Johnny Depp's Defamation Suit

[DarkAmbient]

How long do these summaries go on for? Feels like Heard's team have been going on for a long time compared to Depp's.

[Kumorii]

hehe, even the Amber Alert is objecting.

- - - Updated - - -

How long do these summaries go on for? Feels like Heard's team have been going on for a long time compared to Depp's.

2h each total for all of the claims and counterclaims + rebuttal.

Rottenborn has been talking for 45min atm, but yeah, feels longer.
Camilles were 1h 20min isch I think.


Fuck me rottenborn rubs me the wrong way.
He says himself "They show you a picture where he has a wedding ring, or some form of other ring"
"They try to tell you he always wears ring, but the picture shows him wearing no rings".

Imagine contradicting yourself in the sentence straight after.

[Magical Mudcrab]

Because this particular circus has enough clowns without the peanut gallery putting on their red noses, and the perception that you can assess someone's truthfulness by means of secondhand analysis of body language is both a bit of bullshit pop culture as well as an extraordinarily harmful stereotype that colors judicial and legal dealings with neurodivergent people.

Sure, and I'm 100% sympathetic to this. If you engage by starting with "trying to analyze Heard based on body language, or even your perception of her in court, is stigmatizing and doesn't consider neurodivergent people", or something similar to that, there wouldn't be any confusion. Moreover, I think any reasonable person would look at a statement like that and broadly agree, and if they didn't then it would at least give a point from which to correct them or engage with them meaningfully.

[Kumorii]

Wait, he said that their witness said there wasn't enough glass on the floor for a handle of vodka.
Even though that question got objected to due to speculation and sustained. So they never got an answer to that...
Or did I miss a witness?

[Jotaux]

Wait, he said that their witness said there wasn't enough glass on the floor for a handle of vodka.
Even though that question got objected to due to speculation and sustained. So they never got an answer to that...
Or did I miss a witness?

It was when he was crossing Depp.

- - - Updated - - -

Y'all do not need my help being skeptical of victims given your previous banging on about how the TERF Island case was "rigged".

Go ahead and point to anywhere where I've said that Heard hasn't been distorting facts or is the sole victim. My stance was and continues to be that the relationship was mutually toxic and they're better off far apart from one another, so not sure how you're reading it as a defense of guilty people.

Ah, so when its cut and dry like this the best you can do is "BOTH SIDES"

I would say I wonder what your stance would be if the genders were reversed but we all know how that would go.

[DarkAmbient]

I'm no expert but isn't it pretty unusual to make objections during closing arguments? Wasn't expecting that. Heard's lawyer doing a decent job IMO. Depp even looked impressed at one point.

Edit: third objection already

[Mayhem]

Y'all do not need my help being skeptical of victims given your previous banging on about how the TERF Island case was "rigged".

Go ahead and point to anywhere where I've said that Heard hasn't been distorting facts or is the sole victim. My stance was and continues to be that the relationship was mutually toxic and they're better off far apart from one another, so not sure how you're reading it as a defense of guilty people.

So you just don't believe that relationships with one abuser exist because if the victim also is shitty at times both are abusers? Well, that's certainly a position to take.

- - - Updated - - -

Better question is if you're actually capable of sticking to the subject of the thread, which is ironic considering your previous complaining that irrelevant bullshit was going to get it locked.

I must have struck a nerve pointing out how this case has been hijacked by reactionaries. Imagine that.

You are one of these reactionaries at this point.

[Magical Mudcrab]

Heard's team made a massive mistake. The rebuttal times are:
39 minutes (remaining) for Depp.
6 minutes (remaining) for Heard.

That's a lot of time for Depp's team to do damage to Heard's case, and no time for Heard's team to undo it. This doesn't help the fact that Heard's lawyers were contrasted so heavily within their own team. Elaine was terrible compared to Rottenborn and, as a viewer, I was more annoyed by her team than I was in the last few weeks of watching the trial. Rottenborn made a good case, Elaine ruined that case.

[Jotaux]

They should have had Rottenborn do the entire closing. He was doing really well, good enough that if I was on the Jury I would be considering what he said. Elaine kind of undid all that and used up a ton of time.

[Elegiac]

Ah, so when its cut and dry like this the best you can do is "BOTH SIDES"

I would say I wonder what your stance would be if the genders were reversed but we all know how that would go.

If a court with a reversed burden of proof had found in favor of Mr. Heard and then Ms. Depp chose to engage in litigation in a state where the standards were significantly more favorable for a public circus I'd still be pointing out how it is far from cut and dry.

The only difference would be the absence of the sociopolitical overtones that have come with the usual suspects leaping on this case as a method of payback over #metoo.

- - - Updated - - -

So you just don't believe that relationships with one abuser exist because if the victim also is shitty at times both are abusers?

Not believing this particular case was a instance with a single abuser in no way implies that I don't believe single-sided cases of abuse exist. What a ridiculous fucking strawman, rofl.

You also apparently don't know what reactionary means. Like I said, I really appear to have touched a nerve here.

[Calfredd]

Not believing this particular case was a instance with a single abuser in no way implies that I don't believe single-sided cases of abuse exist. What a ridiculous fucking strawman, rofl.

You also apparently don't know what reactionary means. Like I said, I really appear to have touched a nerve here.

A child repeating "Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?" also touches a few nerves.

[Kumorii]

Heard's team made a massive mistake. The rebuttal times are:
39 minutes (remaining) for Depp.
6 minutes (remaining) for Heard.

That's a lot of time for Depp's team to do damage to Heard's case, and no time for Heard's team to undo it. This doesn't help the fact that Heard's lawyers were contrasted so heavily within their own team. Elaine was terrible compared to Rottenborn and, as a viewer, I was more annoyed by her team than I was in the last few weeks of watching the trial. Rottenborn made a good case, Elaine ruined that case.

He was definitely better, he had some ups and downs though for me. He did put up a strong case, but saying "you are smarter than that" to a jury, implying they are stupid if they don't give Heard the win probably put some off.

- - - Updated - - -

A child repeating "Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?" also touches a few nerves.

His entire forum presence is about touching nerves.

[Elegiac]

A child repeating "Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?" also touches a few nerves.

It's amazing that y'all think you're in a position to criticize Heard's lawyers when you toss out non-arguments like these. Yikes.

[Veggie50]

I'm no expert but isn't it pretty unusual to make objections during closing arguments? Wasn't expecting that. Heard's lawyer doing a decent job IMO. Depp even looked impressed at one point.

Edit: third objection already

It definitely is. Heards lawyer repeatedly mischaracterized testimonies and at one point misstated the law. She was admonished by the judge, and is VERY lucky the sidebar time wasn’t deducted from her total time.

It’s over… it’s done…

Verdict watch!

[Rennadrel]

Amber admitted to writing the op-ed (on accident) because of Johnny. Isn't that like - a REALLY bad thing for her to admit?

It's called perjury, this is the crux of the point of contention in the case. And her admitting that definitely swings the verdict in Depp's favour at this point.

[Kumorii]

Hope runkle of the bailey made it into court...really curious how the jury reacted to the different closing arguments. Or someone else who did. Know of 2 that went in to take notes of just that.

[NotBigzo]

My predictions: Johnny will lose his claim, but Amber will also lose her counterclaim. She'll sink into obscurity and if she's lucky get a made-for-tv movie deal about the trial. He'll have a career revitalization. He'll never be able to get back that piece of himself that was lost and never truly be happy again. She'll learn nothing and keep making the same mistakes and will never truly be happy again. Both will probably keep doing drugs to the detriment of their health. Basically no one really wins but they'll at least move on and make another batch of mistakes with brand new people.

Daddy Elon gonna swoop in, throw her some $, get some play, and go back to shitposting on Twitter.

[Veggie50]

Daddy Elon gonna swoop in, throw her some $, get some play, and go back to shitposting on Twitter.

I doubt Musk is feeling like doing her any further favours.

[Mayhem]

Not believing this particular case was a instance with a single abuser in no way implies that I don't believe single-sided cases of abuse exist. What a ridiculous fucking strawman, rofl.

You also apparently don't know what reactionary means. Like I said, I really appear to have touched a nerve here.

Not really, I think most of your arguments are useless at best or just reactionary rambling. You are somehow absolutely fine with one side not just committing perjury in front of everyone but also accusing everyone else of committing perjury. At the same time, all the other arguments presented by that very same side would easily explain everything JD went through and they'd be more believable too.

But but but they were both shitty because the victim reacted to the abuser is just stupid as an argument and in no way makes them both abusers regardless of the case in question.

I go solely by what has been presented and one side lied more than once with proof that they were lies and trying to wiggle themselves out of these lies, I couldn't care less about gender or race of either side.

[Orange Joe]

Better question is if you're actually capable of sticking to the subject of the thread, which is ironic considering your previous complaining that irrelevant bullshit was going to get it locked.

I must have struck a nerve pointing out how this case has been hijacked by reactionaries. Imagine that.

lol... brings up some shit about terf something....


someone replies to your bullshit terf something...


You go on the blame them for going off topic....



lmfao... I see mmo champ is as classy as ever...