Witkin. They reminded friends after the accusation, he was on the 2016 HV tour. Bruce himself testified he wasn’t clear what JD wouldn’t speak to him and that he cut a lot of people out around the same time. My theory is that it was his new business manager, Ed White. JD had pumped millions into a failed record company headed by Bruce, and bankrolled his family for about 40 years. I think he came to a better understanding of how the money added up and who the people were whose friendship was based on money/opportunity…rather than genuine affection for him. Although Bruce claimed to want to get back in contact with JD, he still was called as a witness for AH, he was happy to gossip and criticise people, such as his doctor and nurse, who testified for JD…meaning that Bruce, even if truthful about the conduct of those people, could have weakened JD’s case.
One thing that is very clear about JD is that he values loyalty. I can’t see him ever speaking to Bruce again after he did something that could have affected the trial.
It’s not exactly clear what happened with Bruce Witkin. They reminded friends after the accusation, he was on the 2016 HV tour. Bruce himself testified he wasn’t clear what JD wouldn’t speak to him and that he cut a lot of people out around the same time. My theory is that it was his new business manager, Ed White. JD had pumped millions into a failed record company headed by Bruce, and bankrolled his family for about 40 years. I think he came to a better understanding of how the money added up and who the people were whose friendship was based on money/opportunity…rather than genuine affection for him. Although Bruce claimed to want to get back in contact with JD, he still was called as a witness for AH, he was happy to gossip and criticise people, such as his doctor and nurse, who testified for JD…meaning that Bruce, even if truthful about the conduct of those people, could have weakened JD’s case.
One thing that is very clear about JD is that he values loyalty. I can’t see him ever speaking to Bruce again after he did something that could have affected the trial.
She was a chancer Amber. Never rated her in any way acting or anything. She looks like Melissa George from Home and Away.
I think Jonny Depp should trust his instincts more instead of relying on an entire team to select who he dates, marries etc. Too many cooks
Instincts never lie. A bit of background research too will tell you a lot about a person and even Amber Heard.
If someone wants the millionaire lifestyle so much then it's alarm bells.
What's he up too? Has he a career still?
I think Jonny Depp should trust his instincts more instead of relying on an entire team to select who he dates, marries etc. Too many cooks
Instincts never lie. A bit of background research too will tell you a lot about a person and even Amber Heard.
If someone wants the millionaire lifestyle so much then it's alarm bells.
What's he up too? Has he a career still?
He acted the French film Jeanne Du Barry; Directed Modi-Three Days On the Wings of Madness and is starring in Day Drinker (still in production)....since the trial ....and has toured with the Hollywood Vampires