Johnny Depp & Amber Heard #26

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
1
Milasam said:
What a tangled web they weave. The question I still have though is why continue to risk it all for a horrible actress? I mean, she is horrible, not even close to sub-par and the only reason she got any work was because of Depp. I can't help but think given her preoccupation with filming mirrors, beds and people talking and sleeping that she wouldn't have put the devices away in other situations. Something is weird about all of it.
Click to expand...


I smell musk...

Why are suddenly major (centre and left-leaning) publications willing to lose their credibility among a sizeable part of their reader base?
There were millions watching the trial and are now feeling not exactly happy about the gaslighting. I have seen more and more comments where life-long Guardian or NYT readers are asking questions (e.g. on Facebook) that "if they lie and gaslight us about this, what else they have lied about".

And meanwhile, conservative and right-wing publications manage to depict the trial and result accurately (Sky News Australia, Fox, The Telegraph).
It is all very odd.



/looks at the Muskrat

Btw, I have seen that Amber has been nicknamed The Ambuser.
 
Last edited:
what surgery gets rid of eye bags? i want it
 

Attachments

  • amber-eye-bags-heard.jpg
    amber-eye-bags-heard.jpg
    52.5 KB · Views: 314
The links on that graph are so tenuous they're ridiculous. Judge Nichol's son was a freelance contributor to Talk Radio where he did newspaper reviews. He would be paid absolute peanuts for that. His full-time job is as a political lobbyist.

To suggest that the judge would throw the case to protect his son's pocket money gig is mad.

And his wife is married to someone who is friends with someone who used to be married to someone who used to employ someone who once met Amber. Cuckoo.
 
wibble said:
"if you've got a horrible problem, and you want to make that problem worse: call a lawyer."

wise words....
Click to expand...
Fran is an absolute Queen. Check out her series on Netflix Pretend It's A City.. epitome of the no bullshit New Yorker, Happy to say she's still around as I bought a front row ticket to hear her speak this July 2 yrs ago and it's been my absolute prayer she didn't pass away before them
 
whathastheworldcometo said:
What is going happen to the Op'ed now? Does it need to be withdraw? Will The Washington Post publish an explanation?
Click to expand...
They have added a note to it at the top.

Editor’s note, June 2, 2022: In 2019, Johnny Depp sued Amber Heard for defamation arising out of this 2018 op-ed. On June 1, 2022, following a trial in Fairfax County, Va. Circuit Court, a jury found Heard liable on three counts for the following statements, which Depp claimed were false and defamatory: (1) “I spoke up against sexual violence — and faced our culture’s wrath. That has to change.” (2) “Then two years ago, I became a public figure representing domestic abuse, and I felt the full force of our culture’s wrath for women who speak out.” (3) “I had the rare vantage point of seeing, in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse.” The jury separately found that Depp, through his lawyer Adam Waldman, defamed Heard in one of three counts in her countersuit.
 
Dotty Merton said:
Web is bigger than you imagine. Timed. Flexible. Always ready for a big story to drop others behind. Lasses like her drama are used to cover bigger dramas, Murdoch is a master at it, or was, bit old now to keep up. There'll be politics interfering too in UK for sure. Turdle got a lot of work before Depp (he helped after) and I suspect she would of made it anyway after this quote turned up in

2009
Variety wrote that Heard "more or less steals the show" from Demi Moore film with DDuchovny (This is when she becomes precious my lovelies, precious......)

also the same year

Heard was arrested in Washington state for misdemeanor domestic violence, met met jd professionally. They didnt get it on til later....years later...supposedly. She was legally know as Amber De Vrees until 2014 (no wonder he got a bit pissed off) which is how I think she got JD to marry her...I am getting ahead of myself, I have a timeline and a theory developing cap'tain!



She got to NY at 17, is that underage for NY? Maybe she was the underage girl?
Click to expand...
maybe

Jen667 said:
The links on that graph are so tenuous they're ridiculous. Judge Nichol's son was a freelance contributor to Talk Radio where he did newspaper reviews. He would be paid absolute peanuts for that. His full-time job is as a political lobbyist.

To suggest that the judge would throw the case to protect his son's pocket money gig is mad.

And his wife is married to someone who is friends with someone who used to be married to someone who used to employ someone who once met Amber. Cuckoo.
Click to expand...
But didn't the judge retire like the next day once the trial was over?!



LasVegas702 said:
Elaine Bredehoft Cancels Interview with Court TV
Click to expand...
Update
 
Last edited:
Wibs what if this is all one big charade, a Marina inspired performance piece combined with that experiment where they made normal people prisoners or prison officers and they started killing the inmates and all the data was just one big experiment for elon at twitter and will be sold to the next people who want to win elections..... what if's huh!

I have some fun pix but tattle tech is currently preventing me from inserting, though, I can, attach...like a leech. I shall choose me images more wisely and me words more carefully 😇 sorry mods if I was a nawty nun ✌ 🤭

I am confused about bee's, was this a real Abfab joke?????
 

Attachments

  • patsy-stone-is-it-a-bee.jpg
    patsy-stone-is-it-a-bee.jpg
    11.7 KB · Views: 25
AuroraBorealis said:
I smell musk...
Click to expand...
On Musk... Maybe....

But the Guardian is easily explained.
There's a video on utube of the editor Katherine Viner, at some media conference (probably 3 or 4 years ago now), saying that the new editorial policy was to 'engage readers' by deliberately feeding them on a diet of extreme content.
Combine that with the decade long trans-Atlantic progressive what-ever-they-called-it....

And thus you have their journalists - and to some extent their readers - behaving like the last Japanese soldier.
 
annagerda83 said:
As far as I know proving a DV is supposed to be difficult. I mean, Amber is a great example of how people can fake a DV or rape case and went away with it. And this whole trial isn’t about which gender is the most oppressed and which other gender has the most power. This is about defamation, in which along the way, involves a man and a woman, and apparently a woman abused a man.

Amber lost the case but it should not be all about women will be having a harder time. Men will also have a harder time to prove that they were indeed victims of DV.

what is it about this whole gender narrative? Why should men and women fight each other in every single turn?
Click to expand...

Proving any crime is difficult in a criminal court because the burden of proof is so high - it has to be beyond all reasonable doubt. The defence simply has to make the jury have the slightest bit of doubt.

with rape and DV this is especially hard because of the taboo nature and also, because of the intimate nature of the crime of DV and rape.

it’s not about men v women, but you’ve got your head in the sand if you can’t see how gender biases and gender roles play a part in both general DV/Rape cases and in this specific one.
 
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Back
Top