Johnny Depp's Defamation Suit

[Flarelaine]

Please cease personal bickering and keep posts on topic.

[NED funded]

Impartial jurors

[Draco-Onis]

Impartial jurors ]

Right because her own behavior the psychiatrist didn't already do that? facts are she lied really big and got caught. In my mind her case sank when she went on to argue that "pledged" was the same as "donated". They maybe had a better shot if she never got on the stand.

[Veggie50]

Impartial jurors

There is no other source of this then one rumor site. Lawyers commenting “IF this is true, it’s very wrong”.

I’m pretty sure Ambers council would have brought this up in interviews. elaine certainly didn’t hesitate to go low in those.

[Mayhem]

Impartial jurors

snip

so, 1 juror, was it 1 of the 7 or 1 of the 9 or 1 of the backup jurors? Also, did their wife also persuade all the other jurors or how did they come to a unanimous verdict?

[Kumorii]

Next we will found out a jurors wife watched Pirates of the Caribbean too... or, even more gruesome, Fantastic Beasts.
I heard a jurors next door neighbor have eaten potatoes, which I'm sure Amber has done, so I guess it evens out.

- - - Updated - - -

There is no other source of this then one rumor site. Lawyers commenting “IF this is true, it’s very wrong”.

I’m pretty sure Ambers council would have brought this up in interviews. elaine certainly didn’t hesitate to go low in those.

She's already said the entire juror was biased and broke their oath because of social media...she's gone beyond the wife's text message.


--------------

Under questioning from lawyers, he read out his wife's response which was: "Amber is psychotic. If a man says a woman beat him, they never believe him."

The man was asked if he could remain impartial despite this message from his wife and he said he could and told lawyers of his spouse: "She tends to exaggerate."

When asked if his wife would be upset with him if he sided with Depp he responded, "She gets mad at me all the time" but would ultimately be understanding. This man was left in the jury pool.

I'm really confused by her stance, says she's psychotic, implying she doesn't like her, but then say Depp will never be believed and then would supposedly get mad if he sided with Depp...

I find the lack of info very confusing, but it seems enough for media to spin it. And his response seems to imply her opinions won't sway him... which of course is up to everyone to believe or not.

[Jotaux]

Plus we don't know if the juror was one of the alternates or not.

[Veggie50]

Next we will found out a jurors wife watched Pirates of the Caribbean too... or, even more gruesome, Fantastic Beasts.
I heard a jurors next door neighbor have eaten potatoes, which I'm sure Amber has done, so I guess it evens out.

- - - Updated - - -



She's already said the entire juror was biased and broke their oath because of social media...she's gone beyond the wife's text message.


--------------



I'm really confused by her stance, says she's psychotic, implying she doesn't like her, but then say Depp will never be believed and then would supposedly get mad if he sided with Depp...

I find the lack of info very confusing, but it seems enough for media to spin it. And his response seems to imply her opinions won't sway him... which of course is up to everyone to believe or not.

To be fair, they supposedly asked if he could be impartial. His response of “she gets mad at me all the time anyway” was if he’d disagree with her. Disagreeing with her here seems to imply siding with Amber.

I still don’t believe the entire exchange took place though.

[Milchshake]

Johnny Depp’s Popularity Decreased During Trial—Despite Social Media Craze

• From April 8-10, before the trial began, to June 4-5, days after the verdict was decided, the amount of U.S. adults who viewed Depp as somewhat or very favorably dropped to 56% from 68%.
• Baby boomer opinion of Depp worsened the most of any age group, with the amount of respondents who viewed him unfavorably dropping to 37% from 59%.
• Gen X had the next biggest drop from 68% to 58%.
• Millennials viewed Depp favorably more than any other generation, with 72% viewing him that way in June, down from 78% in April.
• Gen Z’s opinion of Depp was the most unchanged throughout the trial—those who viewed Depp favorably dropped only 2% to 70% from April to June.

Are Millennials making a devil's bargain? Normalizing misogyny for one more pirate movie and a chance to extend their childhood just a few more years?

[Edge-]

Johnny Depp’s Popularity Decreased During Trial—Despite Social Media Craze

• From April 8-10, before the trial began, to June 4-5, days after the verdict was decided, the amount of U.S. adults who viewed Depp as somewhat or very favorably dropped to 56% from 68%.
• Baby boomer opinion of Depp worsened the most of any age group, with the amount of respondents who viewed him unfavorably dropping to 37% from 59%.
• Gen X had the next biggest drop from 68% to 58%.
• Millennials viewed Depp favorably more than any other generation, with 72% viewing him that way in June, down from 78% in April.
• Gen Z’s opinion of Depp was the most unchanged throughout the trial—those who viewed Depp favorably dropped only 2% to 70% from April to June.

Are Millennials making a devil's bargain? Normalizing misogyny for one more pirate movie and a chance to extend their childhood just a few more years?

The year is 2040: The question before being allowed into any social group is, "Did you support #TeamDepp or #TeamHeard". The echos of the monumental legal case continue to reverberate loudly, impacting all aspects of society.

I'm honestly astounded at how a defamation lawsuit between two kinda not great rich people has turned into something where your opinion on it has such wide ranging implications for who you are as a person, and society in general. Seems like...a bit much?

[Mihalik]

Are Millennials making a devil's bargain? Normalizing misogyny for one more pirate movie and a chance to extend their childhood just a few more years?

No. It's just millenials watched the trail online, more often than not in the Twitch/Youtube/Reddit etc medium where those commenting the trial were very favorable to Depp, while older generations might have watched mostly TV commentators which were either more neutral or more Heard favorable.

I never had much of an opinion on Depp beyond weirdo actor, Tim Burton's pet who occasionally makes a really good movie. After the trial I have a largely unfavorable view of him as a person, but that doesn't change the fact that I do think Heard is unmeasurably worse.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm honestly astounded at how a defamation lawsuit between two kinda not great rich people has turned into something where your opinion on it has such wide ranging implications for who you are as a person, and society in general. Seems like...a bit much?

Milch is the worst example of a right leaning liberal who confuses overplaying the worst bits of "woke" trends for progressiveness. The whole "Great success for Feminism! Raytheon's board is now 50% female, and the head of the CIA is a woman! ...Who ran the War on Terror torture program. Yay girlboss!"

[Veggie50]

Johnny Depp’s Popularity Decreased During Trial—Despite Social Media Craze

• From April 8-10, before the trial began, to June 4-5, days after the verdict was decided, the amount of U.S. adults who viewed Depp as somewhat or very favorably dropped to 56% from 68%.
• Baby boomer opinion of Depp worsened the most of any age group, with the amount of respondents who viewed him unfavorably dropping to 37% from 59%.
• Gen X had the next biggest drop from 68% to 58%.
• Millennials viewed Depp favorably more than any other generation, with 72% viewing him that way in June, down from 78% in April.
• Gen Z’s opinion of Depp was the most unchanged throughout the trial—those who viewed Depp favorably dropped only 2% to 70% from April to June.

Are Millennials making a devil's bargain? Normalizing misogyny for one more pirate movie and a chance to extend their childhood just a few more years?

Thank you for pointing out people liking JD was not the reason he won this.

[Rennadrel]

Johnny Depp’s Popularity Decreased During Trial—Despite Social Media Craze

• From April 8-10, before the trial began, to June 4-5, days after the verdict was decided, the amount of U.S. adults who viewed Depp as somewhat or very favorably dropped to 56% from 68%.
• Baby boomer opinion of Depp worsened the most of any age group, with the amount of respondents who viewed him unfavorably dropping to 37% from 59%.
• Gen X had the next biggest drop from 68% to 58%.
• Millennials viewed Depp favorably more than any other generation, with 72% viewing him that way in June, down from 78% in April.
• Gen Z’s opinion of Depp was the most unchanged throughout the trial—those who viewed Depp favorably dropped only 2% to 70% from April to June.

Are Millennials making a devil's bargain? Normalizing misogyny for one more pirate movie and a chance to extend their childhood just a few more years?

LMAO no one is "normalizing misogyny". But you know what people are trying to normalize? Believing that a woman who has been deemed to have borderline personality disorder is completely innocent in abusing a man and that it's some sort of systemic power structure problem that causes it, rather than that woman just being a psycho bitch who got slapped down by a jury for lying about her ex-husband. Depp may or may not be psychologically abusive, but they could never prove that her allegations were actually true. Then again, if I had to hazard a guess, people of my generation were the most likely to watch the trial, so we'd be the most informed on what was actually going on, while old people don't generally give a toss and zoomers may not have as much of a vested interest.

[Magical Mudcrab]

Impartial jurors

I'm unsure why you're referencing this article when you very clearly did not read it nor fully understand the implications:

California First Amendment attorney Jeff Lewis, founder of Jeff Lewis Law, told Newsweek he was "shocked" to learn that this juror remained on the panel.

"If true, I am shocked that Heard's lawyers let that juror remain. Or perhaps there was an objection that was overruled to that juror," Lewis said.

- Link

The juror was allowed to stay because Heard's lawyers did not raise an objection, and if they did it was an improper one and was overruled. There is nothing to see here. Assuming they were biased against Heard, this is a single juror that would have had to convince every other juror into the unanimous decision of awarding Depp a victory on all counts, otherwise it would have resulted in a hung jury and a retrial.

Regardless, this is a lot of emphasis on something we don't even know affected the trial, especially given the jury wasn't sequestered.

- - - Updated - - -

Are Millennials making a devil's bargain? Normalizing misogyny for one more pirate movie and a chance to extend their childhood just a few more years?

Did you ask a millennial why they thought this way? Did they respond by asking you why you carrying water for a perpetrator of domestic violence, who has a history of abusing people they're in a relationship with, and who went out of their way to lie about the person they abused? It seems as though you're normalizing misandry for one more Aquaman movie with a certain female actress.

[Flarelaine]

Are Millennials making a devil's bargain? Normalizing misogyny for one more pirate movie and a chance to extend their childhood just a few more years?

Tbh I'd have let him off the hook for promising to drop Jack Sparrow. He got cornier with every movie.

[PenguinChan]

Johnny Depp’s Popularity Decreased During Trial—Despite Social Media Craze

• From April 8-10, before the trial began, to June 4-5, days after the verdict was decided, the amount of U.S. adults who viewed Depp as somewhat or very favorably dropped to 56% from 68%.
• Baby boomer opinion of Depp worsened the most of any age group, with the amount of respondents who viewed him unfavorably dropping to 37% from 59%.
• Gen X had the next biggest drop from 68% to 58%.
• Millennials viewed Depp favorably more than any other generation, with 72% viewing him that way in June, down from 78% in April.
• Gen Z’s opinion of Depp was the most unchanged throughout the trial—those who viewed Depp favorably dropped only 2% to 70% from April to June.

Are Millennials making a devil's bargain? Normalizing misogyny for one more pirate movie and a chance to extend their childhood just a few more years?

You’d think how people paint Gen Z, Millennials and somewhat Gen X, that they’d very favorably believe Amber. If the way they gathered their statistics were solid, that’s an interesting turn of events.

[Rennadrel]

I don't really give a shit what you think everyone agrees with you and I am the only one saying what I am saying and pointing out the truth. Nothing in the trial established defamation. The trial wasn't about defamation or money apparently it was about revenge.

No, you aren't "pointing out the truth" because you have no fucking idea what is going on. You have no fucking clue about the evidence submitted for the trial nor the testimony from those who took the stand. You continue to spout asinine, uninformed bullshit.

[Magical Mudcrab]

No, you aren't "pointing out the truth" because you have no fucking idea what is going on. You have no fucking clue about the evidence submitted for the trial nor the testimony from those who took the stand. You continue to spout asinine, uninformed bullshit.

What's super weird is that many anti-Depp people in this thread seem to think that everyone in here is necessarily pro-Depp due to some ingrained misogyny or some personal flaw, when the only reason that many people are on Depp's "side" (i.e.: believe Depp's claims over Heard's) is simply because of what was shown at the trial. If someone came into the thread and said "I looked at what was available in the U.K. trial and I think these pieces of evidence are damning", and it was, people would take it seriously. Instead, we get conspiracies and speculation, and the rare appeal to say that there is evidence which condemns Depp in the U.K. trial, which is never subsequently produced. I don't think the bar is even being set too high, given the unanimous reaction when someone linked the article of Depp going back to court over allegedly hitting a member of production staff on one of his movies years ago was "if he did, he deserves any consequences coming his way".

[Rennadrel]

What's super weird is that many anti-Depp people in this thread seem to think that everyone in here is necessarily pro-Depp due to some ingrained misogyny or some personal flaw, when the only reason that many people are on Depp's "side" (i.e.: believe Depp's claims over Heard's) is simply because of what was shown at the trial. If someone came into the thread and said "I looked at what was available in the U.K. trial and I think these pieces of evidence are damning", and it was, people would take it seriously. Instead, we get conspiracies and speculation, and the rare appeal to say that there is evidence which condemns Depp in the U.K. trial, which is never subsequently produced. I don't think the bar is even being set too high, given the unanimous reaction when someone linked the article of Depp going back to court over allegedly hitting a member of production staff on one of his movies years ago was "if he did, he deserves any consequences coming his way".

I don't think I've seen as many bad takes here as I have on Twitter. Definitely JD is no perfect saint and I'm sure he's been at the least emotionally abusive due to his substance abuse problems, but considering Heard's legal team couldn't actually back up the claims that he was physically abusive, is why he won the trial. That people can't accept what is the truth and reality and think that those supporting Depp are "misogynists" need to pull their heads out of the sand.

Nothing will beat the sheer ignorance of Stanford law professor Michele Dauber calling Camille Vasquez a Pick Me Girl on Twitter the other day, and having the audacity to call other female lawyers who have defended powerful men before the same, was by far and away one of the worst takes I've seen next to Taylor Lorenz's WaPo hit piece article against the lawtube community last week. But hey, why be honest when you can be jealous that a woman who attended a law school so far out of most people's radar in America put on a clinic as to how to cross examine people?

[Kumorii]

What's super weird is that many anti-Depp people in this thread seem to think that everyone in here is necessarily pro-Depp due to some ingrained misogyny or some personal flaw, when the only reason that many people are on Depp's "side" (i.e.: believe Depp's claims over Heard's) is simply because of what was shown at the trial. If someone came into the thread and said "I looked at what was available in the U.K. trial and I think these pieces of evidence are damning", and it was, people would take it seriously. Instead, we get conspiracies and speculation, and the rare appeal to say that there is evidence which condemns Depp in the U.K. trial, which is never subsequently produced. I don't think the bar is even being set too high, given the unanimous reaction when someone linked the article of Depp going back to court over allegedly hitting a member of production staff on one of his movies years ago was "if he did, he deserves any consequences coming his way".

It's projection...They have a huge bias against Depp, or men, in cases like this. So when you are determined what the truth is the only "logical" conclusion why people won't see it your way is because the other side have their biases. Because it's so "obvious my side is the right one".

I don't think I've seen as many bad takes here as I have on Twitter. Definitely JD is no perfect saint and I'm sure he's been at the least emotionally abusive due to his substance abuse problems, but considering Heard's legal team couldn't actually back up the claims that he was physically abusive, is why he won the trial. That people can't accept what is the truth and reality and think that those supporting Depp are "misogynists" need to pull their heads out of the sand.

Nothing will beat the sheer ignorance of Stanford law professor Michele Dauber calling Camille Vasquez a Pick Me Girl on Twitter the other day, and having the audacity to call other female lawyers who have defended powerful men before the same, was by far and away one of the worst takes I've seen next to Taylor Lorenz's WaPo hit piece article against the lawtube community last week. But hey, why be honest when you can be jealous that a woman who attended a law school so far out of most people's radar in America put on a clinic as to how to cross examine people?

That woman, from what I gathered, is a big hypocrite. Talking about how women like Camille undermine women yet she undermines any woman who ever takes a defense case for a seemingly bad person. I haven't heard her say anything about male lawyers taking heinous defense cases though...it's only the women that are at fault for doing so.
That's not talking about the fact that I imagine most defense lawyers who defend the indefensible are doing so because of the right of a fair trial. It's part of the entire legal system, doesn't seem she agree with that though.