I actually thought this this morning. We are being gaslighted by the media. Too late bitches! We saw the whole trial. Makes you wonder how much misreported is going on when we can’t see…I really feel like the mainstream media and certain people are trying to gaslight everyone into thinking they’re misogynistic and wrong for siding with JD. It’s honestly so bizarre
I went through a toxic marriage. I have never done drugs and like a drink but fortunately don’t have an addictive personality so didn’t self medicate with either. Probably didn’t help me deal with the situation though because I became suicidal. I didn’t lash out physically at her apart from once when I was goaded past my point of resistance but I did get worn down by the constant emotional and mental abuse and did argue back. My therapist explained that some people turn their frustrations upon themselves which was exactly what happened to me. Apart from suicidal feelings I headed butted a door once out of sheer frustration. I also smashed an expensive watch she gave me against a wall (she said that was given to me as proof that she loved me - I’d rather have not been treated like shit than been given something we couldn’t afford and I didn’t need). Whilst his texts and actions are not great (as mine weren’t) I can totally understand how that happens. It is better to take your anger and frustration out on inanimate objects than a person. I can see how that could be viewed as threatening behaviour by the other side but there is a big difference between venting on a person and venting on an inanimate object. We look at things through our own personal filters. Depp’s actions ran true for me based on my own personal experiences. I can understand that some people will see the situation differently. I agree with the post earlier that says that Heard’s big mistake was fabricating evidence. Once you are caught out lying your arguments lose credibility where are are looking for a jury to believe your narrative that isn’t supported by hard, authenticated evidence. If she does appeal, and I expect that she will, it will be interesting to hear on what grounds.There is so little nuance these days isn’t there? One can think that Jonny was a pretty big twat and also think Amber is a nasty liar.
To my mind, Jonny is an absolute piece of work. Too many drugs, clearly an emotional mess, throws shit around when he gets drunk, says nasty shit to his friends about his girlfriend. But like the jury, I don’t believe he was a physically abusive person who attacked Amber.
Seems more to me that she exacerbated his mental health issues and wound him up to a point where all his worse traits became completely toxic. He was self-medicating with even more drink and drugs, and she was always there verbally provoking him and making him worse.
I don’t have to like the guy to find him not guilty though, eh?
I think you must be right. She’s doing a total Amber Heard, externalising blame on to the jury, the judge, “celebrity”, social media, “suppressed evidence” and absolutely everything except her own crappy ABUSIVE client.I presume prior to this that Elaine was a fairly decent lawyer.
I honestly think she has fallen victim to AH. You can see in trial where Elaine is almost holding back tears and getting a roasting from AH. I've never seen a lawyer look so vulnerable before.
AH is gaslighting her. She is using Elaine for her own means.
I'm going to hazard a guess that AH has told Elaine that 'this is all your fault - how are you going to fix it?' and this has prompted Elaine to do the interview.
Elaine is completely blinded by the truth, she has been utterly unprofessional to blame this on the jury without genuine reason to do so.
And don't get me started on AH first words being 'I am so sorry to all those women...'
HE SUED HER! She didn't come to court to fight for other women, she came to court because she defamed him. No way in God's name did these words ever come out her mouth.
I guess because she offered an explanation for that recording and people have chosen to believe it.I have been looking on Twitter and there are so many people who would rather believe the jury were swayed/evidence wasn’t submitted etc etc than believe a man can be a victim of domestic abuse. There are literally recordings of her taunting him and admitting to hitting him. What is wrong with people.
A thousand times thisI think there is an international case of people misunderstanding what ‘defamation’ means.
The jury found that the statements did defame JD, that they were false, and that they intended malice. I don’t get what’s so hard? This wasn’t a matter of ‘legal wording’ and ‘popularity’. The jury found the statements were falsely made, not true and written to cause harm to JD. The internet is going crazy. She didn’t win because they believed she lied. Not because her bruises weren’t big enough
yeh the bottle thing was so fantastical with so little evidence it felt bizarre that she went into that story in such detail. Worse for Amber, it fed into Dr. Curry’s assessment exactly - about her being prone to exaggeration. It was a completely home goal.Yeah, I agree with this, and the statement from a lawyer or someone a few pages back who said something to the effect of, she had enough kernels of truth to make this believable and cause the jury serious doubt. Instead, she chose to outright lie, and that is what lost her the case. I was back and forth on all of this at the beginning- I thought when she was describing how they met and fell in love, she was believable and I think most of that stuff is true. I also think he was difficult to live with and they brought out the worst in each other.
But for me, it was when I heard her testimony about being raped with a bottle that she just lost me completely. It was so fantastical. It's not about saying she's "not a perfect victim", it's that there is no way she wouldn't have required medical attention if that had happened, and she had photographs of other questionable injuries but never the times when he beat her black and blue and raped her with a bottle?
Once you start to completely not believe some of these accounts, the whole thing falls apart and she becomes an unreliable witness, to me anyway. I think if she had kept within the realm of reality in her testimony, it would have made it far less black and white for the jury.
I agree with this, if she had kept her claims more simple and not gone with the fantastical tales that not many people bought and admitted she had not donated the 7 million to charity then the jury might have been more inclined to believe her.yeh the bottle thing was so fantastical with so little evidence it felt bizarre that she went into that story in such detail. Worse for Amber, it fed into Dr. Curry’s assessment exactly - about her being prone to exaggeration. It was a completely home goal.
johnnys case from the outset was always harder because the onus was on him to prove he didn’t do something - proving a negative was always going to be difficult. There are lots of elements to the case which is what makes it so fascinating. I think there is misogyny (a little bit), I think it’s an interesting insight into pop culture and how we view celebrity and maybe how that’s changing. I think it’s definitely raised a lot of questions on how we think about victim hood of DV and biases towards what victim hood looks like or how it should present… but ultimately… I really think Amber lost herself this case. The jury seemed engaged and asked questions and spent time deliberating, it doesn’t seem like it was an emotional reaction based of how believable or unbelievable Heard was in the stand, I think it came down to her testimony in black and white as evidence.I agree with this, if she had kept her claims more simple and not gone with the fantastical tales that not many people bought and admitted she had not donated the 7 million to charity then the jury might have been more inclined to believe her.
Watched a you tube reacts video of Elaine doing her TV interviews this morning and a former NFL player news presenter challenges Elaine on a couple of occasions and Elaine just looks stupid with her responses.
The whole of Amber's team has been lacking on this I think, shame because I think Rottenborn is actually a pretty good lawyer but Elaine comes across as incompetent and out of touch.
agree totally. The latter is definitely rooted in misogyy imo. The vitriol against Amber Heard is as much based in Misogyny as it is about justice for JD. JD has justice now, there’s no need to name call.And I just think- she wrote the Washington Post article in bad faith, portraying herself as without fault, an innocent victim. Maybe if she had written an article about the dangers of mutually toxic behaviours in relationships, it wouldn't have been as current or as trendy, but she wouldn't have been sued for defamation. The trial would never have happened if she hadn't written the op-ed. You cannot just write whatever you want, without consequence.
I've just re-read the op-ed, and it's almost like it was written in such a way as to avoid being defamatory, but it's impossible not to conclude that she's saying Johnny Depp physically and sexually abused her.
However one thing I do agree with is that she has become a massive target for vitriolic hate and abuse, and I don't think that's ever justified or a nice thing to witness. You can argue that she's brought it all on herself, but the level of hate levelled at her is like nothing else in recent memory. I don't agree with abusing someone online and calling them a cunt and sending them death threats, sorry Tattlers.
Can we not equate using the word “cunt” with sending death threats, please. It has to be pointed out that men get called this word - on this very site - routinely when they’re disliked.And I just think- she wrote the Washington Post article in bad faith, portraying herself as without fault, an innocent victim. Maybe if she had written an article about the dangers of mutually toxic behaviours in relationships, it wouldn't have been as current or as trendy, but she wouldn't have been sued for defamation. The trial would never have happened if she hadn't written the op-ed. You cannot just write whatever you want, without consequence.
I've just re-read the op-ed, and it's almost like it was written in such a way as to avoid being defamatory, but it's impossible not to conclude that she's saying Johnny Depp physically and sexually abused her.
However one thing I do agree with is that she has become a massive target for vitriolic hate and abuse, and I don't think that's ever justified or a nice thing to witness. You can argue that she's brought it all on herself, but the level of hate levelled at her is like nothing else in recent memory. I don't agree with abusing someone online and calling them a cunt and sending them death threats, sorry Tattlers.
I agree with this, it isn't necessary.And I just think- she wrote the Washington Post article in bad faith, portraying herself as without fault, an innocent victim. Maybe if she had written an article about the dangers of mutually toxic behaviours in relationships, it wouldn't have been as current or as trendy, but she wouldn't have been sued for defamation. The trial would never have happened if she hadn't written the op-ed. You cannot just write whatever you want, without consequence.
I've just re-read the op-ed, and it's almost like it was written in such a way as to avoid being defamatory, but it's impossible not to conclude that she's saying Johnny Depp physically and sexually abused her.
However one thing I do agree with is that she has become a massive target for vitriolic hate and abuse, and I don't think that's ever justified or a nice thing to witness. You can argue that she's brought it all on herself, but the level of hate levelled at her is like nothing else in recent memory. I don't agree with abusing someone online and calling them a cunt and sending them death threats, sorry Tattlers.
Ok fine, not death threats, but I don't agree that calling people cunts is fine. It's also fine if we disagree on this point.Can we not equate using the word “cunt” with sending death threats, please. It has to be pointed out that men get called this word - on this very site - routinely when they’re disliked.
Other than that, I agree with you. It was Heard’s vanity and ego making her want Twitter adulation for being a “feminist icon” that lead to all this. If she”d beem honest and said the relationship was mutally abusive, at least emotionally, she’d have been adding something of value to the public conversation, but she didn’t.
Here.... you've earned it....
View attachment 1314534
use it as shower gel....
That's either Rwanda or a rather wide camel....
Hmmmm....
This calls for semiotics....
And she flew to Dubai before she went to Australia.... poor bitch.
Theres nought so strange as folk they need some meaning of life up 'em! Watch the UK press run scared. I'm hoping the old adage they ignore ya, hate ya, then they repeat every word you say, will ensue soon......I really feel like the mainstream media and certain people are trying to gaslight everyone into thinking they’re misogynistic and wrong for siding with JD. It’s honestly so bizarre
Ahhhh the sweet allure of a freedom fighting man, he really has taken rather a lot on what with Judge Nicols et al! It was blue paint JD used at one point right? Warriorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrs warriors everywhere! Freeeeeeeeeedom! The new coven intake are covered in woad dye.Anyone else think Adam Waldman is hot or am I just losing the plot at this stage?
like fartymcfarlowpants barlow ya weeee krankyand, to quote AH: on all occasions he will be short
4.5 million on the get Turdle off Aquaaaaaaaaman petitionInstagram watch:
Depp - 18m
Heard - 365k
That’s extraordinary.
or loved! You are a good cunt you are, spread the....loveCan we not equate using the word “cunt” with sending death threats, please. It has to be pointed out that men get called this word - on this very site - routinely when they’re disliked.
like fartymcfarlowpants barlow ya weeee krankyand, to quote AH: on all occasions he will be short
4.5 million on the get Turdle off Aquaaaaaaaaman petitionInstagram watch:
Depp - 18m
Heard - 365k
That’s extraordinary.
or loved! You are a good cunt you are, spread the....loveCan we not equate using the word “cunt” with sending death threats, please. It has to be pointed out that men get called this word - on this very site - routinely when they’re disliked.
quick someone post that tumbleweed gif to depict Ambers receptionNowt much to do Op North....
I just cant take the wee satsuma seriously, that name, every time I see it I misread it for clement freud, g/son of sigmund and a freaky pedalo pushing rotter, clemmie should be more carefulHas anyone seen Clementine Ford's feed. Talk about obsessed
Now she's trying to say that the stenographer was "partying" with JD's team during his "victory lap".
I can't this shit just writes itself
too technical for me.. I dont know what a vlc player is as I don't use media players but thanksI have seen it back in the 1990s and I quite liked it.
I dislike when they put up films on youtube that are mirror images (I understand why they do it but still I find it very hard to watch). In case you have the same problem: the workaround is to download it (e.g.using WinX youtube downloader) and then flip it in the VLC player or whichever player you use
but like we all know about it now so if any juror is in trial in VA going forward they will so..I shared the original but just had time to read the comments and I think he is a fake. He said in one of his answers that that they knew about the punitive cap and in VA jurors are not told about the cap.
oh god shes one of the people my bf's friend keeps putting on her IG stories.. I love this friend of his but I have zero time for her right now. I can see why she is doing it as she is always calling out over the years against the patriarchy and giving examples of times when she has been abused in a woman in the arts industry but as she has watched zero hours of the trial she does not get the right to voice an opinion imo.. she's almost making me hit the ignore buttonHas anyone seen Clementine Ford's feed. Talk about obsessed
Now she's trying to say that the stenographer was "partying" with JD's team during his "victory lap".
I can't this shit just writes itself
APPLAUDS SELF for the 50 bucks line taking off..It is just so unprofessional. She is turning the trial into a media circus. Is she getting paid by this? Maybe she needs the TV money as AH now can't pay her 5o bucks?
PLEASE tell me this is both real and you? if so did she not reply then?
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?