Far from me to try and explain it in a reasonable way. But abuse is abuse. And that's it. Women can abuse and will and bloody well do. For some reason the world thinks women are not capable of it against a man. They are. So let's not argue the merits of one side against the other. Women are very capable as are men Edit.... It's just when men are the victim they are played out as a weak soft ass....
The OP titles this thread "Justice". But I have to say that I would preface that with "American". I'm not at all sure that actions like this ought to be played out in front of a jury, with all the prior views of the participants which they must bring to the case (whatever questions may be asked of them whilst being empaneled). Contrast this with Vardy v Rooney in this country, which is being heard by Mrs Justice Stein. I think that a professional tribunal is the appropriate forum for such a high profile case and that appears to be the ordinary presumption in this country. It seems that in the American case the jury members will be allowed to speak out about their experience, which is also different to the position in England and Wales. It is surely something which may influence their handling of cases. Nevertheless it appears that Mr Depp has "won" (although not totally) and that verdict of the American system has to be respected. What is totally unnecessary, in my view is the OP using the term "evil bitch" about one of the participants. In an era where misogyny, prejudice and even violence against women is a sadly all too common occurrence I can't see the need to add vitriolic comments which fuel heated debate in our increasingly polarized society. Mr Depp has his verdict - why not leave it at that? There again, maybe I'm old-fashioned.
Rachel Riley having a meltdown on Twitter about it. Posting stuff with the comments turned off so she doesn't have to hear and viewpoint that disagrees with hers. From the Women who went after Corbyn in a similar way.
I’m sure she’ll be gutted and all that… but I’ve not watched an episode of Cats Does Countdown since she posted that photo of her wearing a T-shirt with the photo of Corbyn getting arrested for protesting against apartheid photoshopped to say he is an antisemite. Of all the pictures to use to spread lies she picks one where he is actually getting arrested for standing up to racists. That was one of the very few tv shows I used to watch, too.
I’ll go with that. My comment was really just a plea for people to dial down on the tone of responses.
It’s also worth pointing out that A: the US Jury found both of them guilty (just awarded higher damages to Depp) B: A British jury found in favour of Amber Heard on the same evidence. none of us will ever know the whole truth, and it’s obvious they’re both fairly awful people. However the language in the OP is fairly disgusting IMO. Not the first time ST had posted some horrid misoginistic language, I think there’s room for some reflection there on his part.
Nothing misogynistic about it. I've called many men much worse. The UK courts findings were based in false evidence that has subsequently been disproven in the new in depth trial. And they haven't both been found guilty of the same things. She's been found guilty of completely falsifying evidence and making things up to ruin his life. He, on the other hand, was found guilty of a single charge of allowing his lawyer to make a defamatory statement about her false allegations
The UK version was heard by a professional tribunal (i.e. Mr Justice Nichol). I'd trust that verdict more than I would a US jury. I note also that Ms. Heard is appealing.
The fact that people care this much is quite disturbing tbh. The same goes for the Colleen Vardy trial. A huge waste of money all around.
It isn't about the celebrity aspect for me. It's about seeing live pictures inside a courtroom and seeing how it works, that's why i was interested. The justice part again isn't about the celebrity aspect it's about someone making up false accusations and completely falsifying huge amounts of evidence in order to ruin someone's life and seeing first hand how that was all proven beyond and doubt to be lies and fakery. If it was someone from Donny it would be just as important.
The UK trial wasn't Depp versus heard, it was against the sun newspaper and as such was a much different case. With amber Heard not being a defendant her lies and false evidence were not able to be proven against her as it wasn't against her. I know you love the British justice system (the one that found chef Evans guilty by the way) but have you actually looked at the two cases in any detail? Have you seen the evidence against her in this case? For example have you seen the images of her bruised and battered face that she presented as evidence? Have you seen the fact that the exif data in those photographs proves beyond all doubt that they were digitally altered despite her stating under oath that they were not? Have you seen that miss heard stated under oath that when asked how she had covered up a broken nose and significant facial injuries that she stated she used a specific brand and style of makeup that is really good at that despite the fact that the makeup didn't exist? Have you seen that she showed a photograph of facial injuries as evidence that Johnny Depp physically assaulted her? Have you seen that it has now been proven that the image was taken years before the date she stated in the UK trial that the assault took place? Not days or weeks different but years different. The evidence is overwhelming both that she has concocted the evidence and that she lied under oath at previous trials.
Except that the case Mr Depp brought against News Group Newspapers surrounded accusations by The Sun that he was a "wife beater". The High Court found that twelve of the fourteen accusations made by Ms. Heard against Mr Depp were "substantially true". The Court of Appeal upheld that finding. As I said above, in a case involving such high-profile celebrities as this, I would rather trust the judgement of a professional tribunal. I think that to say I "love the British justice system" would be pushing it a bit far. I like and admire many aspects of it, but it is far from perfect. I am pleased however that it is not as politicised as the US system, where the senior judges are appointed directly by politicians.
For the life of me I can't see how anybody comes out of this with a victory ( well the law firms obviously) or even dignity ! I've only watched bits of it but they both seem as bad as one another to me.
I’m not so sure about that. The U.K. case was a libel action against the Sun not a case against Ms Heard, so a very different level of proof. Many legal commentators were not happy with the U.K. case and not a few haw commented that the son of Mr Justice Nichol is a Murdoch employee I’ve no real views on this and didn’t follow either trial closely but it’s certainly clear that Ms Heard told lies in court and made up evidence From what I’ve seen I don’t see how an appeal will succeed
Unless she comes up with some actual evidence for these atrocious accusations then I would imagine it won't succeed. She couldn't provide a shred of credible evidence in the weeks/months of this trial.
