I followed it a bit, and I followed the one that preceded it in England. Oddly, some evidence that was allowed in England wasn’t allowed in the US, and some evidence allowed in the US wasn’t allowed in England, so a lot of opinions are different based on which trial they paid more attention to.
Basically, they’re both awful people who were regularly blackout drunk/high, and had a mutually abusive, toxic relationship. A lot of the arguing online is about who was the mostest abusive/toxic, partly (imo) based on the parasocial relationship they have with their celebrity of choice and who had the best zingers in court. In the US trial, Johnny Depp was charming in court and had GREAT lawyers, and Amber Heard came across as very fake (like she was performing for the jury) with terrible lawyers. In the England version, Johnny Depp admitted he didn’t remember what he did or didn’t do to her because he was really high and drunk a lot. They both have witnesses with pretty convincing stories. There was also a lot of fighting about who pushed whom down the stairs, who hit whom, who cut whom with a bottle, etc.
TL;DR - They’re both emotionally unstable trash and would be AWFUL to date. You didn’t miss much.
This was very refreshing to read. They are both shitty people and everyone thought that Amber was the one that was the issue. They are both to blame in my views, they are just as bad.
What I hate is that such a case was viable like a fucking reality show. This is the private life of these people and the media just use this as some TV show. Fuck I hate humanity.
I don’t give a shit who was right or wrong. Just that people start taking sides on something that is none of their business to begin with.
The thing with the British trial that a lot of people don’t seem to get is that in that case it wasn’t Depp v Heard. It was Depp v the newspaper that called him a wife beater.
The case was never about if Heards claims were true and Depp actually was a wife beater, it was a bout if the newspaper intentionally defamed him based on info that was available. And because they were essentially just repeating what Heard had said, and had no way to know if she was lying or telling the truth, Depp team couldn’t prove they were intentionally lying to defame him.
I followed it a bit, and I followed the one that preceded it in England. Oddly, some evidence that was allowed in England wasn’t allowed in the US, and some evidence allowed in the US wasn’t allowed in England, so a lot of opinions are different based on which trial they paid more attention to.
Basically, they’re both awful people who were regularly blackout drunk/high, and had a mutually abusive, toxic relationship. A lot of the arguing online is about who was the mostest abusive/toxic, partly (imo) based on the parasocial relationship they have with their celebrity of choice and who had the best zingers in court. In the US trial, Johnny Depp was charming in court and had GREAT lawyers, and Amber Heard came across as very fake (like she was performing for the jury) with terrible lawyers. In the England version, Johnny Depp admitted he didn’t remember what he did or didn’t do to her because he was really high and drunk a lot. They both have witnesses with pretty convincing stories. There was also a lot of fighting about who pushed whom down the stairs, who hit whom, who cut whom with a bottle, etc.
TL;DR - They’re both emotionally unstable trash and would be AWFUL to date. You didn’t miss much.
This was very refreshing to read. They are both shitty people and everyone thought that Amber was the one that was the issue. They are both to blame in my views, they are just as bad.
What I hate is that such a case was viable like a fucking reality show. This is the private life of these people and the media just use this as some TV show. Fuck I hate humanity.
I don’t give a shit who was right or wrong. Just that people start taking sides on something that is none of their business to begin with.
The thing with the British trial that a lot of people don’t seem to get is that in that case it wasn’t Depp v Heard. It was Depp v the newspaper that called him a wife beater.
The case was never about if Heards claims were true and Depp actually was a wife beater, it was a bout if the newspaper intentionally defamed him based on info that was available. And because they were essentially just repeating what Heard had said, and had no way to know if she was lying or telling the truth, Depp team couldn’t prove they were intentionally lying to defame him.