Johnny Depp and Amber Heard #21

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
It's nothing to do with looks, it's that the two cases are totally different.

Winestein case has several people all claiming the same thing, there's no audio proving his victims goaded, gaslit, abused or harassed him.

Johnny, one person, audio proving how awful she was to him, no evidence or conflicting versions of events from the "victim" and her witnesses.

There's so many reasons to believe JD where as there's nothing in the Weinstein case.
I didn’t compare the two cases. I was just making the point that is is easier to be sympathetic towards someone who looks like Johnny Depp than it is towards someone who looks like Harvey Weinstein. As for the case itself, it is for the jury to decide no matter whatever any of us might think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
I don't know why, but I'm still a little shocked that Dr Curry is 42.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
  • Heart
Reactions: 10
I didn’t compare the two cases. I was just making the point that is is easier to be sympathetic towards someone who looks like Johnny Depp than it is towards someone who looks like Harvey Weinstein. As for the case itself, it is for the jury to decide no matter whatever any of us might think.
I would say the way people look have absolutely nothing at all to do with how people do or do not sympathise with them. That’s ludicrous.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 6
[/QUOTE]
I didn’t compare the two cases. I was just making the point that is is easier to be sympathetic towards someone who looks like Johnny Depp than it is towards someone who looks like Harvey Weinstein. As for the case itself, it is for the jury to decide no matter whatever any of us might think.
Do you not just think it might simply be easier to be more sympathetic towards anyone with a severe lack of evidence supporting the claims of abuse against them vs. someone with so much evidence suggesting they've committed abuse only an idiot wouldn't see it?

Which is probably the only way in which anyone with a basic grasp of reality (and a set of eyes) should distinguish between the Johnny Depp and Harvey Weinstein cases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4
I don't understand how people sat through the evidence and explanation of texts and still come out with this....it was not literal!!!

Also admitting they haven't considered anything else have this is just plain dumb imo
She's got her own thread that Dr Jessica.... and it's not in the "rave about" section!

What kind of twattery is that, silly girl, DR? Did she buy that certificate online. Cackle cackle....

I have poured a rum and coke and returned from my pirate pillaging, I am anticipating some more leaks and bones to pick over online tonight now all parties have caught up with sleep and the weekend (and therefore a loose tongue) is upon us.

Coven Update - This lot just turned up in a puff of smoke to offer assistance and Patsy just rogered the gardener on the altar.

download-1.jpg



What you lovely lot up to this eve?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9
I don't understand how people sat through the evidence and explanation of texts and still come out with this....it was not literal!!!

Also admitting they haven't considered anything else have this is just plain dumb imo
‘Plotting’ utterly ridiculous! He was venting spleen to a close friend not actually planning how to carry it out!! My friend and I always joke about her having all her favourite celebrity men trapped in a dungeon against their will. She doesn’t even have a dungeon let alone enough chains to trap her favourite- Hafthor Bjornsson!
Also a lot of vintage and 90s/00s British comedy (of which Johnny is a fan) is extremely strange and/or non pc (psychoville, inside no.9, Boosh, Gimme Gimme Gimme, Fast Show, Monty Python, Little Britain, Shaun of the Dead etc etc)
Having a dark sense of humour is not illegal and a lot of us have it, especially in dire situations.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 18
What the hell is that supposed to mean?
Sorry I’ve only just got up to this part of the thread. Not sure if you’re actually asking me what I mean or questioning what Eve has posted.

I said I hope she keeps that same energy if it goes in turd’s favour because (from what I took from the post itself) she’s implying the outcome, if in JD’s favour, is wrong and the jurors have come to that decision under duress. Basically implying the jurors are being pressured and coerced into their decision.

So I hope Eve feels the same if Amber wins, or will the jurors no longer have come to their decision under duress? Convenient, right?

I hope that makes sense 😅

ALSO - someone needs to get that idiot (Eve) off of social media ASAP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9
Re the Op-Ed, even ignoring her admitting on stand it's why she wrote it, her mentioning two years ago is significant as that directly points to JD.
All this BS about did she republish it with her tweet & link. Of course she did! The title was visible plus she added her comments so her argument about not seeing/writing that is crap as she had ample time to a) get it changed or b) put in a disclaimer or c) not retweet.
But that title would grab headlines around the world & help her play the victim while helping her rake in $$$ & hurting the one person she was targeting, JD. Did she do it with malice? Yes. Her lies are malice.

If memory serves me right (as I didn't follow the London trial) it was only here in Virginia that she came up with the sexual violence claim?
A claim that was so vicious & vile without one tiny shred of evidence to back it up. What it did do was give further insight into her twisted mindset.
Sadly, JD will always carry this to a degree, even if he wins this case. If he does, he'll have won in the court of public opinion & even more importantly got his voice heard which is a HUGE Win & hopefully his career will pick up again. But there will always be those who will remember her evil claim & believe her simply because she's a woman & of course no woman would ever make up something so horrendous & no matter there is NO evidence.
I can't understand how anyone can still support/defend her after everything we have seen during this trial.
In the end it will come down to the evidence which should dictate who the jury feels is more credible. I hope that will be Johnny. It should be.
The evidence is huge in his favour but there's an awful lot of boxes needing to be ticked & it needs to be unanimous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 19
UGH had to step away from IG as a friend of my bf (who I have always found a lovely woman) started ranting about in a post meant to address people who have not been watching the trial saying she wouldnt blame them if they didn; basically taking AH side and saying its disgusting JD is treating the trial like a press tour and how its all depicting how horrible the patriarchy is etc (tried to go and copy what she said exactly but the story has gone now) andI'ts all I can do not to bite for the sake of getting along/harmony

Wise words, Andrea likes fish too 🤭
Aquawomaaaaan
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Sad
Reactions: 13
UGH had to step away from IG as a friend of my bf (who I have always found a lovely woman) started ranting about in a post meant to address people who have not been watching the trial saying she wouldnt blame them if they didn; basically taking AH side and saying its disgusting JD is treating the trial like a press tour and how its all depicting how horrible the patriarchy is etc (tried to go and copy what she said exactly but the story has gone now) andI'ts all I can do not to bite for the sake of getting along/harmony
These people talking tosh only learnt the word patriarchy yesterday, twats.

Posting this before I watch Jamesfromcourt interview in it

 
  • Like
Reactions: 8
I would say the way people look have absolutely nothing at all to do with how people do or do not sympathise with them. That’s ludicrous.
Sadly there are multiple research which found that looks play a HUGE role especially in the criminal justice system. People who are deemed to be attractive have a higher rate to gain sympathy and usually receive less punishment compared to those who look less attractive. And sadly, it’s also humane. We tend to favour those who look attractive, whether we like it or not. That’s why most of the times we usually don’t believe the crimes committed by the people who look attractive
 
  • Like
  • Heart
  • Wow
Reactions: 11
These people talking tosh only learnt the word patriarchy yesterday, twats.
TBH shes actually quite an intelligent woman which is why I am shocked.. She does often post about Patriarchy etc and other social issues but I really think she should have watched some of this trial because it is so blatantly disrespectful of the real victims. As I have said on here I am a feminist in the non stereotypically naff tropey way but you do not see me on this Amber is a victim. Believe all woman bull crap.

Sad to say said friend has gone down a little in my opinion
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 4
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.