Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2022 9:14:21 GMT
It cost him an ongoing role in the highly critically acclaimed and commercially successful Dumbledore shit that people most definitely still care about. I assume he still would have gotten paid shedloads though. I haven't followed it and don't give a crap about either of them, but I hope her losing (warranted or not, no idea) doesn't make it harder for women (or men) to come forward about abuse. I suspect it will though.  I think he had a pay or play contract so because he'd started filming it, he still got a hefty pay packet. |
|
pizzacrunch
New Member
Enter your message here...
Posts: 154
|
Post by pizzacrunch on Jun 2, 2022 9:44:16 GMT
But How is shitting the bed or sex work abuse? Being drunk is abuse but intentionally shitting in you partners bed after an argument and cheating on your partner out of spite isnt? |
|
|
|
Post by damagedinc on Jun 2, 2022 9:50:18 GMT
It's almost as if juries aren't legal experts and might misunderstand instructions or get things wrong or inconsistent sometimes. But it's the verdict we got. Justice! Everyone loses, hooray! Juries in this country at least are very well instructed by the judge around the boundaries if the decisions they can make. But your right it's scary because most people are morons |
|
Youthist
Junior Member
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,984
|
Post by Youthist on Jun 2, 2022 11:06:11 GMT
I am getting a bit lost - getting drunk is abuse now is that where we are?
|
|
cubby
Full Member
doesn't get subtext
Posts: 6,368
|
Post by cubby on Jun 2, 2022 11:08:44 GMT
Anything to avoid the possibility that people may have been duped.
FWIW, I was duped too. Before I caught any of the trial I had Depp pegged as an abuser too. But after watching the trial I completely changed my mind.
|
|
Youthist
Junior Member
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,984
|
Post by Youthist on Jun 2, 2022 11:09:32 GMT
Thank fuck this is all done, hopefully I wont need to see much more about it. But even here, I've seen a few folks slagging of Heard due to the turd or alleged prostitusim. But How is shitting the bed or sex work abuse? Genuine question, some of that crap just comes across as being shit slinging. I can't be arsed anymore. I hope they both choke on their own vomit tonight, that would be the only ending I'd find satisfying. You could have just avoided reading about it! Same as every other celebrity nonsense the media latches onto (wag gate or whatever it was). Just let it wash over you and don’t give any of them a second thought. |
|
|
|
Post by technoish on Jun 2, 2022 11:13:27 GMT
I wonder how much of a impact it was that Heard's legal team were awful and Depp's were the bees knees. That is how they came across in any case.
|
|
|
|
Post by dominalien on Jun 2, 2022 11:18:43 GMT
Maybe they came across as awful because they had nothing to work with?
|
|
cubby
Full Member
doesn't get subtext
Posts: 6,368
|
Post by cubby on Jun 2, 2022 11:22:05 GMT
Rottenborn came across as probably the best trial lawyer there. Bredehoft was the most expensive lawyer there, although she didn't seem like she had much trial experience. It fundamentally comes down to what they had to work with.
Bredehoft clearly didn't trust Heard when she was doing her redirect with her, as she kept giving her leading questions and getting them objected. If she trusted her client she would have given her more open questions, but she knew that Heard was liable to go off script and got stuck.
|
|
|
|
Post by drhickman1983 on Jun 2, 2022 11:40:07 GMT
Thank fuck this is all done, hopefully I wont need to see much more about it. But even here, I've seen a few folks slagging of Heard due to the turd or alleged prostitusim. But How is shitting the bed or sex work abuse? Genuine question, some of that crap just comes across as being shit slinging. I can't be arsed anymore. I hope they both choke on their own vomit tonight, that would be the only ending I'd find satisfying. You could have just avoided reading about it! Same as every other celebrity nonsense the media latches onto (wag gate or whatever it was). Just let it wash over you and don’t give any of them a second thought. Unfortunately it was cropping up far more than the usual celebrity dross. Hard to avoid it when it was appearing consistently in any media feed, and was being referred to even in totally unrelated posts elsewhere. |
|
MolarAm🔵
Full Member
Bad at games
Posts: 6,853
|
Post by MolarAm🔵 on Jun 2, 2022 12:21:05 GMT
It's almost as if juries aren't legal experts and might misunderstand instructions or get things wrong or inconsistent sometimes. But it's the verdict we got. Justice! Everyone loses, hooray! Juries in this country at least are very well instructed by the judge around the boundaries if the decisions they can make. But your right it's scary because most people are morons Yeah, this is the thing. I'm a bit curious as to why this trial succeeded while the one in the UK courts failed. From what I understand (I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong), the UK trial dismissed a lot of evidence that wasn't directly related to the question of whether Heard did a defamation. Whereas the Virginia court accepted a lot of that, if not all of it. Amber Heard is a terrible person! She's lied before! She cheated on Depp! She abused *him*! All of which might be true, but to me doesn't really have relevance to the question about the defamation, ie. her knowingly lying about being a victim of domestic abuse. You can be a terrible person and still a victim, after all. And I don't know how you could be a juror and not have all this extraneous information affect you. Sure the judge gives you instructions to ignore such and such, but like... you already heard it. How can your brain ignore it? Anyway, it's the thing we have. I will be morbidly curious as to how the appeals go. It'll be a trash fire, probably. |
|
|
|
Post by baihu1983 on Jun 2, 2022 12:27:55 GMT
She slipped up several times and admitted writhing it and on the last day Depps female lawyer more or less tricked her into admitting she wrote it about him.
|
|
cubby
Full Member
doesn't get subtext
Posts: 6,368
|
Post by cubby on Jun 2, 2022 12:33:15 GMT
The UK trial was about whether The Sun defamed Depp. Therefore the scope was limited to what The Sun knew when they published their stories, so Heard was only treated as a witness not a defendant.
One of the main rulings the judge made was that she didn't do it for monetary gain, as she gave all her money from the divorce away to charities, which she testified she did in the UK. But it turns out she didn't give the money away, so she quite likely committed perjury as that was testimony he relied on for his verdict.
|
|
dogbot
Full Member
Posts: 8,738
|
Post by dogbot on Jun 2, 2022 12:44:13 GMT
It's interesting that a lot of the people (generally, not here) who are criticising her and celebrating this "victory" are also free speech absolutists who think they should be able to say whatecer they want, at any time, without consequences.
Unless it's an opinion piece in a newspaper, apparently. Hmmm. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a free speech absolutist and I think that whilst certain types of speech should be protected, defamation is not one of them, nor do I believe that a private entity should be required to give a platform to anyone who wants it.
The British case and the US case were tried under different laws. Depp unsuccessfully sued a newspaper, not Heard, in the UK. The judge, not a jury, found that there was sufficient likelyhood of abuse of some sort to suggest that the paper hadn't defamed him by calling him a wife beater. Beyond that, without access to the specific evidence which was used to make that decision (which won't be made public in the UK, because we're not a circus) to compare against the different laws of the two countries and probably, a law degree, it's not possible to judge why the rulings are different. Tbh, it leaves me a little sick that the Sun won, but there you go.
It she'd just published her opinion piece in the Telegraph, she'd probably have been ok,but I don't think that would have happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by technoish on Jun 2, 2022 12:44:57 GMT
I saw that bit of cross examination. "Did you give the divorce money to charity?" "Yes" "but you haven't transferred the actual money?" "I have pledged it, that's the same thing".
|
|
|
|
Post by baihu1983 on Jun 2, 2022 12:48:18 GMT
It's interesting that a lot of the people (generally, not here) who are criticising her and celebrating this "victory" are also free speech absolutists who think they should be able to say whatecer they want, at any time, without consequences. Unless it's an opinion piece in a newspaper, apparently. Hmmm. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a free speech absolutist and I think that whilst certain types of speech should be protected, defamation is not one of them, nor do I believe that a private entity should be required to give a platform to anyone who wants it. The British case and the US case were tried under different laws. Depp unsuccessfully sued a newspaper, not Heard, in the UK. The judge, not a jury, found that there was sufficient likelyhood of abuse of some sort to suggest that the paper hadn't defamed him by calling him a wife beater. Beyond that, without access to the specific evidence which was used to make that decision (which won't be made public in the UK, because we're not a circus) to compare against the different laws of the two countries and probably, a law degree, it's not possible to judge why the rulings are different. Tbh, it leaves me a little sick that the Sun won, but there you go. It she'd just published her opinion piece in the Telegraph, she'd probably have been ok,but I don't think that would have happened. Her problem was she was unable to actually provide proof of assult. If what they showed in this trail is what they showed in the one here then that's embarrassing for us. No one noticed she used the same pics multiple times with different filters on it? The one video she had was him beating up some cabinets and pouring a mega pint of wine. |
|
|
|
Post by technoish on Jun 2, 2022 12:48:29 GMT
Yeah hard to know about the UK Sun trial, but Depp's lawyers said the judge only used Heard's testimony as evidence, nothing else.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bill in the rain on Jun 2, 2022 12:48:49 GMT
|
|
dogbot
Full Member
Posts: 8,738
|
Post by dogbot on Jun 2, 2022 12:50:59 GMT
It's interesting that a lot of the people (generally, not here) who are criticising her and celebrating this "victory" are also free speech absolutists who think they should be able to say whatecer they want, at any time, without consequences. Unless it's an opinion piece in a newspaper, apparently. Hmmm. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a free speech absolutist and I think that whilst certain types of speech should be protected, defamation is not one of them, nor do I believe that a private entity should be required to give a platform to anyone who wants it. The British case and the US case were tried under different laws. Depp unsuccessfully sued a newspaper, not Heard, in the UK. The judge, not a jury, found that there was sufficient likelyhood of abuse of some sort to suggest that the paper hadn't defamed him by calling him a wife beater. Beyond that, without access to the specific evidence which was used to make that decision (which won't be made public in the UK, because we're not a circus) to compare against the different laws of the two countries and probably, a law degree, it's not possible to judge why the rulings are different. Tbh, it leaves me a little sick that the Sun won, but there you go. It she'd just published her opinion piece in the Telegraph, she'd probably have been ok,but I don't think that would have happened. Her problem was she was unable to actually provide proof of assult. If what they showed in this trail is what they showed in the one here then that's embarrassing for us. No one noticed she used the same pics multiple times with different filters on it? The one video she had was him beating up some cabinets and pouring a mega pint of wine. Again, completely different defense under completely different laws. Neither she nor her lawyers presented any evidence in the UK... |
|
|
|
Post by baihu1983 on Jun 2, 2022 12:53:40 GMT
She was a witness for the sun.
|
|
dogbot
Full Member
Posts: 8,738
|
Post by dogbot on Jun 2, 2022 12:56:16 GMT
Yes, do you really need to have the difference between a witness and a defendant explained?
|
|
|
|
Post by baihu1983 on Jun 2, 2022 12:57:45 GMT
No thanks.
Doesn't change that it seems the sun got away with basically posting shit again. (But technically they didn't lie just posted what she leaked them)
|
|
cubby
Full Member
doesn't get subtext
Posts: 6,368
|
Post by cubby on Jun 2, 2022 12:58:17 GMT
Jesus. The beeb are really going balls deep on trying to discredit this trial result. Most of the article is the opinion of one lawyer written verbatim, saying how stupid and gullible juries are, and how judges are amazing. UK good, US baaaaad. |
|
Youthist
Junior Member
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,984
|
Post by Youthist on Jun 2, 2022 14:01:38 GMT
Yeah that article is total bollocks.
|
|
Ulythium
Full Member
Lily-livered
Posts: 7,106
|
Post by Ulythium on Jun 2, 2022 14:49:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by clemfandango on Jun 2, 2022 15:03:17 GMT
He’ll be pleased that he is at number 12 in the uk singles charts too. ‘Prince Andrew is a sweaty nonce’ could even make it to number 1 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2022 18:51:12 GMT
Jesus. The beeb are really going balls deep on trying to discredit this trial result. Most of the article is the opinion of one lawyer written verbatim, saying how stupid and gullible juries are, and how judges are amazing. UK good, US baaaaad. I just came here to post that exact article from the BBC. Quite a spicy take. |
|
|
|
Post by baihu1983 on Jun 2, 2022 20:18:59 GMT
How dare they allow the truth to be allowed in court. And she can't afford the bill.
She probably threatened to take a dump in her teams coffee
|
|
|
|
Post by Aunt Alison on Jun 2, 2022 22:54:03 GMT
Why is there a weird shifty looking hippy in the corner
|
|
MolarAm🔵
Full Member
Bad at games
Posts: 6,853
|
Post by MolarAm🔵 on Jun 2, 2022 22:57:56 GMT
I could really do without the shitty reaction videos, they're a large part of what made this whole thing such an exhausting trainwreck.
|
|
