Legal victory for Johnny Depp after he and Amber Heard found liable for defamation

[OneMoreFarang]

I saw some of the trial and I think it was obvious that she was lying all the time. And there was no prove at all that he hurt her - what she claimed. So from what I saw she was very much guilty and he was innocent. But in these MeToo times I was not so sure that the jury would vote for him.

But they did. He won almost on any count. She made up the stories, she wanted to destroy him and she did it deliberately. He won. Great.

 

But then it is fascinating/sad how some people see this trial. I read this opinion this morning and I was shocked how ignorant and one sided some people can be.

The Amber Heard-Johnny Depp trial was an orgy of misogyny | Moira Donegan | The Guardian

 

When will those feminist understand that they will never get the support from many men as long as they claim all women are always right and all men are always wrong. Even for feminists that shouldn't be so difficult to understand.

Imagine a feminist would write something like this: Often women are abused but sometimes it is the other way around. Sometimes they abuse men and then they lie. We should always fight for the truth regardless of the gender of the involved people.

I am sure feminist could win over lots of people if they would admit that not all men are wife beaters and not all women are innocent. But it seems many feminists are so brainwashed that that possibility never crosses their mind. Sad.

[SunnyinBangrak]

Well she plans to appeal, don't suppose this will ever end with both parties having sufficient funds to drag this sorry saga out for eternity. What could possibly end the whole thing is if Heard gets charged for perjury for any of the several lies she told throughout the hearings?

[OneMoreFarang]

3 hours ago, JonnyF said:

I followed this case pretty closely and it was good to see justice served.

 

Amber Heard was clearly lying. For an actress, she was incredibly unconvincing on the stand. Now her career is in tatters, pretty much unemployable due to the wave of public opinion against her and she will likely be made bankrupt by the damages awarded. 

 

She could have just taken the 7 million divorce settlement and carried on with her life of luxury and Hollywood career. Not too smart that one.   

Basically you are right.

But did you expect this verdict from the jury in these MeToo times?

Personally I was sure that she was guilty. But I was not sure at all that the jury would have the same verdict - with all jury members having the same verdict.

I guess she thought she could get away with her lying because of MeToo and everybody should believe all women.

But her acting was just too bad. She lied to badly that it was impossible not to see it.

Imagine if she would have been a little smarter. Maybe admit directly that she didn't jet donate the money to the children and maybe a few humble words that she also made mistakes. I guess then that verdict could have been very different... Good that she is so stupid and full of herself. She ruined herself.

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I saw some of the trial and I think it was obvious that she was lying all the time. And there was no prove at all that he hurt her - what she claimed. So from what I saw she was very much guilty and he was innocent. But in these MeToo times I was not so sure that the jury would vote for him.

But they did. He won almost on any count. She made up the stories, she wanted to destroy him and she did it deliberately. He won. Great.

 

But then it is fascinating/sad how some people see this trial. I read this opinion this morning and I was shocked how ignorant and one sided some people can be.

The Amber Heard-Johnny Depp trial was an orgy of misogyny | Moira Donegan | The Guardian

 

When will those feminist understand that they will never get the support from many men as long as they claim all women are always right and all men are always wrong. Even for feminists that shouldn't be so difficult to understand.

Imagine a feminist would write something like this: Often women are abused but sometimes it is the other way around. Sometimes they abuse men and then they lie. We should always fight for the truth regardless of the gender of the involved people.

I am sure feminist could win over lots of people if they would admit that not all men are wife beaters and not all women are innocent. But it seems many feminists are so brainwashed that that possibility never crosses their mind. Sad.

It is Heard and her lies that have damaged the MeToo movement.

 

[JonnyF]

2 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I saw some of the trial and I think it was obvious that she was lying all the time. And there was no prove at all that he hurt her - what she claimed. So from what I saw she was very much guilty and he was innocent. But in these MeToo times I was not so sure that the jury would vote for him.

But they did. He won almost on any count. She made up the stories, she wanted to destroy him and she did it deliberately. He won. Great.

 

But then it is fascinating/sad how some people see this trial. I read this opinion this morning and I was shocked how ignorant and one sided some people can be.

The Amber Heard-Johnny Depp trial was an orgy of misogyny | Moira Donegan | The Guardian

 

When will those feminist understand that they will never get the support from many men as long as they claim all women are always right and all men are always wrong. Even for feminists that shouldn't be so difficult to understand.

Imagine a feminist would write something like this: Often women are abused but sometimes it is the other way around. Sometimes they abuse men and then they lie. We should always fight for the truth regardless of the gender of the involved people.

I am sure feminist could win over lots of people if they would admit that not all men are wife beaters and not all women are innocent. But it seems many feminists are so brainwashed that that possibility never crosses their mind. Sad.

Totally agree. What they fail to realize is that Amber Heard's lies are a terrible thing for women who are genuinely domestically/sexually abused by their partner.

 

Because now, people are going to think "Are the accusations true or is she doing an Amber". Real victims will now have to fight harder to be believed, yet some people are championing her.

 

"Believe all women" was always a ridiculous slogan. Being a certain gender/race/religion does not preclude you from lying, as this trial has shown all too clearly. Identity politics raising it's ugly head again.

 

Some of The Guardian's coverage and opinions have been truly shameful. A new low for that rag.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Basically you are right.

But did you expect this verdict from the jury in these MeToo times?

Personally I was sure that she was guilty. But I was not sure at all that the jury would have the same verdict - with all jury members having the same verdict.

I guess she thought she could get away with her lying because of MeToo and everybody should believe all women.

But her acting was just too bad. She lied to badly that it was impossible not to see it.

Imagine if she would have been a little smarter. Maybe admit directly that she didn't jet donate the money to the children and maybe a few humble words that she also made mistakes. I guess then that verdict could have been very different... Good that she is so stupid and full of herself. She ruined herself.

Alternatively, MeToo is not the bogeyman you are being told it is.

 

Read up on Borderline Personality Disorder, you’ll get to see precisely why she destroyed herself.

[Hummin]

To be true, this was an lawsuit about defamation about Johnny, and judged by media and opinion without a trial, and not about he was an wife beater not. 
 

Today most media I see, claim the trail have made it more hard for women to file reports and go to trail against partner violence. 
 

I belive both is crazy, biut to be true, Amber her self hurt the womans future chances in court, not Johnny.
 

F.. circus it was. 

[connda]

It's fun to watch the super-duper riche go after each other.
Now I guess Depp will go after Disney. 

I'm glad I'm a farang commoner living out in the rice fields of Thailand.
No drama. 

[JonnyF]

4 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Well she plans to appeal, don't suppose this will ever end with both parties having sufficient funds to drag this sorry saga out for eternity. What could possibly end the whole thing is if Heard gets charged for perjury for any of the several lies she told throughout the hearings?

She should certainly be charged with perjury for the UK trial where she stated under oath that she had donated 7 million to charity, yet when forced into a corner during this trial eventually had to admit (again under oath) that she had only pledged it and never actually donated it.

 

I am in no doubt she committed perjury during this trial as well. But I doubt she will be charged.

[OneMoreFarang]

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

The Guardian? ???? 

 

Their opinion was also that Amber Heard was an 'imperfect victim'.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/may/22/metoo-is-over-if-we-dont-listen-to-imperfect-victims-like-amber-heard

 

That's an interesting way to describe someone who fabricated a sexual assault to destroy the reputation of an innocent man.

 

Forgive me if I dismiss their ridiculous editorial pieces. Their opinion on Depp's future career and Heard's career as an 'activist' are irrelevant. She'll be lucky to escape perjury charges after lying about donating her divorce settlement to charity.

Expand  

So just ignoring all the industry insiders views that were quoted in the story...quelle surprise

I regularly read The Guardian because they are often a reliable source.

But sometimes they are just one sided and they publish only half truth and crazy opinions. And they know the opinions are crazy. That is why they don't allow any reader comments.

 

I am sure it is always possible to find "experts" with any opinion anybody wants to find. Just talk to 20 people and one of them will say what you want to hear. And then publish only that one opinion and ignore all the others. Unfortunately that is what the Guardian allowed to happen in this case.

[JonnyF]

25 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It is Heard and her lies that have damaged the MeToo movement.

 

Also those who continue to support Heard despite her obvious lies and the verdict of the court.

[OneMoreFarang]

1 hour ago, animalmagic said:

Her acting ability seems more suited to porn movies, that's probably her best option.

But who would hire her?

Imagine she would say in such a movie: Give it to me, harder!

And then the guys do just that.

And then she will sue them and the producer and director and everybody else for treating her like a dog.

No, that is not a good idea.

[mikeymike100]

4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

I followed this case pretty closely and it was good to see justice served.

 

Amber Heard was clearly lying. For an actress, she was incredibly unconvincing on the stand. Now her career is in tatters, pretty much unemployable due to the wave of public opinion against her and she will likely be made bankrupt by the damages awarded. 

 

She could have just taken the 7 million divorce settlement and carried on with her life of luxury and Hollywood career. Not too smart that one.   

Totally agree and now she is probably unemployable, well certainly be Warner Bros.  I hear though she is thinking of appealing, big mistake!

[mikeymike100]

41 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Well she plans to appeal, don't suppose this will ever end with both parties having sufficient funds to drag this sorry saga out for eternity. What could possibly end the whole thing is if Heard gets charged for perjury for any of the several lies she told throughout the hearings?

To appeal would be a mistake for her. Could she afford an appeal?? Who in their right minds would represent her now??

She has shown her colors to the world and is now probably unemployable!

[OneMoreFarang]

2 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

Who in their right minds would represent her now??

Anybody who gets paid enough.

With her behavior you can't blame the lawyer for losing. 

[JonnyF]

22 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

But who would hire her?

Imagine she would say in such a movie: Give it to me, harder!

And then the guys do just that.

And then she will sue them and the producer and director and everybody else for treating her like a dog.

No, that is not a good idea.

I certainly wouldn't want to work with her now. I'd be concerned I'd be left alone in a room with her and the next thing is she's claiming I attacked her.

 

Given the public reaction that I've seen on social media, I think any future movies she got would be boycotted by many people anyway. 

 

It sounds like Johnny Depp got her the Aquaman role and now there's a petition of over 4 million to edit her out of it.

 

Can't imagine too many producers wanting to take the risk given her limited acting skills and all that baggage.

[Hummin]

5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

I certainly wouldn't want to work with her now. I'd be concerned I'd be left alone in a room with her and the next thing is she's claiming I attacked her.

 

Given the public reaction that I've seen on social media, I think any future movies she got would be boycotted by many people anyway. 

 

It sounds like Johnny Depp got her the Aquaman role and now there's a petition of over 4 million to edit her out of it.

 

Can't imagine too many producers wanting to take the risk given her limited acting skills and all that baggage.

Just another new age polarization phenomenon, we are all getting more divided day by day. 
 

Easiest if both just agreed they where crazy and not good for each other, and there would had been more peace in this world if more people could  follow same principles. There is not always only good and bad, but something between. 

[KhunLA]

20 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Just another new age polarization phenomenon, we are all getting more divided day by day.

Adds to my thinking and counters the BS of 'believe every woman' c r a p they push.   I've known too many schizos to believe anyone without very hard evidence & witnesses.  And then I have my doubts.

 

It cost Depp quite a bit in lost work.   Not that he'll see any money from her.  But now studios won't be worried about a boycott for hiring an 'abuser' of only alcohol & drugs ????  

[Bluespunk]

2 hours ago, transam said:

Lost what..?  ????

Read the thread.

[Hummin]

18 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

.  But now studios won't be worried about a boycott for hiring an 'abuser' of only alcohol & drugs ????  

Rock stars are allowed to be nasty creatures, look at Iggy Pop, 75 years old still going strong and on tour right now. Johnny is more a rock star, one and only who can survive anything like this. Amazing survivors both of them, whetever they have done they landed on their feet. 
 

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/iggy-pops-trail-of-destruction-234011/

[Bluespunk]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

No I'm saying it's no more important than yours or mine.

 

Which makes me wonder why you posted it in the first place - since what some Guardian hack thinks proves nothing.

LOL

 

You said what you said, and you said opinion were irrelevant. 

 

I don't agree but that was what you said. 

 

The guardian article was based on informed opinion from those  involved in the film industry.

[CharlieH]

51 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Anybody who gets paid enough.

With her behavior you can't blame the lawyer for losing. 

Lets hope she actually pays them and doesnt just "pledge" it ???? 

[Bluespunk]

1 hour ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I regularly read The Guardian because they are often a reliable source.

But sometimes they are just one sided and they publish only half truth and crazy opinions. And they know the opinions are crazy. That is why they don't allow any reader comments.

 

I am sure it is always possible to find "experts" with any opinion anybody wants to find. Just talk to 20 people and one of them will say what you want to hear. And then publish only that one opinion and ignore all the others. Unfortunately that is what the Guardian allowed to happen in this case.

The article I posted a link to commented fairly on both sides involved in this lawsuit.

[Hummin]

5 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

The article I posted a link to commented fairly on both sides involved in this lawsuit.

At once you google, or click on news, the flow of biased media starts, and especially on social media.

[Chomper Higgot]

43 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Just another new age polarization phenomenon, we are all getting more divided day by day. 
 

Easiest if both just agreed they where crazy and not good for each other, and there would had been more peace in this world if more people could  follow same principles. There is not always only good and bad, but something between. 

I’m not sure it’s another polarization issue.

 

I find myself in broad agreement with people on this trial with whom I am diametrically opposed on a wide range of other issues.

 

 

 

 

[Bluespunk]

8 minutes ago, Hummin said:

At once you google, or click on news, the flow of biased media starts, and especially on social media.

I don't regard the Guardian as biased.

[JonnyF]

35 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

But now studios won't be worried about a boycott for hiring an 'abuser' of only alcohol & drugs 

If they were worried about that there wouldn't be any movies made.

 

Reminds me of Ricky Gervais last sentence of his Oscars speech when he told the audience of famous actors to "get drunk, do your drugs, F off". 

 

What a legend that bloke is ????

[mikeymike100]

1 hour ago, connda said:

It's fun to watch the super-duper riche go after each other.
Now I guess Depp will go after Disney. 

I'm glad I'm a farang commoner living out in the rice fields of Thailand.
No drama. 

Yes, it kept me entertained for hours. I hope Depp does go after Disney and everyone else who tarnished his name. At least he knows he has a great legal team!

[KhunLA]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

If they were worried about that there wouldn't be any movies made.

Obviously they were worried, as he wasn't cast in: Pirates or Fantastic Beast sequels.

[transam]

13 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I don't regard the Guardian as biased.

Clearly..................????