Johnny Depp's Defamation Suit

[MCMLXXXII]

And so spoke the internet tough guy...

[Rennadrel]

Has it been proven (with reliable evidence, not the pathetic shit Amber Heard is displaying) that he was a wife beater?

They can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. All it is is hearsay evidence at this point. Her photos are mediocre evidence, while there's audio and photographic evidence of what she did to Depp. I'm a big proponent of having the receipts before blatantly accusing someone of wrongdoing.

[jonnysensible]

They can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. All it is is hearsay evidence at this point. Her photos are mediocre evidence, while there's audio and photographic evidence of what she did to Depp. I'm a big proponent of having the receipts before blatantly accusing someone of wrongdoing.

it was good enough for a court in the UK, alot of you seem to be ignoring that happened.

[MCMLXXXII]

it was good enough for a court in the UK, alot of you seem to be ignoring that happened.

Well..... they allowed a tabloid to call him a wife beater. Tabloids in the UK can almost get away with murder. I'm sure that in almost every other country a court would've said otherwise.

[Ripster42]

They can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

They don't need to; it's a civil case. More likely than not is basically the standard here ("preponderance of evidence"), and it's him who needs to meet that standard, not her. He needs to prove, to a preponderance of the evidence standard, that he didn't beat her. Her being an awful person isn't evidence of him not being an awful person. Don't know why you're talking about hearsay as a bad thing, there's so many exceptions to the rule, it's generally allowed as evidence.

it was good enough for a court in the UK, alot of you seem to be ignoring that happened.

They believe the decision was corrupted by conflict on interest. They're not ignoring it, they're dismissing it after consideration.

[jonnysensible]

Well..... they allowed a tabloid to call him a wife beater. Tabloids in the UK can almost get away with murder. I'm sure that in almost every other country a court would've said otherwise.

we have some of the worst libel laws in the world. Its why rich oligarchs use our courts to silence journalists. Losing a libel case that you brought in the UK means you really fucked up.

he got fucked up and knocked her around a bit, some of it was a bit soft but its all abuse. Again the only good thing about any of this is weirdo rich people getting dragged in courts because of their own egos.

[Kumorii]

They believe the decision was corrupted by conflict on interest. They're not ignoring it, they're dismissing it after consideration.

This case has a lot more evidence in it than the UK trial + it's another case...
Calling back to another trial about something similar, but no the same is just wrong. With new evidence, new conclusions can be drawn.
Imagine if we had the mindset that "previous trial said this, thus it is"... people being exonerated through new evidence would still be locked up if that's the case.

It's just not relevant.

[Veggie50]

They can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. All it is is hearsay evidence at this point. Her photos are mediocre evidence, while there's audio and photographic evidence of what she did to Depp. I'm a big proponent of having the receipts before blatantly accusing someone of wrongdoing.

To avoid confusion, I would like to note that the threshold in civil cases is not “beyond reasonable doubt”. All AH has to do is make it more likely that it did than didn’t happen. That’s what makes this case so hard for JD.

[Barzotti]

'The judge in the Johnny Depp libel action concluded that “the great majority of alleged assaults” on Amber Heard by the Pirates of the Caribbean star had been “proved to the civil standard”.

Of the 14 alleged assaults heard in open court – all of which have been denied by Depp – he found that 12 of them were proved on the balance of probability.'

you can literally call him a wife beater in the press because he is one.

It was a civil case, not a criminal case. That means that Depp had to prove that he didn't hit her. All the judge on the UK case said that some alleged assaults were more likely than not for him, not that there was any evidence (photos, videos) of said assaults.

And the judge was a fucking clown. He had to nerve to say “There is evidence which I find compelling of witnesses who saw Ms Heard with injuries to her face and who took photographs of these.”

[jonnysensible]

It was a civil case, not a criminal case. That means that Depp had to prove that he didn't hit her. All the judge on the UK case said that some alleged assaults were more likely than not for him, not that there was any evidence (photos, videos) of said assaults.

And the judge was a fucking clown. He had to nerve to say “There is evidence which I find compelling of witnesses who saw Ms Heard with injuries to her face and who took photographs of these.”

i can go read the whole thing https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2020/2911.html

Depp is asking for 50million for this line : 'two years ago i became a public figure representing domestic abuse'

this is literally what he is suing over. The information was already public, she provided no further details and there's no evidence this had any impact on his career.

i mean i can look at imdb and see he was still working. She made the allegations in 2016 and he kept working and then hes crying about that line in at op ed in 2018 loool.

There is no evidence he lost any roles because of this. He lost his harry potter job because of the UK court case he lost when the UK court found that the claim "wife-beater" was backed up by evidence.

This is frivolous and hes going to lose because hes a wife beating dunce. Its exactly the same as the UK trial just a bit more messy because its public.

[Jotaux]

it was good enough for a court in the UK, alot of you seem to be ignoring that happened.

In the UK case the judge uses Amber’s testimony of having donated the divorce settlement to charity of proof she’s not lying.they used that in their written judgement. We all know she lied about that. The uk decision is pretty much tossed out now.

[Milchshake]

"The judge is crooked", Depp fans are the new QAnon. Remember, Trump and fans spent months complaining about the "mexican judge" screwing him in a lawsuit.

Sorry Ladies, but all the Very Online Progressives heard the Gamer Gate dog whistle. This thread is their Pavlovian response.
It's YouTube junkies howling in defense of a burnt out Boomer junkie. Even skeptic/math youtube channels on jumping the rating bonanza. Why talk about cartesian coordinates? When views calling Anitia Sarkeesian Amber HEard "a lYIng BItc!" get 10000x the views.

[Jotaux]

"The judge is crooked", Depp fans are the new QAnon. Remember, Trump and fans spent months complaining about the "mexican judge" screwing him in a lawsuit.

Sorry Ladies, but all the Very Online Progressives heard the Gamer Gate dog whistle. This thread is their Pavlovian response.
It's YouTube junkies howling in defense of a burnt out Boomer junkie. Even skeptic/math youtube channels on jumping the rating bonanza. Why talk about cartesian coordinates? When views calling Anitia Sarkeesian Amber HEard "a lYIng BItc!" get 10000x the views.

Again the uk decision was based on Amber being believable about her donation. The judge outlines that specific piece of testimony in their ruling. We now know she lied. Honestly you guys going “lalalala … gamer gate” are just ignoring facts

[Veggie50]

Again the uk decision was based on Amber being believable about her donation. The judge outlines that specific piece of testimony in their ruling. We now know she lied. Honestly you guys going “lalalala … gamer gate” are just ignoring facts

I feel left out here… wtf is gamer gate, and why does it connect here?

[Jotaux]

I feel left out here… wtf is gamer gate, and why does it connect here?

It’s now a boogeyman, it has no connection here.

[Milchshake]

Again the uk decision was based on Amber being believable about her donation. The judge outlines that specific piece of testimony in their ruling. We now know she lied. Honestly you guys going “lalalala … gamer gate” are just ignoring facts

"AmbER not doNating moNeyz!" is the new "Anita is not making videos and frauding her Patreons!".

Again, it's replaying your old gamergate tactics.

[MCMLXXXII]

Still not clear to me what a gamergate is...

[Veggie50]

Still not clear to me what a gamergate is...

Me neither… it seems to have something to do with an “anita”.

I feel old…

[DarkAmbient]

I accept the instruction.

[Jotaux]

"AmbER not doNating moNeyz!" is the new "Anita is not making videos and frauding her Patreons!".

Again, it's replaying your old gamergate tactics.

It's literally the basis of the UK decision. The judge points to that specific fact as why they believe Amber is likely being truthful.