Johnny Depp Wins Defamation Case

[Ken W]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Good job your not involved in the case then. Personally i think he should have been give a bigger pay-out as it was proved she lied through her teeth. Shame she cannot now be tried for lying under oath.

I thought that I was being generous

The real losers in all this are those women who have a genuine case against an abuser but will be thinking very hard about actually taking an abuser to court or even to report abuse to the authorities.

I hope women and some men won't be put off to try and seek redress that they ARE owed.

[nomadking]

Erin Pizzey who can safely be described as having decades of knowledge on the matter.
Link

Fifty years ago, the first sanctuary for "battered wives" opened its doors. It went on to become Refuge, the UK's largest single provider of help for those experiencing domestic violence.
Erin Pizzey, the woman who began it all in a small house in west London, later developed a theory that would lead her to leave the organisation and decry feminism. She now campaigns for men's rights.
...
Ms Pizzey parted ways with the charity in the early 1980s after a disagreement revolving around feminism and her belief it was "anti-man" and forced women into the role of victim.
Her childhood was prominent in her mind when "feminists started demonising all fathers", as she puts it. The memories of both parents "reminded me of the truth - domestic violence is not a gender issue.
"I have never been a feminist, because, having experienced my mother's violence, I always knew that women can be as vicious and irresponsible as men."
Her stance now on domestic abuse is that violence is a family issue, usually intergenerational, and men and women are equally capable and culpable of it.

[Itshim]

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/worl...anada-61633236

If you watched any of it Amber Heard was obviously lying through her teeth throughout the trail. I am happy with the result. Depp should go after Disney and Rowling now for sacking him off due to the lies

The main case was Amber Heards report that she was a victim of domestic abuse and this is where she lost
She counter sued 2 of which were ruled out 1 upheld. Heards claims basically ruined his career

Depp awarded $15 million Heard $2 million so an award of $13 million to Depp

So British court got it wrong . Both can't be right , must trust jury over a trained judge . After all pulling down a statue ( whom ever it is) is not criminal damage according to a British jury .

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Itshim

So British court got it wrong . Both can't be right , must trust jury over a trained judge . After all pulling down a statue ( whom ever it is) is not criminal damage according to a British jury .

Did this trial use evidence that wasn't applied in the UK one? The UK one was solely about what he did or didn't do, whereas this one was about both of them.
IMO the UK decision was wrong on the basis that the evidence presented wasn't known at the time of the alleged defamation.

Originally Posted by Ken W

I thought that I was being generous

Then you clearly have no clue about the case.

[Jaymoss]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Did this trial use evidence that wasn't applied in the UK one? The UK one was solely about what he did or didn't do, whereas this one was about both of them.
IMO the UK decision was wrong on the basis that the evidence presented wasn't known at the time of the alleged defamation.

it is not alleged anymore

---------- Post added at 18:28 ---------- Previous post was at 18:27 ----------

Originally Posted by Itshim

So British court got it wrong . Both can't be right , must trust jury over a trained judge . After all pulling down a statue ( whom ever it is) is not criminal damage according to a British jury .

I would go with a jury over a judge yes

On your logic a biased jury would tend to side with the women wouldn't they? isn't it normally men who are vilified in such cases. The evidence presented in court left me in no doubt Heard was lying and the psychiatric reports explained why she is the way she is. A lot of the evidence was not allowed by the judge in the UK trial if it had been there may well have been a different result

End of the day the only witness Heard had to any assault was her sister and Depp had plenty of witnesses that said differently ie hotel staff who were there at the time of alleged assaults bartenders first responders and on top of that Kate Moss who basically disproved one of the lies outright

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

it is not alleged anymore

---------- Post added at 18:28 ---------- Previous post was at 18:27 ----------



I would go with a jury over a judge yes

My point being that they didn't know that at the time of the defamation. You can't defame somebody, and then start searching for evidence.

[Pierre]

She lied, throughout. That’s it.

Originally Posted by nomadking

My point being that they didn't know that at the time of the defamation. You can't defame somebody, and then start searching for evidence.

Actually you can. If you can prove something you said is true, that’s a valid defence. Whether you had hard evidence at the time of printing is immaterial to the court case, albeit professionally irresponsible on the part of the publisher.

[Itshim]

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

it is not alleged anymore

---------- Post added at 18:28 ---------- Previous post was at 18:27 ----------



I would go with a jury over a judge yes

On your logic a biased jury would tend to side with the women wouldn't they? isn't it normally men who are vilified in such cases. The evidence presented in court left me in no doubt Heard was lying and the psychiatric reports explained why she is the way she is. A lot of the evidence was not allowed by the judge in the UK trial if it had been there may well have been a different result

End of the day the only witness Heard had to any assault was her sister and Depp had plenty of witnesses that said differently ie hotel staff who were there at the time of alleged assaults bartenders first responders and on top of that Kate Moss who basically disproved one of the lies outright

Frankly a US jury is made up of the "simpler" members of the community , who are easily duped . Surggest that you look at the ,can't believe I am saying this , the BBC news web site and the article about why different courts came to different conclusions in the past" we" have always tried for a jury . Look at OJ Simpson

I didn’t follow the detail of the case but the whole being televised live, clipped for Twitter and social media, with fans appearing outside the court was very unedifying.

[Jaymoss]

Originally Posted by Itshim

Frankly a US jury is made up of the "simpler" members of the community , who are easily duped . Surggest that you look at the ,can't believe I am saying this , the BBC news web site and the article about why different courts came to different conclusions in the past" we" have always tried for a jury . Look at OJ Simpson

my decision is from looking at the evidence and watching some of the testimony plus the diagnosis of Heard's mental condition and fake crying which was so obvious it hurt. When you call out a section of society as simpler and then spell suggest "surggest" now that is funny

just for reference I read that and blanket "seeing through" Darvo cases as false is a mistake because what about the time when it actually was them ?

The UK Judge rejecting evidence which the US court saw (and the public) is why I would not trust one man. If pleading not guilty to a crime I would always take trial by jury if it could lead to prison time over just sitting in front of a magistrate

[TheDaddy]

At least she can truthfully say Johnny beat her now...