Jump to content

Depp and Heard Trial Result


Recommended Posts

I  have not followed the trial, I only read some articles about the end of it.

It left me with a bad feeling.

As I understand it Amber Heard wrote an article in the Washington post in which she implied that she was a victim of abuse and for this she was sued by her ex- husband. and now she has to give him 15 millon dollars.

As I see it: this evening if you are a victim of violence not only will your abuser say: "shut up no one will believe you anyway", but also "if you say something about it I will destroy your life and ruin you financially"

Even if he is innocent (which I don't know) I think he is a bad person for ruining his ex-wife financially and socially.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JoannaL said:

As I see it: this evening if you are a victim of violence not only will your abuser say: "shut up no one will believe you anyway", but also "if you say something about it I will destroy your life and ruin you financially"

There is a narrative going around in many of the more left wing publications that the important lesson from this trial is that it sets back women because now we won’t believe female victims of abuse.

There might be some truth in that, but if there is anyone to blame for that , it’s Amber Heard. 
 

This isn’t a story about Depp trying to ruin her life for speaking up, this is a story of a woman who abused a man, who painted herself as a victim and a hero, who lied about her own abuse and cynically manipulated the press to destroy Depp. 
 

Id say Depp was totally in his rights to clear his name and get pay back on the woman who’d been trying to ruin him, who was also the woman who abused him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, JoannaL said:

Even if he is innocent (which I don't know) I think he is a bad person for ruining his ex-wife financially and socially.

For what it is worth, my understanding is that the sum total she owes is $8.35 million -- the $5 million in damages was capped at $350k by statute, and Depp himself was found to owe $2 million for statements made by his lawyer.

The monetary amount relate to the argument, that the jury believed based on evidence, that the op-ed's defamatory statements led to Depp being removed from projects that would have earned him tens of millions of dollars. Apparently the timeline and evidence from witnesses seemed to indicate that before the op-ed studios were still willing to work with Depp, but that changed after its publication. 

I really think that this case, like so many cases that have been televised of late, are treated like watersheds that fundamentally change the nature of the law... but they really don't. Nothing in this case impacts jurisprudence related to defamation or libel in the state of Virginia or in the US. It's not setting precedents. It's just an individual case.

Edited by Ran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JoannaL said:

As I see it: this evening if you are a victim of violence not only will your abuser say: "shut up no one will believe you anyway", but also "if you say something about it I will destroy your life and ruin you financially"

Even if he is innocent (which I don't know) I think he is a bad person for ruining his ex-wife financially and socially.

You are basically describing Heard's actions here and applying it to Depp.

"shut up no one will believe you anyway" is pretty much what Heard said to Depp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, JoannaL said:

I  have not followed the trial, I only read some articles about the end of it.

It left me with a bad feeling.

As I understand it Amber Heard wrote an article in the Washington post in which she implied that she was a victim of abuse and for this she was sued by her ex- husband. and now she has to give him 15 millon dollars.

As I see it: this evening if you are a victim of violence not only will your abuser say: "shut up no one will believe you anyway", but also "if you say something about it I will destroy your life and ruin you financially"

Even if he is innocent (which I don't know) I think he is a bad person for ruining his ex-wife financially and socially.

 

 

But, isn't that's what Amber Heard said to him?  She mocked him and taunted him about going public with the fact that she hit him and that no one would believe him.  Again, to me, not the words of a victim, but the words of an arrogant, entitled abuser.  In fact, Amber Heard's behavior is textbook abusive.

And she did, if not destroy his life, she destroyed his reputation, made him a social parriah, she certainly destroyed his abilty to earn money, since he was dropped from all projects as a result of her accusations, and has yet to make any come back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

I'm at a loss to understand how someone can listen to Amber berate Depp about 'not punching him but only hitting him' and somehow conclude that she is the victim.  The totality of the evidence showed to me that she was the abuser and the aggressor in the physical violence, and also that she is a liar who lied about a multitude of things.

That audio gave me the most pause.  

That said I agree with Mormont I don’t think Depp is without stain in this.  It seems to me they brought out the worst in each other and I’d hate the result of this case to be that women who are abused are suddenly presumed to be lying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

I'm at a loss to understand how someone can listen to Amber berate Depp about 'not punching him but only hitting him' and somehow conclude that she is the victim.  The totality of the evidence showed to me that she was the abuser and the aggressor in the physical violence, and also that she is a liar who lied about a multitude of things.

The repeated use of the singular in the above is the fundamental problem, I've already noted: this is the mindset that Depp's team relied on. The idea that in any abusive relationship, there's one evil abuser and one innocent victim. And if the woman doesn't fit the stereotype of the innocent victim, then she must be the evil abuser and by extension the man must be the innocent victim.

The reality of abusive relationships is (often, not always) much more messy. This relationship in particular seems to have been one with two abusers and two victims. Neither seem like very nice people. I wouldn't want anything to do with either of them.

But in terms of the damage caused by this trial, if there is any, I would suggest the success of the tactics Depp's team employed is the worst thing to come out of this trial.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61673676

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

That audio gave me the most pause.  

That said I agree with Mormont I don’t think Depp is without stain in this.  It seems to me they brought out the worst in each other and I’d hate the result of this case to be that women who are abused are suddenly presumed to be lying.

I don't think that will be the result since surely the vast majority of actual abuse victims are not on tape hurtling abuse at their partner, admitting to physicial violence, not said by the marriage counselor to 'start fights' when their partner attempts to leave to defuse the situation, not diagnosed with a personality disorder and they are not going to be caught in a multitude of obvious lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

I don't think that will be the result since surely the vast majority of actual abuse victims are not on tape hurtling abuse at their partner, admitting to physicial violence, not said by the marriage counselor to 'start fights' when their partner attempts to leave to defuse the situation, not diagnosed with a personality disorder and they are not going to be caught in a multitude of obvious lies.

Perhaps, or perhaps it gives ammunition to abusers to say… she’s lying… she’s framing me… she’s an attention hog… she’s trying to destroy my reputation.  Should people being abused be focused on getting away from their abuser or gathering evidence of abuse in the event their abuser are accuses them of lying?

I would suggest the former is much more important than the latter.

Edited by Ser Scot A Ellison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Perhaps, or perhaps it gives ammunition to abusers to say… she’s lying… she’s framing me… she’s an attention hog… she’s trying to destroy my reputation.  Should people being abused be focused on getting away from their abuser or gathering evidence of abuse when they are accused of lying?

I would suggest the former is much more important than the latter.

The difficulty here is that the defense of the innocent person looks strikingly like the defense of the guilty person.  To say that Depp is an abuser because he says he 'never hit a woman' seems odd to me, since if he never hit a woman, that's exactly what he would say, isn't it?  

I think that Amber lost this case because she was simply not credible on the stand.  Too many completely implausible statements, outright lies, and in the tapes, she comes off as the abuser not Depp, and while the marriage counselor did say she thought it was a mutually abusive relationship, her details were much more damaging to Heard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Perhaps, or perhaps it gives ammunition to abusers to say… she’s lying… she’s framing me… she’s an attention hog… she’s trying to destroy my reputation.  Should people being abused be focused on getting away from their abuser or gathering evidence of abuse in the event their abuser are accuses them of lying?

I would suggest the former is much more important than the latter.

While it’s a genuine concern, I also am confused as to why this is not more aimed at people like Amber Heard. The amount of articles written worried about women not being believed, at the same time seem to ignore the actions of Heard and hand wave them ( many outright denying the result of the trial)

If we want a system where abuse victims are first and foremost believed we also need to be able to call out those who abuse the system to falsely accuse others

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

While it’s a genuine concern, I also am confused as to why this is not more aimed at people like Amber Heard. The amount of articles written worried about women not being believed, at the same time seem to ignore the actions of Heard and hand wave them ( many outright denying the result of the trial)

If we want a system where abuse victims are first and foremost believed we also need to be able to call out those who abuse the system to falsely accuse others

There are two discussions here.  The micro discussion focused on this case… and the macro discussion focused on the broader implications for society as a whole after this case.  The second is more important in my earnest opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

There are two discussions here.  The micro discussion focused on this case… and the macro discussion focused on the broader implications for society as a whole after this case.  The second is more important in my earnest opinion.

Sure, but what is actually being suggested as a remedy? From what I can see , a lot of people are wanting us to just ignore what Heard did, pretend it didn’t happen or worse deny it, in case it gets seen as a common behaviour. I don’t see that as a healthy reaction either. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Heartofice said:

Sure, but what is actually being suggested as a remedy? From what I can see , a lot of people are wanting us to just ignore what Heard did, pretend it didn’t happen or worse deny it, in case it gets seen as a common behaviour. I don’t see that as a healthy reaction either. 
 

 

What lesson do you believe should be taken?  Assuming for sake of discussion that Depp is completely innocent how often will female abusers be in Heard’s position with power and influence to do what Heard has been accused of doing here?  Seriously? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What lesson do you believe should be taken?  Assuming for sake of discussion that Depp is completely innocent how often will female abusers be in Heard’s position with power and influence to do what Heard has been accused of doing here?  Seriously? 

I think female abuse of men is far more prevalent than we as a society pretend it is, and male victims are often stigmatised in the exact same way Heard did to Depp. 
 

But I think it isn’t helpful to pretend that people like Heard don’t exist, or to sweep it under the carpet when they are exposed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What lesson do you believe should be taken?  Assuming for sake of discussion that Depp is completely innocent how often will female abusers be in Heard’s position with power and influence to do what Heard has been accused of doing here?  Seriously? 

As the saying goes 'hard cases make bad law' and a case with two famous celebrities that has copious amounts of audio, video and bystander testimony is so far outside of the norm that I don't see it having any lasting impact.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was never interested in this trial and I dislike celebrity news generally.  But as someone who watches a fair bit of Youtube (history and gaming stuff), I was constantly getting recommendations for "Amber Heard DESTROYED" or "Heard Lawyer could be disbarred!" or some such nonsense.  And it wasn't just Youtube, this case was everywhere - it felt very much like a coordinated campaign (which I suspect came from Depp's team) to destroy his ex-wife.  Which is...very abusive.  The case felt like another way for an angry man seeking to destroy his ex's life.  And it was extremely successful, because I suspect Heard's career is basically over.

So I have no idea if Heard was lying because as I didn't watch any of the trial.  But even without watching anything, it gave a strong impression that Depp is indeed abusive.  Perhaps not physically (I have no idea) but definitely emotionally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The question here was why was there such a vitriol directed towards Heard - whether it was because of Depp being charismatic and popular; or Depp having an army of rabid fans; or toxic masculinity or patriarchy. For me, answer is much more prosaic. This was not about legality [and while I disagree with rest of @mormont's argument, he is absolutely on point that - technically and legally - if Depp also abused Heard (even in unproportionally small amount compared to what she did to him)  - then he also is an abuser and should have lost defamation case] - it's about tale as old as time; tale repeated thousands of times through various forms of media: karmic revenge. Shitty person getting their comeuppance. 

And let's not kid ourselves here - Heard is the real villain here. Depp also didn't come out stellar out of all this mess; but all of crappy things he did pale in comparison to her actions. For example:

- history of past domestic abuse (unlike Depp, whose ex spoke in his favour)
- documented physical abuse against Depp
- mocking her partner for running away when she gets violent
- manipulating the narrative, trying to present herself as innocent victim facing a powerful abuser while completely omitting her own abusive part
- hijacking the popular (legitimate and sorely needed) women's rights movement and misusing it for her own purpose. Seriously, why aren't MeToo supporters being royally pissed at Heard right now?

- repeatedly lying (donating money to children's hospital, for example) and utterly destroying her credibility
- continuing to push "woe me the victim" narrative despite mountain of evidence of her abuse and generally not owning up/admitting/apologizing for her actions.


In terms of spectacle and moral "justice" I think vox populi would have been satisfied with pretty much anything: Heard losing the hypothetical abuse case, Heard publicly admitting her wrongdoing, Depp getting massive support from public figures etc. As it happens, this comeuppance came in form of losing the defamation trial. Is it just in strictly legal sense - probably not. But for the most part, this was less about court of legal justice, and more about court of public opinion. And court of public opinion likes to see spectacles of public shamings of crappy people (or people deemed crappy for no objective reason; but that's whole another can of worms and obviously not applicable here).

Edited by Knight Of Winter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...