Lexicus
Deity
Why wouldn't he be?
Amber Heard vs Johnny Depp
- Thread starter sherbz
- Start date
Why wouldn't he be?
I don't think you're meant to publicly discuss the case until its over?
Snowygerry
Deity
Vanessa Paradis.
EnglishEdward
Deity
I commented yesterday on the jury's decision.
However I was surprised by the verdict. I had expected a US
jury to side with a US woman citing freedom of speech.
The matter will most likely go to appeal.
I think it quite possible an appeal court will in part reverse the decisions.
Meanwhile careers remain in limbo.
However I was surprised by the verdict. I had expected a US
jury to side with a US woman citing freedom of speech.
The matter will most likely go to appeal.
I think it quite possible an appeal court will in part reverse the decisions.
Meanwhile careers remain in limbo.
amadeus
Serenity now
Depp said he wants to get past the trial and have people stop looking at him like a freak.
He also announced that he will spend the $13 million award by building the world's largest toilet paper dispenser out of rare brazilwood and sinking it in the Indian ocean so the whales can clean themselves after they doody.
He also announced that he will spend the $13 million award by building the world's largest toilet paper dispenser out of rare brazilwood and sinking it in the Indian ocean so the whales can clean themselves after they doody.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Generally not but technically speaking his supporters action aren't part of the case, and telling them to stop isn"t actually materially related to what happens in that courtroom, He could have told them to stop without once discussing the evidence, the accusations or any of the actual things happening in the courtroom (which is where "publicly discussing the case" goes).
(That, and "don't publicly discuss the case" is downright farcical when livestreaming the whole thing)
Whether he had the moral and ethical capacity for it...I don't buy one second. Evidence is far greater that this is exactly what his ego wanted.
Last edited:
EnglishEdward
Deity
If Johnny Depp was to give any instruction at all to his supposed supporters and they were to follow it,
his critics would no doubt argue that merely proves that those supporters were under his control all
along, and that their previous hostility towards Amber Heard was under his personal direction.
So there is a very good reason for him to remain totally silent about his supposed supporters' abuse.
his critics would no doubt argue that merely proves that those supporters were under his control all
along, and that their previous hostility towards Amber Heard was under his personal direction.
So there is a very good reason for him to remain totally silent about his supposed supporters' abuse.
And.. he hates is ex partner..I am not surprised he didn't bother to intervein on her behalf.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Bovine manure. The only people likely to use it that way ALREADY think that mob was doing his dirty work, and would see LACK of action as just as much evidence that they are doing what he wants. For everyone else, the idea that "his telling them not to do it proves he's responsible for what they did" will rightly be seen as far-fetched nonsense, and taking the principled stand would have been better PR.
Plus, even if you were right (you are not), it'd only be a "very good" idea from a self-serving amoral point of view that puts your image above anyone else's need.
Any hatred he may feel, reasonable or not, is his own problem, not an excuse for actions or lack of thereof.
Plus, even if you were right (you are not), it'd only be a "very good" idea from a self-serving amoral point of view that puts your image above anyone else's need.
Any hatred he may feel, reasonable or not, is his own problem, not an excuse for actions or lack of thereof.
Last edited:
Deadly Dog
Prince
Here ya go: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...fd876a-02ed-11e9-b5df-5d3874f1ac36_story.html
It's usual for me to totally ignore celebrity news as I really don't like that game but when my pre-teen child and friends started sharing memes about it on their phones I felt I had to educate myself and sent some required reading to my kid with a discussion over dinner about the issues.
We'll have to revisit it now that the verdict has passed.
I don't need to review any evidence to be appalled by what happened. Outside of the trial, a message has bent sent loud and clear: unless you are somehow the perfect victim, dont you dare even suggest someone may have abused you or you will suffer. The trial itself - televised, jurors not sequestered (??!), and a self-contradicting verdict. total farce doesn't prove him innocent don't care if she's not nice she didn't deserve t
So I didn't vote - I'm not "in favor" of one person or the other. But Depp's comments about wanting to kill/rape/desecrate his ex-wife pretty much ruin any work I enjoyed watching him in.
stinkubus
Emperor
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2016
- Messages
- 1,845
IDK, Marlon Brando was a POS but The Godfather and Apocalypse Now are still amazing films.
I guess these types of para-social relationships just don't make sense to me. Would you base a car purchase off the moral character of the persons who assembled it?
I guess these types of para-social relationships just don't make sense to me. Would you base a car purchase off the moral character of the persons who assembled it?
Deadly Dog
Prince
Not sure it makes sense to me either, it's more of a gut reaction, not necessarily consistent Like I said, I prefer not to know much about the private lives of celebrities. Maybe I could get over it with Depp but I'm unlikely to try given the lengths to which he made sure this whole thing was very public.
I agree about those Brando works being amazing movies, and maybe I should say it won't ruin the memory of Depp's movies so much as ruin my desire to watch them again.
As for cars, which I avoid purchasing as much as possible, I wouldn't care so much about the morals of individuals behind making it but the morals/values of the company building it, yes.
It helps that I don't consider either of them losses to their profession.
He wasn't imo good in Apocalypse Now. Let alone that he didn't even bother to read the book (apparently barely even read the movie's script) and showed up obese and indifferent to anything.
I get that a few scenes in that film are highly impressive, but the plot/acting imo wasn't what makes it memorable, and that goes well beyond Brando (Hopper is worse).
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,989
i misclicked in picking heard.
depp is clearly less bad, because he is not a false accuser who took a bad relationship public then lied with malice. depp still doesn't come off as a good person. his doing this trial makes a ton of sense though.
the evidence presented in the trial is extremely relevant to its significance and to the message the trial sends. if you don't "review the evidence" presented, you can't make a functional conclusion about the message the trial supposedly sends.
false accusations of crime are serious. when they are made, the victim is not the accuser.
actually, if she put fake marks on herself to claim that she was physically assaulted, she definitely deserved this trial.
public trials have a long tradition for a reason by the way. hiding the process from scrutiny tends not to give more fair results over time.
?
who made public accusations in the first place? abused people should file police reports asap, not fake injuries that magically go away shortly after and run very public defamation maneuvers.
that relationship was highly toxic generally, but where does the evidence of actual violence lead?
yeah, for how much of a meme the trial turned out to be, this won't change my propensity to watch movies with them much. though maybe i'm a bad example anyway since i rarely watch movies and will struggle to name actors/actresses in moves i enjoy in the first place, with only a few exceptions.
depp is clearly less bad, because he is not a false accuser who took a bad relationship public then lied with malice. depp still doesn't come off as a good person. his doing this trial makes a ton of sense though.
the evidence presented in the trial is extremely relevant to its significance and to the message the trial sends. if you don't "review the evidence" presented, you can't make a functional conclusion about the message the trial supposedly sends.
false accusations of crime are serious. when they are made, the victim is not the accuser.
actually, if she put fake marks on herself to claim that she was physically assaulted, she definitely deserved this trial.
public trials have a long tradition for a reason by the way. hiding the process from scrutiny tends not to give more fair results over time.
?
who made public accusations in the first place? abused people should file police reports asap, not fake injuries that magically go away shortly after and run very public defamation maneuvers.
that relationship was highly toxic generally, but where does the evidence of actual violence lead?
yeah, for how much of a meme the trial turned out to be, this won't change my propensity to watch movies with them much. though maybe i'm a bad example anyway since i rarely watch movies and will struggle to name actors/actresses in moves i enjoy in the first place, with only a few exceptions.
Some of the acting was good, Sheen and the guys on the boat, but Hopper was terrible (but good in an over the top way). Brando just turned up for the fee.
Deadly Dog
Prince
I think we're operating on very different assumptions. Mine are first that the trial is so flawed that the ruling should and no doubt will be appealed, and second that I don't have the time, qualification of expertise to review all the evidence and come up with a conclusion that is in any way valid outside my opinion. I'm certainly not sequesterd and I dont have a judge guiding me through the evidence and the questions that need to be answered by that evidence and the legal points that need to be covered and how to compensate for them. And third, sort of related, is that there are many many reasons why a woman might not go to the police to report abuse besides lying about it, though that is certainly one that is in the realm of possibility.
I also have some questions about how they got lies from that opinion piece I linked. It's all literal truth. It would seem to me that the lies, if lies they were, came before that. But that's not meant as a refutation, that is a serious question. I really don't know enough about slander/defamation/libel to know why Depp sued over that op ed and not whatever it was that Heard said earlier that led to the op ed.
Just my 2 cents, and why the whole thing bothers me, and why I didn't vote but instead chose to post what I did.
Your assumptions?
RobAnybody
Emperor
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2009
- Messages
- 1,945
I feel like the poll would've been better if the OP hadn't included the "Both are losers" or the "I don't pay attention..." options. Because I would *like* to pick options 3 & 4, but that would defeat the point I'm about to make (where I picked one - I suppose "Depp").
I feel like far too many people who might weigh in are options 3 & 4, so forcing anyone who wants to weigh in to pick between Heard/Depp would make for a better poll, instead of giving them a couple outs. Not trying to weigh in on the poll's subject matter with this, but just criticizing the construction of poll itself.
I feel like far too many people who might weigh in are options 3 & 4, so forcing anyone who wants to weigh in to pick between Heard/Depp would make for a better poll, instead of giving them a couple outs. Not trying to weigh in on the poll's subject matter with this, but just criticizing the construction of poll itself.
Apparently Herd is going to appeal the verdict. I guess she has to due to the huge sums involved.. but I can't imagine she wants more attention brought.
Similar threads
