Page 75 of 85 FirstFirst ...
25
65
73
74
75
76
77
... LastLast
  1. #1481
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    If Johnny Depp could prove that 1, The Washington Post Article clearly was about him and that the statements where verifiably false regardless of Amber Heard telling and 2, Johnny Depp could prove that it caused direct harm to himself or his person meaning his career, then my opinion he won.
    1). He proved that the Op-Ed was about him, and he also proved, with evidence and witness testimonies, that he did not abuse Heard (watch the entire trial if you question that).

    2). It was proved that it caused harm to his career, that’s why jurors awarded him $10 mill in compensatory damages.

    Unless we’re ignoring weeks worth of evidence and witness testimony, including the verdict of the 7 jurors? Is this a Convince Doctor Amadeus Trial on MMO-Champ?
    Last edited by Winter Blossom; 2022-06-08 at 06:24 PM.
    Fairy tales are more than true–not because they tell us dragons exist, but because they tell us dragons can be beaten. -G. K. Chesterton & Neil Gaiman

  2. #1482
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    Ok



    No it does not. Criminal and Civil Charges are not the same thing and they aren't interchangeable, If Amber Heard was guilty of committing fraud that's a complaint Depp would have to go the police for to investigate and a District Attorney would decide based on evidence and Merits of the case "ideally".

    The same is True for if Johnny Depp was guilty of domestic Violence (FULL STOP). This needs to be boldened and because without that process, Johnny Depp has never committed domestic violence PERIOD.

    Now people are free to make whatever opinions they like, and Amber is free to give whatever perspective she has for that, Just as Johnny is free to do the same thing.

    And Disney is free to make whatever associations they like that is in line with whatever image thy like or dislike when it comes to their business. Whether it's Johnny Depp being mentioned in a "Op-Ed" or Amber Heard only ever being a horrible Actor and people signing petitions to Axe her from a film.

    The Difference is Johnny Depp used the courts as though it's an official Arena to substantiate his claims they aren't and shouldn't be in a defamation case.



    Wrong it doesn't matter if the statements were false Slander nor Libel require it, only that only that the statements weren't true. And yes I understand that might confuse you but just because something hasn't been established as Truth, doesn't mean they are false.

    It's why we should believe all Victims including Johnny Depp, just because he may or may not have enough evidence to PROVE he was a victim of it, doesn't mean it didn't happen, it might just mean there isn't enough to in the eye's of a criminal court prove that.

    Where that is relevant is that had Johnny Depp wrote an Op-Ed but didn't mentioned Amber Heard the same elements would apply. It's his perspective, and unless he named her specifically, and went on to make claims not validated by an official authority Criminal Court that directly leads to damage to Amber Heard person he wouldn't be guilty of defamation eiher.

    The Washington Post (Op-Ed) is NOT an official Authority of Anything! Neither is a Civil Court for Defamation. Which is why statements can't be verified as true because claims if a person finds there are any are of CRIMINAL conduct. Not Uncivil behavior.





    I get it, nothing here to argue about, I was wrong about the amounts of who sued for what, I am fully aware the awards were knocked down, I was ignorant to exactly the amounts in the end.

    I don't think either should have been awarded anything and any of the figures I have heard are fucking ridiculous. This was petty bullshit.






    I don't know this doesn't seem any more established than any other opinions or accusations of anyone in this case. Even though I personally agree and believe this entitled yes LIAR Amber Heard was starved for attention and up to no good.

    I personally don't find her Op-Ed funny or compelling at least not in the way she likely intended it. I also think no mentioning Depp while likely implying in every other way clearly who she was talking was cute.

    If the Jury found based on that alone and that is all that was introduced and argued in this trial, I would Support this verdict.


    I don't because of the circus this became and the shenanigan's that played out in the media because this, that only served to make people more ignorant and stupid about the law.

    This could have been educational and and actually meaningful, but that would have been a lot more boring and likely less financially rewarding for all the clowns involved.





    I don't know how clear the court was on how it decided, because the court was never clear as to what the case was about evident by the scope of what nonsense was allowed to be introduced or argued in the first place.

    I will certainly agree they could have found that the Op-Ed was clearly about JD even without Amber Heard admitting it which would have been stupid if she didn't. That doesn't however lend that any of what she said was True or that it caused any damages Johnny Depp Claimed.

    Maybe if I heard more about that and MAYBE I missed it, but I don't remember any Disney Executive or anyone else equally as brave to admit that YES that in part might have had a huge impact on them NOT hiring JD again.

    However, while that would be their civil right do to their business model. I think it would have been also bad by that same line to admit that was the sole reason.

    Either way if the first burden was believed by the Jury, then complain detailing this kind of damage is reasonable too.

    Again the problem isn't where jury arrived as they sometimes do, but how.




    I separated this last point because it's the most compelling part of what you said here, and where I will admit I stand corrected on part of my views of this trial, and what I missed.

    I want to leave with this too, I don't hate JD, I enjoy most of his work and despite Amber Heard's bullshit, I went on enjoying his work provided I like the material he is in.

    The point is I don't LIKE either of them though and not because of their personal failings as human being. I don't know how well anybody does with their entire lives being examined by a bunch of self righteous boobs and finger pointers of all backgrounds.


    But both of their behaviors have been pathetic and sadly everyone involved dragged into the BS, meaning people who honestly should know better, which he exception of the lawyers because hey that's what they do. Everybody hates lawyers until they need one.


    I am not OK with this entire spectacle, However YOU have convinced me that Johnny Depp honestly may have had NO other choice.

    - - - Updated - - -



    What bias, you mean Shit on Pillogate on whatever the fuck "AmberTurdgate" Yeah, I didn't get the skinny on every failing of these two individuals irrelevant to the case.
    There we get to the heart of the problem, you don’t understand the legal definition of defamation.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation

    This should help you!

    Also…
    The Difference is Johnny Depp used the courts as though it's an official Arena to substantiate his claims they aren't and shouldn't be in a defamation case.
    That’s by definition what the courts are for…
    Last edited by Veggie50; 2022-06-08 at 05:37 PM.

  3. #1483
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCiQnJf4hoM&t=4755s


    This is why people are angry with amber.
    This why people are angry at media who try to spin this in a way that they are essentially telling victims to shut up.

    Or at least I am... but I feel and hope that more are in this camp.
    Last edited by Kumorii; 2022-06-08 at 05:09 PM.

  4. #1484
    Elemental Lord Midterm Voter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Javelin of Shitposts, Post-and-Forget
    Posts
    8,946
    Amazing coincidence, that most of the YouTube-Reaction-Video-Lawyers also moonlight as "The election was stolen from Trump" guys. They are really mad at queer folk and feminists for our "lies"...



    Surprised/unspsurprised that so many people keep falling for this Reactionary bullshit. Sucks to see a whole generation so irony-poisoned.
    Welcome to MMO-C. One you realize that the median poster is a Johnny Depp fanboi that consume 8 hours of youtube a day. You realize it's hopeless.

  5. #1485
    Quote Originally Posted by Milchshake View Post
    Amazing coincidence, that most of the YouTube-Reaction-Video-Lawyers also moonlight as "The election was stolen from Trump" guys. They are really mad at queer folk and feminists for our "lies"...

    Surprised/unspsurprised that so many people keep falling for this Reactionary bullshit. Sucks to see a whole generation so irony-poisoned.
    You are right, we should tell victims to shut up. Don't come forward. Stay silent and live with your abuser. Good message. Completely opposite of how reality has proven to work. Which is SPEAK UP. People will believe you.

    He has a retarded opinion about something unrelated, Cool. What the other guy, and what he said later on in the video is a good message for victims. You know, completely opposite to Elaine. I guess if Elaine have the right views on homosexuality that means she have the right to tell victims to shut up? Sickening to be fair.

    Good to know where you stand, and it's not with morality or ethics.
    Last edited by Kumorii; 2022-06-08 at 05:41 PM.

  6. #1486
    Elemental Lord Midterm Voter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Javelin of Shitposts, Post-and-Forget
    Posts
    8,946
    Quote Originally Posted by Kumorii View Post
    You are right, we should tell victims to shut up. Don't come forward. Stay silent and live with your abuser. Good message. Completely opposite of how reality has proven to work. Which is SPEAK UP. People will believe you.

    He has a retarded opinion about something unrelated, Cool. What the other guy, and what he said later on in the video is a good message for victims. You know, completely opposite to Elaine. I guess if Elaine have the right views on homosexuality that means she have the right to tell victims to shut up? Sickening to be fair.

    Good to know where you stand, and it's not with morality or ethics.
    Sorry you got caught pushing You Tuber guys with reactionary agendas.
    Welcome to MMO-C. One you realize that the median poster is a Johnny Depp fanboi that consume 8 hours of youtube a day. You realize it's hopeless.

  7. #1487
    Before the trial most people on Law tube thought Heard was going to win this case. I think only Legalbytes thought he had a chance. By the end of the trial I don't think anyone still thought Depp would lose.

  8. #1488
    Quote Originally Posted by Jotaux View Post
    Before the trial most people on Law tube thought Heard was going to win this case. I think only Legalbytes thought he had a chance. By the end of the trial I don't think anyone still thought Depp would lose.
    Most of the world tbh. Think most thought it was done after the UK trial...

  9. #1489
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    72,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Jotaux View Post
    Before the trial most people on Law tube thought Heard was going to win this case. I think only Legalbytes thought he had a chance. By the end of the trial I don't think anyone still thought Depp would lose.
    Like I think I said pretty early on, there really wasn't an evidentiary path that would lead Depp to win on what he could present. It was Heard's trial to lose, and she did so, between her inconsistent testimony, apparent perjury, and referencing witnesses like Kate Moss who would then categorically refute her claims. It all made it that much more difficult to believe anything else she testified to, and that was essentially her entire defense; her own testimony.


  10. #1490
    Void Lord Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    41,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Veggie50 View Post
    There we get to the heart of the problem, you don’t understand the legal definition of defamation.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation

    This should help you!

    Also…

    That’s by definition what the courts are for…

    No courts are not there to assign guilt outside their purview.

    This was not a defamation case as much as it was a desperate attempt to do exactly what Johnny’s complaints were about.

    And you and others go along with it because you made up your mind before watching any trial.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kumorii View Post
    Most of the world tbh. Think most thought it was done after the UK trial...
    Yes that’s because of the theater allowed to take place.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Like I think I said pretty early on, there really wasn't an evidentiary path that would lead Depp to win on what he could present. It was Heard's trial to lose, and she did so, between her inconsistent testimony, apparent perjury, and referencing witnesses like Kate Moss who would then categorically refute her claims. It all made it that much more difficult to believe anything else she testified to, and that was essentially her entire defense; her own testimony.
    Bullshit this came down to the merits of the law now shit on pillows or how good the attorneys were.
    #ANTIFA "Intellect alone is useless in a fight...you can't even break a rule, how can you be expected to break bone" Khan Singh

  11. #1491
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    72,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    Bullshit this came down to the merits of the law now shit on pillows or how good the attorneys were.
    And on the merits of the law, Amber Heard ruined her own defense, and that led to her being found liable, appropriately.


  12. #1492
    Void Lord Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    41,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    And on the merits of the law, Amber Heard ruined her own defense, and that led to her being found liable, appropriately.
    Because the judge allowed testimony not relevant to the complaint.
    #ANTIFA "Intellect alone is useless in a fight...you can't even break a rule, how can you be expected to break bone" Khan Singh

  13. #1493
    Someone definitely didn't watch the trial, or even bother to look up the facts presented...

  14. #1494
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    Because the judge allowed testimony not relevant to the complaint.
    What testimony, exactly?
    Fairy tales are more than true–not because they tell us dragons exist, but because they tell us dragons can be beaten. -G. K. Chesterton & Neil Gaiman

  15. #1495
    Immortal unfilteredJW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Seagrove Beach, FL
    Posts
    7,480
    Quote Originally Posted by xmirrors View Post
    Someone definitely didn't watch the trial, or even bother to look up the facts presented...
    This is Mallcop's M.O.
    Blessed are the fornicates, may we bend down to be their whores. Blessed are the rich, may our labor deliver them more.
    Blessed are the envious; bless the slothful, the wrathful, the vain. Blessed are the gluttonous, may they feast us to famine and war.
    What of the pious, the pure of heart, the peaceful, the meek, the mourning, and the merciful? All doomed, all doomed

  16. #1496
    Quote Originally Posted by Milchshake View Post
    Sorry you got caught pushing You Tuber guys with reactionary agendas.
    Or in other words; If you're a man, of course you'd be against the woman and if you're a woman? Obviously a sex traitor.

  17. #1497
    Pit Lord Magical Mudcrab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    All across Nirn.
    Posts
    2,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Eugenik View Post
    I already explained, the Judge dismissed Depp because the Judge believed he was using a DARVO defense. Thats all there is to it. You says hes corrupt because you dont agree with him..
    Technically, there are some places where there were possible conflicts of interest. Heard was acquaintances with judge Nicol's wife and the lawyers presenting her case had a longstanding relationship with both judge Nicol and his wife. This included the judge having worked for and publishing books with Geoffry Robertson, the head of the chamber which the lawyers were from, and one of the aforementioned lawyers presenting Heard's case was being mentored by Robertson.

    An even more tenuous link is that judge Nicol's son works for a subsidiary company owned by Rupert Murdoch, who also owns the Sun. Although, quite frankly, I don't know why Murdoch, who has a net worth around $19bn, would really care about this case, or what possible reason could be conceived to try and justify him putting pressure of the son of a judge to skew a verdict that didn't really affect him.

    All that said, there's a difference between saying the judge should have probably made a disclosure and thinking that there's necessarily corruption involved. The judge should have obviously disclosed his relation to the chamber and those presenting Heard's case, but if there was any actual corruption then Depp's lawyers would have probably explored that avenue already.
    Last edited by Magical Mudcrab; 2022-06-08 at 07:50 PM.
    Sylvanas didn't even win the popular vote, she was elected by an indirect election of representatives. #NotMyWarchief

  18. #1498
    Void Lord Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    41,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Winter Blossom View Post
    What testimony, exactly?
    Any of it outside the scope of the of whether or not the Op-Ed clearly identified Depp and if the statements did damage, not whether or not they whether or not they were true because the accusation were of a crime.
    #ANTIFA "Intellect alone is useless in a fight...you can't even break a rule, how can you be expected to break bone" Khan Singh

  19. #1499
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    If Johnny Depp could prove that 1, The Washington Post Article clearly was about him and that the statements where verifiably false regardless of Amber Heard telling and 2, Johnny Depp could prove that it caused direct harm to himself or his person meaning his career, then my opinion he won.


    That didn't happen, and what this trial became was about Johnny Depp and his lawyers doing exactly what they were complaining about out of revenge. That isn't what courts are for, that's what Op-Eds and Trash Magazines are for.
    What universe are you living in where you think he didn't prove either of those two things? Not only was it proven, it was proven by Heard's own testimony when she stated outright that it was about him and stated outright that she wrote it to take away his power. Depp's team proved those two things by merely cross-examining Amber Heard.

  20. #1500
    Void Lord Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    41,613
    Quote Originally Posted by korijenkins View Post
    What universe are you living in where you think he didn't prove either of those two things? Not only was it proven, it was proven by Heard's own testimony when she stated outright that it was about him and stated outright that she wrote it to take away his power. Depp's team proved those two things by merely cross-examining Amber Heard.
    The Universe where when someone commits a crime like domestic assault the only way to determine that is through a process of fact finding called a criminal investigation. Which didn't happen, so how the fuck could Johnny Depp have been verifiably harmed by an unsubstantiated claim made in a OP-Ed that didn't mention him?

    And where was that damage proven?

    Answer: it didn't and it wasn't
    #ANTIFA "Intellect alone is useless in a fight...you can't even break a rule, how can you be expected to break bone" Khan Singh

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •