Amber Heard admits to beating up Johnny Depp

Dave0301 wrote: »

This kind of thing is such a double standard. Just absolutely ignores all the allegations against Heard and presents her as the victim, despite there being a growing consensus that she was more than happy to abuse away herself. Like many, I think it took two to tango in this case, but if Depp is going to be labeled a wife beater due to her accusations, then she can own a similar tag given the current proceedings.

If/When his name is cleared, Depp should speak for men's domestic violence campaigns spreading awareness for men who have suffered domestic violence at the hands of a woman. All is fair.


Imho, from the tapes Iv listened too and from Heards deposition video I don't fully agree with it taking two to tango. There is far more going on with Heard than Depp, lies etc . It was a toxic marriage, both fond of their drink and drugs but when physical and psychological abuse in a marriage ever excepted.

BattleCorp wrote: »

Yeah, Depp mightn't be the best spokesperson for cause given his very extensive drug use.

Yeah for drug abuse, his drug use doesn't really make him a 'wife-beater'. If/when it's proven that he has been a victim of Heard sh*Te, I don't see how his use of drugs impedes him from spreading awareness of domestic violence on men. It's not a drug seminar :pac:

golfball37 wrote: »

Maybe a stupid question but why is she even giving evidence here? Is it not civil case between depp and the sun and no way would she be compelled to ?

Are the sun paying her

The sun labelled him a wife beater, I'm guessing the easiest way to prove that's not libel is to have the wife he supposedly beat give evidence of his wife beating.....

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Depp has lost his libel case against the S*n.

No surprise and the correct decision. TBH it was never in doubt.

Libel is very difficult to prove and the only winner here is his lawyer.

They are both as bad as each other and he was a misguided fool for dragging this through the Courts. When you have that much of a coke and alcohol problem your memory ain't going to be that good. Even if he had won the crap that was dragged up painted nobody in a good light.

My impresison of Depp is the classic "Mr Nice But Dim".

Mad_maxx wrote: »

female bullying is now completely immune from consequence , the judge decided that the feminist lobby were too powerful to risk incurring the wrath of , even for a multi millionaire like Depp , justice is an unattainable goal

The paper called him a wife-beater. He sued for libel. They produced evidence that he beat his wife. It seems you have an issue that the truth is a defence to libel.

Ardent wrote: »

He has to appeal to a higher court. The damage to his reputation from this ruling is too great.

I find it incredible the judge sided with everything Heard put forward. I think it's well understood by all at this stage that she's a complete psycho.

Yes she is a scheming and calculating so and so but that was not the issue before the Courts.

As mentioned above Depp was not able to refute any of the evidence put forward that he was physically violent toward her. It was clearly a very toxic relationship and she played him good and proper.

"Oh but she was just as bad" is not a good argument.

Both of them come out looking like twats. He is going to be even more broke. None of this is a surprise.

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

yeah and I dont get the "the are as bad as each other" . In work I found a lot of women making excuses for her and her behaviour, trying to rationalise it all. Its different when the woman is accused. Woman aren't capable of psychological and physical abuse

the case was about what he did.

Deleted User wrote: »

Poor decision, doesn't reflect well on British justice system siding with a toilet rag. Depp would never have taken this matter to court if he was lying. Nor submitted over twenty hours of testimony. My two cents, you don't publicly call somebody a wife beater unless they've been convicted of domestic abuse. And Heard is no angel who comes across as a compulsive liar. If there is any consolation, her public standing has been damaged by unflattering testimony of a toxic aggressor.

Someone who hits their wife is a wife beater. The judgement was entirely correct. To say that he would never have taken the matter to court if he was lying is naíve in the extreme.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Not a bit of it. Her public standing won't be affected in the slightest. Her gender means it (her transgressions) will never be brought up. Within a year she'll be back on American late-night and might even be asked about domestic violence and no doubt she'll have set up some foundation for other survivors by that time. I might even go as far as to say she'll be bigger box office than she was before.

Nah, she's also tainted because of the drug use etc. She's no longer snow white so I don't think her career will have the same trajectory although will probably be more successful than Johnny's career going forward.

BattleCorp wrote: »

Nah, she's also tainted because of the drug use etc. She's no longer snow white so I don't think her career will have the same trajectory although will probably be more successful than Johnny's career going forward.

Well, she was never really box office (Aquaman maybe) and sure half of Hollywood are coked up. Look at someone like Downey Jnr for example, soon as he said he was in recovery, his career sky rocketed.

Hope you're right though as she deserves to take some hit for her behaviour but I just don't see it. Society will by and large see Depp as the aggressor now. The details tend to get lost and verdicts remembered in libel cases.

I agree with those saying he never should have taken it. He effectively asked himself a 'When did you stop beating your wife?' question in front of the whole world and it was a case he had to win to make sure he didn't do himself, and his career, more damage than had been done by the original article. Which I feel the case has done.

I see Depp is going to throw away more good money by appealing the verdict.