Johnny Depp/Amber Heard

[Sicks Bux]

Wonder when the decision on this going to be handed down?

[Jezza]

^ They say late September.

[Sicks Bux]

Thanks.

[Presti35]

Waiting.... waiting... wai... oh she's countersuing him now. And accusing him of avoiding the final date and smearing her name online...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2krXq8fw90

[Sicks Bux]

Where's the dignity?

[Presti35]

Aquaman came on right after the Brownlow last night, and I thought what the hell ended up happening here?

Still going to the courts I see.

I wonder how the new Fantastic Beasts film will be? Considering its being filmed around this case and Depp is in the film. Surely he'd be off his game?

[David]

[David]

[Sicks Bux]

The comments section on this thread seems pretty unanimous.

https://www.celebitchy.com/687296/johnn ... /#comments

[Presti35]

Unbelievable.

Channel 7 have just reported that "yes, Depp is a wife beater".

I really thought it may have been fabricated. Maybe he really is a bad guy.

Only thing left to do now is add him to the Collingwood board. Or better yet, the new Pres!

[think positive]

Depp wins!

I’ve watched and read a fair bit. I have no idea what the truth is, but certainly, she was referring to him in that article, and he was never charged or found guilty of anything. Free speech? Just another stupid US amendment right that is totally out dated. Free speech should not mean you can say anything you want about anyone, be it true or not.

I believe him where usually I wouldn’t, not because I love him as Jack sparrow, because of his previous girlfriends and partners, his relationship with the mother of his children. His statement is very humble. And if you know anything about his history he’s stayed on good terms with his ex’s, and especially the mother of his kids.

And I don’t believe her because in her own recordings you can tell she leading him, goading him, why would she take so many damning photos? Film so many conversations? Stay when she had the money and people around her to facilitate leaving? I had never heard of Heard until they got together. And I do believe she just wanted more fame and stuff who gets hurt.

Personally I think they had a terribly toxic relationship. I don’t know the truth, but I do believe she had no right to put him on blast like that with no proof and with no convictions against Depp for her claims. If she wants to make such accusations she should do it in a court of law and not in the papers.

I don’t for a minute believe a woman should automatically be believed, and that every man is guilty.

[David]

[think positive]

I totally agree but I get why Depp pursued it, as he said in the blink of an eye she destroyed his reputation, his career, and hurt everyone around him. With no proof whatsoever.

Shame on the journalist for printed her story.

One thing I will say, is This probably cost him the settlement maybe more in lawyers, when he had enough to go away and quietly live his life.

Watch the innocence project, it’s really enlightening, men spending years, decades, in prison because the won’t admit to a crime they did not commit, they get to the parole board and say how can I be sorry and remorseful for something I did not do?

Guilty people generally don’t go to court to clear their name if they don’t get ordered to.

[David]

[David]

On the divergent responses, this is what I find most perplexing from the pro-Heard camp:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... o-backlash

Instead, there’s been tremendous focus on Heard’s mistakes and worst moments over the course of her relationship with Depp. As is typical of domestic abuse victims, Heard does seem to have done things many of us would not be proud of. She fought back. Depp’s outbursts and insults left Heard resentful and angry with him, and sometimes, she told him so. Many are quick to point out that Heard is not a perfect victim. We are told that the lawsuit is “complicated”. But no woman is. We are told that the lawsuit is “complicated.” But the lawsuit is not complicated. It is abuse. Now, that abuse has been sanctioned by a jury.

[…]

No victim is perfect. No victim should have to be. After all, if a man cannot be considered abusive towards an imperfect woman, then just how perfect does a woman need to be before it becomes wrong to beat her?

So many weasel words here: "mistakes"; "done things"; "imperfect". Nobody is accusing Heard of not being "perfect"; these "mistakes", from what has been reported, include multiple alleged incidents of physical violence (not self-defence, but assault). That is domestic violence, and is understood, I presume, by most of us to be abusive.

So in a mutually violent relationship, who gets to be the aggressor and who gets to be the victim who is merely "fighting back"? Or is the second just the woman's role by default?