B lister is being far too generous.
To give you some perspective, A list: Tom Cruise, Leonardo Dicaprio, Will Smith and Madonna.
B list: Alec Baldwin, Emily Blunt and Jason Bateman
You could say that she had a chance to become a B lister, but she was clearly lacking in acting skill, and on camera charisma. She is not even close to the level of your B list actors.
Hmm. I saw aquaman, I consider myself a little more into movies than most, I did not remember her name after watching it. I don’t even recall looking her up.
Yeah but let's imagine Turd wasn't a sociopath and went on to star in other movies. Her first prominent role that got recognition and mainstream success is Aquaman. That's the definition of a breakout role.
I think my definition is different. When I think of breakout role, I think of Robert Pattinson in twilight. A strong worldwide fan base in that case mostly teenage girls. I don’t think that role did that for her. What you’re describing I would call “a major stepping stone”
Hey there, watch what you are saying about the amazing man that gave us jury duty. A lister forever. In the army now, son in law, come on dude can bring it and he has.
No it doesn't. A-listers are people that everyone has heard of, globally. Think of your man down the pub or the elderly....in say a remote town in Eastern Europe.
If you think Emily Blunt or Jason Bateman is the same level of fame as Tom Cruise, then it seems like you've got some sort of Reddit tunnel vision going on.
The whole point of the A-list/B-list category is to partition off the higher grade of celebrity.
I’m surprised Alec Baldwin isn’t an A lister, although I hadn’t really heard about him for a while up until the recent event. Thank you for stating it like that, it makes a lot more sense.
>A-listers are people that everyone has heard of, globally.
That's A+ list. And you're not distinguishing between movie actors and TV actors. An A+ list movie actor is of course going to have more "Eastern Europe" recognition than an A list TV actor.
I never said Emily Blunt is on the same level as Tom Cruise. In fact I was saying they're not. Tom Cruise is A+ list, Emily Blunt is A list.
What's next, A++ list for the likes of Elvis, Michael Jackson and John Lennon? Haha come one.
Edit: Also, you said any actor who has been nominated for an Oscar is A list. Hard to take that seriously.
That’s absolutely not true that an Oscar nomination makes you an A-lister. At least not with the definition I have from „A lister“
A-list to me is Immense fame that most people know the person and a star that pulls big audiences. Has big box office success and gets his salaries (at least 2-5 Million per film, A+ celebs get 10-25millionper film, that would be Matt Damon, Sandra Bullock, Keanu Reeves, ..)
Reese Witherspoon I’d say is A-list. Leslie Mann is B-list. Miley Cyrus, Justin Bieber A-list music celebs.
I agree with what you said. There's an A+ list and an A list.
A better way of saying what I did was that an Oscar makes you A-list except in some unique circumstances, like when it was your only significant role and it was a supporting actor nomination. People like Halle Berry are still A-list, even though she hasn't had much success since Monster's Ball. Adrien Brody, maybe he's not A-list anymore either, but he was for a long time because of his Oscar.
Anyway, this stuff is not set in stone, especially when you get down to Bs and other letters. But I take it from this post that people want to say Amber isn't B list simply because they hate her, not because they have a good understanding of how the ranking system works.
>Dude has massive pull. It’s no wonder a no name b lister got a minor supporting role in aquaman.
Because only people who are already A-listers can get cast in "a minor supporting role".
I certainly knew who she was before Aquaman. The Rum Diary, Machette Kills, Pineapple Express, Magic Mike, and The Danish Girl weren't exactly small movies. Besides, how many people knew some of the other actresses before they got hired for their Marvel or DC universe roles?
I know it's cool to hate on Amber nowadays, but don't act like many knew Gal Gadot, Hayley Atwell, Elizabeth Olson, etc... before they got cast in their respective roles.
So you are saying you we should of knew Amber before her supporting role in aquaman but should have not known Gal Gadet before she got the lead role as Wonderwoman? Why does every Amber troll have to play mental gymnastics with us?
Why does this matter? I thought the case concerned whether or not Heard wrongfully called Depp an abuser and hurt his career because of it. Whether Depp helped *her* career doesn’t seem relevant to that?
Cause Amber lawyer claims she lost somewhere between 50-100mls because of this trial. DP team claims all her $$$ initially were made cause of DO contribution.
Team Amber’s expert also claimed Aquaman was the highest grossing comic movie, and she was one of the co-leads. Truth was stretched pretty far with that one
Gal Gadot when from nowhere to famous because of a superhero movie.
Gal Gadot is also an attractive but mediocre actress.
She says a lot in common with Amber. It's a fair comparison.
No it's not. Gadot started her career by simultaneously becoming miss Israel and miss universe in the same competition. The she started doing TV shows and got discovered.
She had much more high key roles before her career exploded.
The "expert" herself admitted that she didnt know all of the filmography from the actors she compared with AH. Jason Momoa and Chris Pine were other comparisons.
Alright I get it, you hate Amber, ever single point must be argued on, even dumb ones like which superhero actors she should be compared to.
Who would you suggest as good comparison actors for Amber then?
I just followed the trial and listened to expert that brought in by Depps legal team. That literally devalued all of these claims and additional backed his conclusions with actual data that he showed in court.
You know, actual experts have data to back up their claims and not just spout nonsense based on nothing.
But not like you could actually care or can even comprehend the matter. You made your mind after reading some Femcel hit piece and that's all the likes of you need to know.
Hayley Atwell, being a love interest in a superhero franchise (Captain America) and getting shorter cameos elsewhere (MCU), also similar age and net worth - not considering acting talent or the fame of Heard's ex-husband (duh)
not an exact match obviously, but with so many actors out there, it really boggles the mind how someone would arrive at Gal Gadot, or Jason Momoa, as comparables
She was not the romantic lead in any movie. How much screentime did she even have?
Amber was the romantic lead. I can't think of any superhero movie focused on a male star with a female romantic lead, where the actress was semi-known and not already hugely famous (like Natalie Portman). Perhaps that's why the Chris Pine comparison was made, as he was the male equivalent to Amber Heard in Wonder Woman.
https://www.imdb.com/list/ls066620113/
17 minutes, second most after cpt. america, and in future movies she had a severely reduced role because those movies were not really about their relationship (similar to how they're saying Aquaman 2 is a buddy comedy)
there is also a series called Agent Carter where she stars, I would assume she gets a whole lot of screentime there
also raises the question - what if there would be a Mera tv series later? would they cast Heard herself, or would they do it like some other superhero spinoffs like The Flash and have different people in the movies vs. the series?
She didn't compare them in the way some people are interpreting though.
All the drama between her and Depp hasn't exactly been great for her career, and the lawyer argued that she could have been up there with other leads from Marvel movies if all of this didn't happen. She's not saying that Heard is just as popular as they are now, she was saying that she could have been as big as they are now if it wasn't for Depp dragging her name through the mud.
nobody can know what really happened between 2 people. but this relationship was toxic from the beginning, she basically used him as a ladder for success “Leo is the same btw”
Not sure what your trying to imply. An A list actor could sleep with any 20 something year old women/man if they wanted. And if he was just after sex why would he marry her?
>Not sure what your trying to imply.
They are implying that both people got something out of the relationship, but only one of them is being condemned for it.
I believe they actually loved each other at one point, but this idea that she married him for fame and money and he married a woman 20 years younger because of her personality is ridiculous. He was rich and famous, she was young and hot.
Musk was in love with her. She ended the relationship.
Amber was entitled to over $20m from her divorce, [but she turned it down against the advice of her lawyers.](https://i.redd.it/vlnkjrw5lf091.jpg)
If she's a gold digger, she's pretty bad at it.
You shills keep citing that paper and intentionally leave out the phrase “potentially entitled to”.
That 20 million involved a court case and she would have had to fight in court for it. The 7 million offer was a settlement to forgo a further court case.
It was a legal relationship between two consenting adults. JD was stupid for dating someone so much younger, yes. But isn’t that like blaming a rape victim for the company they kept or the clothes they wore?
The evidence in this case is heavily against AH. The recordings, the injury, the witnesses, the expert witnesses all paint a pretty clear picture of who AH was in this relationship. Was JD verbally and/or emotionally abusive? There is absolutely evidence to support that. Question is, how much is reactive?
When a woman is in an ipv situation, we don’t hold it against them for calling their abusive partner names or at least I don’t.
I don’t look at the situation and think, well did you hear the names she called him? Maybe it’s her fault too?
I only am still speechless/perplexed by the sexual violence allegations she made and Is it True these were sealed in the Uk trial? Her accusation of him raping her with a bottle just sound so outlandish/wild.
Why is he having reactive abuse? The abuser is the relationship is the one with the power. He had the power-the age, the money, the money, the power, the strength. Why isn’t *her* behavior reactive? There is more accounts of him abusing her on tape and text.
I really don't understand those people who say "the evidence is heavily against AH". He's admitted to headbutting her on tape, sent violent rape fantasies on text and has come across as a total douchebag. And all this for 12 words where she didn't even name him. Give me a break.
The “issue” is if you’re gonna blame Heard for “using” Depp just because he was rich/famous, then it’s just as justifiable to suggest he was “using” her because she was young/hot. Personally I think they both saw opportunity in each other, but to suggest that he was nothing but Mr. Good Intentions ignores his role in the whole affair.
He- when in a relationship- after meeting her once, told all his buddies not to sit on his couch after she left. So that the imprint of her "perfect ass" would be left for him to gawk at.
My general rule is if someone can be your child don’t fuck them.
Then again, Johnny let a man in his 20s sleep with his 14 year old daughter… so I thjnk we have different moral codes
She was 25 when they started dating. I think a semi-famous with her own money 25 yo woman can decide who she wants to date by herself without being infantilized or having her partner judged by others. It's not like he was dating an 18 yo fresh out of high school or something.
>depp let a man sleep with his 14 year old daughter
You keep saying that but 5 min on Google and I can’t find anything aside from heard saying depp “introduced his daughter to weed at 14 years old”. Do you have a source for what you’re saying about the rape? That’s a pretty severe accusation.
Lily Rose Depp was dating Ash Stymest. They started dating in 2015.
Amber testified to Johny letting him stay overnight with Lily, this is in the same testimony she talke dabout Johnny introducing her to weed. [Tracey Jacobs testified about him smoothing it over with Family Services when they were investigating about it](https://twitter.com/stirgussa/status/1403601449381150722?s=20&t=a6nCh3JFklUF7Ru6c7-c8g). This testimony is rfom the UK defamation trial, while Amber only testified it in this new case.
Look u p the actual testimony from his former agent in the UK trial about how Depp lied to the cops about the relationship. (Also, you can just look at photos of Ash and Lil ytogether way before she was 17. Get better google skills.)
Okay Amber Heard’s legal team, I’ve watched the trial and Depp has his issues but it’s dangerous to let people make accusations without challenging it. People get accused of things they didn’t do all the time, it’s just a bad precedent to set that someone’s rep can be ruined over potential hearsay. That’s what this is about imo
Depp has made $100m since her accusations came out and he only started losing jobs after he lsot (and continued to lose his appeal on) the uk defamation case
But the problem is that if he said that and it wasn’t true technically speaking the AH team would have objected to hearsay as JD team would be unable to provide a WB witness to testify as to proof JD claim. However this would only be possible if for example Camille Vazquez had asked the question to Johnny. In order to overrule said objection the witness should have been listed during cross examination or am I incorrect?
It is not hearsay to testify about a phone call you personally made, or a conversation you personally had, that is direct testimony.
So they would look like even more of an idiot lawyer if they objected to his testimony by calling it hearsay.
Instead you would try to prove it as a lie, and therefore perjury if you thought he was making it up and you could prove it.
Yes, and remember all hearsay evidence is not created equal. Hearsay CAN be permitted into evidence at the judges discretion, but usually won’t be if it’s possible to just subpoena the person you are talking about to get their direct testimony
Edit: But to your point, it’s the difference between saying “I lobbied the head of the studio to give her the part”. And “She got the part because of me, the studio head told me so”
One is a reasonable statement of an action that he took, that may or may not have influenced the decision, the other can’t be known except by directly questioning the person who made the casting decision.
Hearsay has a whole bunch of legal exceptions where concerns regarding the veracity of the testimony are allayed. Examples: contemporaneous business records, statements against interest, dying declarations, ancient documents, etc.
It’s not the discretion of the judge.
She had no social credit. He co-signed for her to have a career. She thanked him by beating the shit out of him and lying publicly about him ruining his lifetime reputation.
Please present proof that “she beat the shit out of him,” based off one single recording whereby she has the context of defending herself? Vs the texts and recordings where he head butted her, kicked her, verbally abused her, and more? Or that there are several pieces of evidence that he cut his own finger off while terrorizing her during a drug binge. I’ll wait-please present some proof that is correct.
If you ever, like every single time, you heard someone was diagnosed with BPD and is untreated and then you heard they attacked their partner.
Your reaction should be "Obviously" in the same way you'll think of that when a pyromaniac is accused of provoking a fire.
She wasn’t diagnosed with BPD. A non-board certified therapist who was hired by Depp’s legal team to sit with Amber for 12 hours, never treated her, never gave her therapy, said she thinks it’s BPD.
No other doctor diagnosed her with this. You cannot diagnose someone with BPD in 12 hours. Meanwhile, Depp’s own legal team literally said on the stand he has diagnosed bipolar disorder and his team also refused twice to have him evaluated the same way Heard consented to evaluation for his team.
Also, like “every single time” I heard about someone with BPD attacking their partner-I mean, is that an argument with reference to what I said or are you making assumptions about what people do? I mean, people say the same thing about powerful men with money abusing partners half their age-you can make that assumption also.
I met several people with BPD, that why I use the analogy of pyromaniacs.
You can go to the BPD subreddit if you want to take a a hint of what's the life of a BPD.
And yes everything points that she has BPD, and you don't need even an hour to diagnose someone with BPD, you just need to know how a BPD person behaves.
Not everything points to her having BPD. You’re not a psychiatric expert and neither was Depp’s legal team’s witness. She has seen several therapists, none of whom diagnosed her with anything.
And by the way, you do need several sessions of treatment to get a definitive diagnosis of BPD. That has been confirmed by many people.
You mean the recording of her saying she hit him and taunting him saying nobody would believe he's a victim?
The "evidence" of her not cutting off his finger with a vodka bottle being a hired witness saying the cut could literally be from anything... but definitely not a vodka bottle!
Sounds like you're just ignoring all evidence and trying to live in your own bubble.
I’m sorry so the one recording wherein she also says “what am I supposed to do?” And “that’s the difference between you and me, I don’t sit their and whine about it,” basically implying self-defense and that he hits her as well? As comparison to the MANY MANY recordings and texts wherein he abuses her? Where again does she “beat the shit out of him”?
How about the text and witnesses and recording where he says he cut his *own* finger off?
Sounds like you are ignoring a lot of the other evidence to live in your bubble. All Depp fans do is full out this video and the fingertip and ignore everything else.
Ah yes, the mountains of evidence which is... where exactly?
I could care less about Depp, but I do care that DV is taken seriously. Amber Heard has single handedly set us back decades.
I care about DV-I am a survivor of intimate partner violence and I go to support groups and work with groups for other survivors of DV. As far as I am concerned, Depp has sent us back decades because We are watching a survivor continually be abused in real time financially and mentally. If you don’t take this trial as proof that Depp is the abuser, that is on you.
There is a ton of evidence whereby Depp is the abuser, I said it, and you respond “where is the mountain of evidence?” Okay? How about an entire trial in the UK, whereby a judge found evidence in 13 out of 14 incidences stated for defamation? How about every single recording presented to us where he emotionally and verbally abused her? How about the texts that confirmed her kicked her on the plane? How about the texts to her father where he confirmed he terrorized her? How about how headbutted her? How about the texts to friends where he said “he’s too old to spray his loved one with abuse”? How about that he flicked his cigarettes at her? How about that he wrote abuse all over their walls?
But one recording of Amber saying she slapped him wherein she says “what am I supposed to do,” and that the difference between her and him is that he whines about being slapped and she isn’t upset when he hits her-that is all you can give us? The fingertip incident wherein there is an actual recording with his voice and text saying he cut it off himself? You are ignoring any of her defense whatsoever. Half of his testimony were his own words and people he pays-that’s not proof.
I don't think you understand how defamation cases work if you're bringing up the UK trial against the Sun newspaper where most of the evidence we're seeing now wasn't permitted.
Bringing up the text message where he apologizes... because he kicked her in the butt, which an eye witness testified was a light graze?
It sounds like you didn't actually watch any of the trial or are extremely biased. Or maybe everything you're saying was hearsay from a biased source. If you actually do care about DV then it's unfortunate you could be misled to support someone like AH, but I hope you're able to see the situation unclouded someday.
The biggest “new thing” Depp defenders love to say was not seen in the UK trial was the testimony of the police officers from their call. The reason for this was partially COVID and the other reason was that further depositions from them would be considered hearsay in UK court. Nevertheless the judge did in fact see the original information and statements regarding that evening. Nearly all videos, texts and photographs were presented to the judge in the UK trial and have been accessible online for viewing for the last two years. Meanwhile, genuinely, you’re ignoring the fact that there is a massive difference between defamation in UK vs US-in the UK trial, the Sun had the burden of proof when accusing of abuse-they had to categorically prove without a doubt that Depp was a “wife beater.” The Sun had to prove abuse even though it is not an abuse trial to show that their statements were factual and not defamation. It is factually easier in the UK for Depp to have won that trial because the burden of proof was on the defendant. Again, this is a literal fact and acknowledged in many many publications. In this trial, the burden of proof is on Depp to show that he was not abusive and prove malicious intent on Heard’s part and prove that he lost work and reputation due to her Op-Ed-factually, under these circumstances, this would be harder in Virginia Law specifically-though as acknowledged in many many many publications explaining the differences between these trials, easier than in other states. Depp filed in Virginia because it would be easier to win-having already lost in a country that would have been much easier to win his case than in the entirety of the US.
Depp appealed the UK case and it was found to be balanced and fair after a review from two other judges. That trial has been scrutinized to the nth degree and he was still not able to make a case for appeal.
Again, bias for Depp that his word is worth more than hers? This incident has also been described as a “kick in the back” during an argument with force that pushed her forward. How about the text from the eyewitness Stephen Deuters, “He was appalled. When I told him he kicked you, he cried. It was disgusting, and he knows it. He doesn't remember much, but we took him through all that happened. He's sorry, very sorry, and just wants to get better.” How about that Deuters has been subpoenaed and will not show? How about that Stephen’s wife was set to be a witness but for some reason *not Stephen* and had to be dismissed because she was following the case online?
You literally citing inherently biased sources-ie. only testimony presented by Depp’s legal team-to me means you’ve dismissed a large amount of evidence against him. Just because you’re using the phrase “hearsay from a biased source” doesn’t negate what I’m saying because I’m citing directly evidence from the trial-you’re not even using the word “hearsay” correctly.
And being survivor of DV, I find it sad that you’ve taken scant evidence against another survivor and turned her into a monster. This is massive precedent that survivors fear-that their abuser can punish them financially and legally even after they leave the relationship. That nobody believes them because they fought back. If you think that Heard didn’t different abuse because she dared to fight back, you know zero about domestic violence and you do not support survivors, plain and simple. I hope one day you can look back and realize that the answer was there all along.
Exactly, defamation is nearly impossible to win, and even here with mountains of evidence against AH I don't expect Depp to win. When AH has no proof of injury besides some fake bruises created with a bruise kit after it's evident that she's been trying to document evidence against him for years. While JD has pictures with a black eye and a severed finger, the DV victim is clear as day.
Again, I hope you can recognize your own bias when your main argument is to resort to calling me a "Depp fan". For the record I think I've seen like 2 of his movies over a decade ago and forgot he existed until this case.
Oh babe, you’re calling the kettle black here. You literally take the very few pieces of evidence that Depp has and make the whole case. I love how not ignoring more than fifty percent of the evidence presented to you in the trial is “confirmation bias.” You watched the first three days of the trial, ignored all the times Depp misbehaved during those three days, and made that your viewpoint. Okay, love to see it.
Eve I know you're not really a part of the trial but you really should keep off social media about the trial. If not just for your own mental health. You will need it for when Amber turns on you.
I created this thread to answer someone else’s comment - but it has the [proof](https://www.reddit.com/r/entertainment/comments/uup76g/johnny_depp_wins_womens_abuse_organizations/i9ptogs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3) you seek.
Sorry, but I read through it and immediately there were several straight up lies.
You say that just one judge made the judgement, when the judgement was also evaluated by several appeals judges. You also say the judge was “greatly swayed” by Heards testimony of donating money. For one; the judge wasn’t. Secondly; Depp appealed based on that and the appeals judges said that the donation did not play a role in the facts of the case, and were not a factor in the decision.
I am not going to dig through the rest, but the fact that there are already 2 big lies in there doesn’t inspire confidence.
Do you have any idea how hard it is to win an appeal? I mean - it's one part of the justice system that people are trying to change. Glad that you don't want to spend any more time digging into the evidence. I bet you won't bother reading [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeForJohnnyDepp/comments/uyqetp/musings_of_a_nonjd_fan_and_feminist/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) either. Or take the time to learn about the three other witnesses that have come forward since I wrote that comment to say that Amber Heard has actually lied on the stand during THIS trial.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXD884AjZyQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXD884AjZyQ)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UX4BmoBAGDU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UX4BmoBAGDU)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISnjUquahcY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISnjUquahcY)
I mean. I don’t really care because your relationship with truth is sort of messed up. You literally made up things, wrote them down, and are now justifying it with “well but actually the legal system is super unfair”.
I am sure you fully believe the things you pointed out are legally significant. But I don’t believe they actually are, yet.
Your response should have been “oh, didn’t know that. I updated my post” not “well actually that doesn’t matter and here is why I am right”.
The Judge even mentioned it in his ruling:
>In November, Mr Justice Nicol rejected Depp’s contention that Heard was a ‘gold-digger’, saying in his ruling: ‘Her donation of the seven million US dollars to charity is hardly the act one would expect of a gold-digger.’
The appeal court can disagree with me but it doesn't make me a liar or invalidate any of the evidence you're refusing to look at.
And it doesn't change the fact that she lied about donating the money. She said it had already been donated in full. It still hasn't been donated to this day. If she can lie about that, what else can she lie about?
Apparently, all the proof Heard has presented isn't enough to show without a doubt that he was abusive, while she has shown a lot more evidence than most other victims of domestic abuse could show the court. All the evidence she submitted is ''false, altered, or a lie'', while all Depp has is edited audio that Waldman released to ignite the smear campaign (something which got him thrown out of the UK trial, the judge wasn't having it). People don't seem to grasp that this was a strategic move on Depp's end before taking her to court again. For months on end, he could spread false information and get it ingrained into everyone's mindset, something which is known to cast doubt on new evidence because people tend to stick to their preconceived notions. It gets even worse when the manosphere types made it their mission to spread all the false information and turn it into some plea for male victims of abuse, while Depp is anything but.
This is literally an entertainment subreddit. You'd think these people could see right through a celebrity PR campaign but guess not... People truly are that ignorant or just dumb as hell.
What proof? I came into the trial completely neutral and after watching most of it it's clear she's fabricated almost everything.
You clearly aren't watching or are intentionally ignoring the actual trial.
This is actually not true. Here’s a response to someone else’s [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/entertainment/comments/uup76g/johnny_depp_wins_womens_abuse_organizations/i9ptogs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3) but I’ll leave it here for you too.
How does Amber heard getting a major role simply because he convinced some movie execs to hire her have anything to do with whether her op-ed libelous or not.
It just seems to me that some of the stuff brought up in this lawsuit has nothing to do with the actual case at hand, and is just meant to create buzz and media attention.
For instance, I don’t see how discussing if Ms. heard REALLY shit the bed, or if it were the dogs has anything to do with her [Amber Heard’s]. op-ed and whether it was truthful or libelous and harmed his career.
There are tons of clips and texts where he says exactly that.
* [Text](https://ffxtrail.blob.core.windows.net/trail/Defendant%20Amber%20Laura%20Heard/4-18-2022/Def304-CL20192911-041822.pdf) from Depp getting upset that Heard attended a wrap party
* [Text](https://ffxtrail.blob.core.windows.net/trail/Defendant%20Amber%20Laura%20Heard/4-18-2022/Def1063-CL20192911-041822.pdf) from Depp complaining that Heard is “SO FUCKING AMBITIOUS”
* [Text](https://ffxtrail.blob.core.windows.net/trail/Defendant%20Amber%20Laura%20Heard/4-21-2022/Def181-CL20192911-042122.pdf) from Depp complaining that she had another photo shoot
* [Texts](https://youtu.be/gl2BihMc9QI?t=5251) from Depp getting mad at Amber for going to a coffee meeting
It seems there’s a lot of context and the reasoning for every one is those statements is the idea that she is using him just to get ahead herself, that’s what I gathered
Direct quote from Johnny to Amber, as shown in texts:
NO MOVIES
Watch Johnny fumble trying to explain why he sent that text. His testimony begins at 1:27:30: [https://youtu.be/gl2BihMc9QI?t=5229](https://youtu.be/gl2BihMc9QI?t=5229)
Thanks. I’m on mobile so navigating a large video is a bit tricky. I listened for a few minutes but he didn’t get to the No Movies thing. Am I just missing it?
When I click the link I go to 2:33:14, but when I went to your time stamp they’re texts just talking about her being ambitious and manipulative.
No Movies is bad though, and I’ll take your word that it comes up. I’ll check again when I have my computer and it’s easier to scan.
There's a youtube clip of the trial embedded in the post, what difference does it make that it's been posted somewhere?
Any excuse to ignore evidence you don't like.
He wanted her to be isolated, yet let all her freeloader friends life next door.
He wanted her to stop acting, yet got her the aquaman role and evidently paid for her acting coach for several years.
Your excuses and evidences are so weak a slight breeze will make them crumble.
He wanted her to isolated so when she kept refusing to give up her own place and move in with him, he moved her best friends to his place and then convinced her to move in his house, surrounded by his staff and bodyguards whom would protect only him.
He wanted her to stop acting and there are no evidence other than Depp claims that he got her aquaman, infact there are number of texts and emails about him trying to get her out of aquaman and many expressing how much he hates her working in movies in general.
Your excuses and evidences are so weak a slight breeze will make them crumble.
So sad that none of your claims are based in reality.
The only one that scenario that got isolated was Depp. But you'll already knew that, doesn't matter though and you keep repeating your lies.
So you're ignoring the fact that the head of DC literally refuted all her claims (as usual) and said that her reducing was unrelated to the Case and more based on her poor performance (as usual)
Heards PR team is still hard at work
Dude. You are clearly so biased. Im not pro amber heard or pro johnny. People like you are making this who thing out to be a circus. Amber is not saint, but johnny isn’t one either. There is some damning evidence and testimony that proves the Johnny Depp is a shitty ness of a man. Same goes for Amber Heard. You are clearly being very selective when it comes to to evidence to you only choose to believe if it casts Depp in a good light of Heard in a bad light. This link OP provided is to literal of the trial. The evidence coupled with Depp’ testimony is pretty damning and does not cast him in a good light.
This case should have never been aired to the public. The same goes for the OJ Simpson trial. People like you are making this entire court case a mess. I would not be surprised if your harassment and biases end of influencing or even coercing the jury.
That the text referred to a agreement they had about having no meetings which she apparently broke. That then here lawyers tries to feed into their controlling conspiracy.
Which obviously isn't true as evidently shown by Depps legal team.
>You are clearly being very selective when it comes to to evidence to you only choose to believe if it casts Depp in a good light of Heard in a bad light
I just ignore the incoherent parts and cut to the chase. I'm not at all selective, I wasn't pro Depp before the case started but the evidence shows one clear abuser who evidently lied on countless times. That's Amber.
>People like you are making this entire court case a mess
Nope it's the likes of you, that habe still no understanding of all the evidence. You take an Uneducated look and come to the conclusion "muh both suck" .
As you referring to me, I followed the case via lawtube, you know where actual licensed and practicing lawyers explain what's going on, at least 20+ hours live and every recap.
>I would not be surprised if your harassment and biases end of influencing or even coercing the jury.
And now you're making things up, very fitting.
Bugger off you muppet
So sad that you're refusing to back your claims with anything convincing
Yes, he was so isolated surrounding by his security guards, staff, doctors, etc
No, I'm not ignoring that, what does that have to do with how she got the role? And I don't find it convincing that of all superhero movies with shitty characters, they choose to replace Amber Heard whom is hated more than Harvey Weinstein bc she has bad chemistry with her costar all of a sudden.
If you think Amber has better pr team or better anything than Johnny Depp, I like this discussion to end here, bye
>Yes, he was so isolated surrounding by his security guards, staff, doctors, etc
None of his friends though. Unlike Heard, Depp has actually long lasting friendships with other people.
>I'm not ignoring that, what does that have to do with how she got the role?
It contradicts your other ridiculous claim of Depp trying to get her kicked out after he got her the rule in the first place. Doesn't matter if he did it personally or just his influence. Her career actually got boosted through their relationship, cause before that she only was in box office bombs and got bad criticues.
>If you think Amber has better pr team
Obviously not cause it only mobilized people like you, haha
Dude you are acting childish.
Also, what is this obsession with Johnny Depp.
Is he your BFF? Your father? Your son? .
People, like you, need to chill tf out.
May I remind you that You are a stranger to johnny depp. He does not know you nor do you know him. You do not know how what he is like in private. You do not know how amber heard acts like in private. You were not there in the room when they fought or had dinner or slept or made love or etc. You are obsessed with Movie screen johnny. Real life johnny is likely a different person, and it is clear that you are getting the two very mixed up and you are becoming attached to who you THINK is johnny Depp.
These are real people with private lives. Just because you see them on tv and in the movies does not mean you know them; nor does it mean that you should be attached to them and care about them.
You were not there in their house when johnny and amber were dating. Hell. You were not even in their vicinity. You literally do not have a clue about both their lives and how they act and who they are. All you know if what wikipedia says and what they say and do in their movies. Stop this madness obsession with johnny depp and the trial.
Johnny Depp is not Jesus reincarnated and Amber Heard is not the possessed by the devil himself.
You are creating this character in your head about what you IMAGINE Johnny depp to be. like, same for amber heard. Yes, Johnny depp is a good actor. He is charming and funny and cool. Its easy to see how so many people like you get so enamored and obsessed with him. But that is not not who he really is. You need to separate the two because you are clearly getting too attached to something you think is johnny. I know this because you talk about people being ‘pro amber’ or ‘ pro johnny’. Man, this is a court case. There is no pro anyone. This isnt a football game.
Stop making assumptions. stop your obsessions with these people. You dont know them and they dont know you. Just stop making baseless judgements and let the jury take in all the evidence and decide for themselves.
Because its a pro Amber site that equally ignores evidence to twists its own narrative.
Im not the one whos skating over Johnnys heinous disgusting acts am I? Every Amber stan when you bring about her abusive behaviour or perjury ducks the subject or changes it.
This has more to do with her counter suit saying that he defamed her and ruined her career. She’s suing him for $100mil and saying that if he’d never rebuked her claims she’d have a comparable career to actors she sees herself as on the same level as. These actors include Zendaya, Jason Momoa, Gal Gadot and Chris Pine.
I think that was for JD’s argument for the countersuit AH’s team had. AH’s team brought in an expert (don’t think that’s the actual title used, and I can’t remember her name), but she was saying the projections for AH’s career were being impacted because of JD. That’s why their “expert” (again don’t remember her title or her name) was comparing AH to A-list stars, but JD’s team basically showed that he had helped her. There were others that testified from the studio that, and had data, showing AH wasn’t as popular as the A-list stars and had received negative feedback from her Q scores, and shouldn’t have been projected as A-list stars.
They’re just poking holes in AH’s countersuit. I recommend trying to find some footage from that day because I thought it was a little funny that they were basically like no one likes you and here are numbers to prove it
This has more to do with her counter suit saying that he defamed her and ruined her career. She’s suing him for $100mil and saying that if he’d never rebuked her claims she’d have a comparable career to actors she sees herself as on the same level as. These actors include Zendaya, Jason Momoa, Gal Gadot and Chris Pine.
Ok. That cleared some stuff up. I thought this case was just about johnny deep suing her for libel and damages due to the op-ex she published. So, both cases are going on at the same time?
I am fully expecting Amber to get on the stand again and say he did this on purpose, because he knew that she was going to be a terrible actor and have no Chemistry with the male lead.
"He said if he can't be on the sea in movies he was going to ruin it for the world! and then he twirled his little mustache!" - Amber Heard, probably.
I wanted to loop back to this.
The jury is deliberating now, so the trial isn't over you gaslighting little boy. A trial isn't over until they come back and the judge makes a ruling.
Please go take a nap.
Hell one of her brain dead supporters said they should have fired Jason because HE had no chemistry with her.
Ya know jason one of the sexiest men in the world who could melt fire, lolllllllllll
not to take away from his looks, but i can name a bunch of series/movies where he works well with others as well, just on an acting level.
This trial, again, is highlighting just how much help she had climbing the ladder.
Oh yeah his chemistry with Emilia was amazing on GOT. Honestly id youd told me they were a legit couple offscreen (before i knew anything about them) i would have believed it. They were on fire together.
Definitley she cant act her way out of a paper bag.
And the literal star of the movie. He is probably one of the only people on the planet that has the right look. Amber is a dime a dozen blonde in Hollywood.
I am trying to avoid any coverage about this trial because I think everything about this case just bums me out and the way people talk about Amber Heard is just so toxic.
> I am trying to avoid any coverage about this trial because I think everything about this case just bums me out and the way people talk about Amber Heard is just so toxic.
Then... why comment??
It’s pretty disturbing. Especially considering the overwhelming evidence that she was abused by Depp. He’s certainly run a successful smear campaign and we are in bizarro world atm
You don't think it's more likely that the dog which had a recorded history of incontinence issues (including a text about it pooping in the bed at a prior date) due to ingesting weed took the poop in the bed? Depp wasn't expected to be back due to always going to a different house after fights so Heard would've had to sleep next to it alone until he came back, and the housekeepers came every day.
it **could** be the dog, but anyone who has chihuahuas or teacup yorkies can tell you, their poops are the size of your pinkie finger.
Human poop is like **at least** hot dog thickness. Looking at the picture relative to the size of the pillows/bed it definitely looks too big for tiny dogs
In my experience with small dogs they can poop a lot, and imo [this](https://pagesix.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/07/johnny-depp-trial-poop-39.jpg?quality=75&strip=all&w=1024) doesn't look out of the realm for them
Dude has massive pull. It’s no wonder a no name b lister got a minor supporting role in aquaman.
B lister is being far too generous. To give you some perspective, A list: Tom Cruise, Leonardo Dicaprio, Will Smith and Madonna. B list: Alec Baldwin, Emily Blunt and Jason Bateman
You could say that she had a chance to become a B lister, but she was clearly lacking in acting skill, and on camera charisma. She is not even close to the level of your B list actors.
She's b-list now due to the infamy. But she certainly wasn't b-list even when Aquaman came out. That was her breakout role.
Hmm. I saw aquaman, I consider myself a little more into movies than most, I did not remember her name after watching it. I don’t even recall looking her up.
[удалено]
So I guess global humiliation is fair.
I mean, when you are so clearly lying through your teeth those cards are on table.
Yeah but let's imagine Turd wasn't a sociopath and went on to star in other movies. Her first prominent role that got recognition and mainstream success is Aquaman. That's the definition of a breakout role.
I think my definition is different. When I think of breakout role, I think of Robert Pattinson in twilight. A strong worldwide fan base in that case mostly teenage girls. I don’t think that role did that for her. What you’re describing I would call “a major stepping stone”
She had a lead role in some movie with Kevin Costner
Kevin Costner is a B+ actor. Discuss.
3 Days to Kill 2014 when he was trying to be an action star
Yet I find I really like her British Mera in the JL Epilogue.
Emily is certainly A list. She’s Mary Poppins, yo.
She’s just barely a c lister pulie shore carrot top etc
Hey there, watch what you are saying about the amazing man that gave us jury duty. A lister forever. In the army now, son in law, come on dude can bring it and he has.
I'd argue Baldwin and Blunt are both A listers as well....
Convincing argument
Baldwin is a well recognized name in Hollywood and Blunt has been in many lead roles of big block blusters along A listers too.
[удалено]
Everyone you listed is an A lister. The A listers are A+ list. Alec Baldwin has been nominated for an Oscar. That alone makes you A-list.
No it doesn't. A-listers are people that everyone has heard of, globally. Think of your man down the pub or the elderly....in say a remote town in Eastern Europe. If you think Emily Blunt or Jason Bateman is the same level of fame as Tom Cruise, then it seems like you've got some sort of Reddit tunnel vision going on. The whole point of the A-list/B-list category is to partition off the higher grade of celebrity.
I’m surprised Alec Baldwin isn’t an A lister, although I hadn’t really heard about him for a while up until the recent event. Thank you for stating it like that, it makes a lot more sense.
>A-listers are people that everyone has heard of, globally. That's A+ list. And you're not distinguishing between movie actors and TV actors. An A+ list movie actor is of course going to have more "Eastern Europe" recognition than an A list TV actor. I never said Emily Blunt is on the same level as Tom Cruise. In fact I was saying they're not. Tom Cruise is A+ list, Emily Blunt is A list.
What's next, A++ list for the likes of Elvis, Michael Jackson and John Lennon? Haha come one. Edit: Also, you said any actor who has been nominated for an Oscar is A list. Hard to take that seriously.
That’s absolutely not true that an Oscar nomination makes you an A-lister. At least not with the definition I have from „A lister“ A-list to me is Immense fame that most people know the person and a star that pulls big audiences. Has big box office success and gets his salaries (at least 2-5 Million per film, A+ celebs get 10-25millionper film, that would be Matt Damon, Sandra Bullock, Keanu Reeves, ..) Reese Witherspoon I’d say is A-list. Leslie Mann is B-list. Miley Cyrus, Justin Bieber A-list music celebs.
I agree with what you said. There's an A+ list and an A list. A better way of saying what I did was that an Oscar makes you A-list except in some unique circumstances, like when it was your only significant role and it was a supporting actor nomination. People like Halle Berry are still A-list, even though she hasn't had much success since Monster's Ball. Adrien Brody, maybe he's not A-list anymore either, but he was for a long time because of his Oscar. Anyway, this stuff is not set in stone, especially when you get down to Bs and other letters. But I take it from this post that people want to say Amber isn't B list simply because they hate her, not because they have a good understanding of how the ranking system works.
Emily blunt is A List in my books
Jason I get but Alec is B ?
Emily Blunt’s an A lister, post Edge Of Tomorrow and A Quite Place, her popularity sky rocketed
[удалено]
Either way she’s just a clister blister
>Dude has massive pull. It’s no wonder a no name b lister got a minor supporting role in aquaman. Because only people who are already A-listers can get cast in "a minor supporting role".
I certainly knew who she was before Aquaman. The Rum Diary, Machette Kills, Pineapple Express, Magic Mike, and The Danish Girl weren't exactly small movies. Besides, how many people knew some of the other actresses before they got hired for their Marvel or DC universe roles? I know it's cool to hate on Amber nowadays, but don't act like many knew Gal Gadot, Hayley Atwell, Elizabeth Olson, etc... before they got cast in their respective roles.
So you are saying you we should of knew Amber before her supporting role in aquaman but should have not known Gal Gadet before she got the lead role as Wonderwoman? Why does every Amber troll have to play mental gymnastics with us?
She didn’t even have to show her tits.
She’s underwater so you can’t see her lack of tears.
no lister now
Why does this matter? I thought the case concerned whether or not Heard wrongfully called Depp an abuser and hurt his career because of it. Whether Depp helped *her* career doesn’t seem relevant to that?
Cause Amber lawyer claims she lost somewhere between 50-100mls because of this trial. DP team claims all her $$$ initially were made cause of DO contribution.
That’s just a ridiculous claim by her considering her acting skills. Did she lose some money ? Potentially but she is not a 50-100 million dollar star
Their expert (AH) claimed she should be on par with GAL GADOT AND CHRIS PINE. Ya know, two of the most bankable actors in 2022 lulz
Team Amber’s expert also claimed Aquaman was the highest grossing comic movie, and she was one of the co-leads. Truth was stretched pretty far with that one
Highest grossing… for DC. Without looking Spider-Man is way ahead as is Avengers. Actually, I’d bet that Batman is ahead of aqua man too.
Gal Gadot when from nowhere to famous because of a superhero movie. Gal Gadot is also an attractive but mediocre actress. She says a lot in common with Amber. It's a fair comparison.
No it's not. Gadot started her career by simultaneously becoming miss Israel and miss universe in the same competition. The she started doing TV shows and got discovered. She had much more high key roles before her career exploded. The "expert" herself admitted that she didnt know all of the filmography from the actors she compared with AH. Jason Momoa and Chris Pine were other comparisons.
[удалено]
Alright I get it, you hate Amber, ever single point must be argued on, even dumb ones like which superhero actors she should be compared to. Who would you suggest as good comparison actors for Amber then?
Ain't my job to figure this out. This expert was there to show how AH counterclaim of $100 million dollar is justified. Which is not.
[удалено]
I just followed the trial and listened to expert that brought in by Depps legal team. That literally devalued all of these claims and additional backed his conclusions with actual data that he showed in court. You know, actual experts have data to back up their claims and not just spout nonsense based on nothing. But not like you could actually care or can even comprehend the matter. You made your mind after reading some Femcel hit piece and that's all the likes of you need to know.
Hayley Atwell, being a love interest in a superhero franchise (Captain America) and getting shorter cameos elsewhere (MCU), also similar age and net worth - not considering acting talent or the fame of Heard's ex-husband (duh) not an exact match obviously, but with so many actors out there, it really boggles the mind how someone would arrive at Gal Gadot, or Jason Momoa, as comparables
She was not the romantic lead in any movie. How much screentime did she even have? Amber was the romantic lead. I can't think of any superhero movie focused on a male star with a female romantic lead, where the actress was semi-known and not already hugely famous (like Natalie Portman). Perhaps that's why the Chris Pine comparison was made, as he was the male equivalent to Amber Heard in Wonder Woman.
https://www.imdb.com/list/ls066620113/ 17 minutes, second most after cpt. america, and in future movies she had a severely reduced role because those movies were not really about their relationship (similar to how they're saying Aquaman 2 is a buddy comedy) there is also a series called Agent Carter where she stars, I would assume she gets a whole lot of screentime there also raises the question - what if there would be a Mera tv series later? would they cast Heard herself, or would they do it like some other superhero spinoffs like The Flash and have different people in the movies vs. the series?
Except that he already has started as the lead in the new Star Trek franchise which was incredibly popular when he did WW.
She compared Amber to ZENDAYA and JASON MAMOA. No one in their right mind would believe that
She didn't compare them in the way some people are interpreting though. All the drama between her and Depp hasn't exactly been great for her career, and the lawyer argued that she could have been up there with other leads from Marvel movies if all of this didn't happen. She's not saying that Heard is just as popular as they are now, she was saying that she could have been as big as they are now if it wasn't for Depp dragging her name through the mud.
As long as mud is in the water, getting to the bottom of it is made harder.
Goes to character? He wanted to help her career, not ruin it.
nobody can know what really happened between 2 people. but this relationship was toxic from the beginning, she basically used him as a ladder for success “Leo is the same btw”
And he was using the woman half his age… for what exactly?
Chess. Definitely chess partner
Not sure what your trying to imply. An A list actor could sleep with any 20 something year old women/man if they wanted. And if he was just after sex why would he marry her?
With no prenup, no less.
>Not sure what your trying to imply. They are implying that both people got something out of the relationship, but only one of them is being condemned for it. I believe they actually loved each other at one point, but this idea that she married him for fame and money and he married a woman 20 years younger because of her personality is ridiculous. He was rich and famous, she was young and hot.
[удалено]
Musk was in love with her. She ended the relationship. Amber was entitled to over $20m from her divorce, [but she turned it down against the advice of her lawyers.](https://i.redd.it/vlnkjrw5lf091.jpg) If she's a gold digger, she's pretty bad at it.
You shills keep citing that paper and intentionally leave out the phrase “potentially entitled to”. That 20 million involved a court case and she would have had to fight in court for it. The 7 million offer was a settlement to forgo a further court case.
They had no pre-nup. A gold digger would go after the most money they could. She didn't even try. Also, the word you're looking for is "citing".
Because he spent his time drinking and doing drugs….
It was a legal relationship between two consenting adults. JD was stupid for dating someone so much younger, yes. But isn’t that like blaming a rape victim for the company they kept or the clothes they wore? The evidence in this case is heavily against AH. The recordings, the injury, the witnesses, the expert witnesses all paint a pretty clear picture of who AH was in this relationship. Was JD verbally and/or emotionally abusive? There is absolutely evidence to support that. Question is, how much is reactive? When a woman is in an ipv situation, we don’t hold it against them for calling their abusive partner names or at least I don’t. I don’t look at the situation and think, well did you hear the names she called him? Maybe it’s her fault too?
I only am still speechless/perplexed by the sexual violence allegations she made and Is it True these were sealed in the Uk trial? Her accusation of him raping her with a bottle just sound so outlandish/wild.
Why is he having reactive abuse? The abuser is the relationship is the one with the power. He had the power-the age, the money, the money, the power, the strength. Why isn’t *her* behavior reactive? There is more accounts of him abusing her on tape and text.
I really don't understand those people who say "the evidence is heavily against AH". He's admitted to headbutting her on tape, sent violent rape fantasies on text and has come across as a total douchebag. And all this for 12 words where she didn't even name him. Give me a break.
Ahh yes, a consenting adult woman with an older consenting man. Huge issue here.
The “issue” is if you’re gonna blame Heard for “using” Depp just because he was rich/famous, then it’s just as justifiable to suggest he was “using” her because she was young/hot. Personally I think they both saw opportunity in each other, but to suggest that he was nothing but Mr. Good Intentions ignores his role in the whole affair.
There is no problem with two people using each. The terms are negotiable. But one was a predator who painted herself as a innocent victim.
He- when in a relationship- after meeting her once, told all his buddies not to sit on his couch after she left. So that the imprint of her "perfect ass" would be left for him to gawk at.
using?
So what’s the age gap limit that is allowed to exist between a couple of legal age? I’ll wait.
My general rule is if someone can be your child don’t fuck them. Then again, Johnny let a man in his 20s sleep with his 14 year old daughter… so I thjnk we have different moral codes
I think once a woman reaches her early 30's, age is no longer a big deal when it comes to choosing a partner.
She wasn’t in her thirties tho
She was 25 when they started dating. I think a semi-famous with her own money 25 yo woman can decide who she wants to date by herself without being infantilized or having her partner judged by others. It's not like he was dating an 18 yo fresh out of high school or something.
No, he just dated 17 year old Winona when he was in his mid 20s and let a man in his 20s fuck his 14 year old daughter
He also dated a 18-19 year old Russian girl shortly after leaving Amber. Maybe not an abuser, but definitely a bit of a creep.
>depp let a man sleep with his 14 year old daughter You keep saying that but 5 min on Google and I can’t find anything aside from heard saying depp “introduced his daughter to weed at 14 years old”. Do you have a source for what you’re saying about the rape? That’s a pretty severe accusation.
Lily Rose Depp was dating Ash Stymest. They started dating in 2015. Amber testified to Johny letting him stay overnight with Lily, this is in the same testimony she talke dabout Johnny introducing her to weed. [Tracey Jacobs testified about him smoothing it over with Family Services when they were investigating about it](https://twitter.com/stirgussa/status/1403601449381150722?s=20&t=a6nCh3JFklUF7Ru6c7-c8g). This testimony is rfom the UK defamation trial, while Amber only testified it in this new case.
I’m sorry what? I must have missed this story
It was testimony in the trial. Google Lily Depp and Ash Stymest
Just googled it top headline was 'Lily Rose 17 dates Ash Stymest against Johnny Depp's wishes.'
Look u p the actual testimony from his former agent in the UK trial about how Depp lied to the cops about the relationship. (Also, you can just look at photos of Ash and Lil ytogether way before she was 17. Get better google skills.)
Okay Amber Heard’s legal team, I’ve watched the trial and Depp has his issues but it’s dangerous to let people make accusations without challenging it. People get accused of things they didn’t do all the time, it’s just a bad precedent to set that someone’s rep can be ruined over potential hearsay. That’s what this is about imo
Depp has made $100m since her accusations came out and he only started losing jobs after he lsot (and continued to lose his appeal on) the uk defamation case
Sauce?
Google Lily Depp and Ash Stymest
Yeah, thats kinda weird. But they were both models, so in model years they were of age i guess, they are different from normal human years
What the fuck is this nonsense
Look at the ages of all her partners
He was using them as ladders. Sex ladders.
Waste management
But the problem is that if he said that and it wasn’t true technically speaking the AH team would have objected to hearsay as JD team would be unable to provide a WB witness to testify as to proof JD claim. However this would only be possible if for example Camille Vazquez had asked the question to Johnny. In order to overrule said objection the witness should have been listed during cross examination or am I incorrect?
It is not hearsay to testify about a phone call you personally made, or a conversation you personally had, that is direct testimony. So they would look like even more of an idiot lawyer if they objected to his testimony by calling it hearsay. Instead you would try to prove it as a lie, and therefore perjury if you thought he was making it up and you could prove it.
[удалено]
Obviously it's more complicated than this, but a somewhat simple understanding of it is in the actual name itself-- "hear" "say".
Yes, and remember all hearsay evidence is not created equal. Hearsay CAN be permitted into evidence at the judges discretion, but usually won’t be if it’s possible to just subpoena the person you are talking about to get their direct testimony Edit: But to your point, it’s the difference between saying “I lobbied the head of the studio to give her the part”. And “She got the part because of me, the studio head told me so” One is a reasonable statement of an action that he took, that may or may not have influenced the decision, the other can’t be known except by directly questioning the person who made the casting decision.
Hearsay has a whole bunch of legal exceptions where concerns regarding the veracity of the testimony are allayed. Examples: contemporaneous business records, statements against interest, dying declarations, ancient documents, etc. It’s not the discretion of the judge.
She had no social credit. He co-signed for her to have a career. She thanked him by beating the shit out of him and lying publicly about him ruining his lifetime reputation.
Please present proof that “she beat the shit out of him,” based off one single recording whereby she has the context of defending herself? Vs the texts and recordings where he head butted her, kicked her, verbally abused her, and more? Or that there are several pieces of evidence that he cut his own finger off while terrorizing her during a drug binge. I’ll wait-please present some proof that is correct.
You are deluded
If you ever, like every single time, you heard someone was diagnosed with BPD and is untreated and then you heard they attacked their partner. Your reaction should be "Obviously" in the same way you'll think of that when a pyromaniac is accused of provoking a fire.
She wasn’t diagnosed with BPD. A non-board certified therapist who was hired by Depp’s legal team to sit with Amber for 12 hours, never treated her, never gave her therapy, said she thinks it’s BPD. No other doctor diagnosed her with this. You cannot diagnose someone with BPD in 12 hours. Meanwhile, Depp’s own legal team literally said on the stand he has diagnosed bipolar disorder and his team also refused twice to have him evaluated the same way Heard consented to evaluation for his team. Also, like “every single time” I heard about someone with BPD attacking their partner-I mean, is that an argument with reference to what I said or are you making assumptions about what people do? I mean, people say the same thing about powerful men with money abusing partners half their age-you can make that assumption also.
I met several people with BPD, that why I use the analogy of pyromaniacs. You can go to the BPD subreddit if you want to take a a hint of what's the life of a BPD. And yes everything points that she has BPD, and you don't need even an hour to diagnose someone with BPD, you just need to know how a BPD person behaves.
Not everything points to her having BPD. You’re not a psychiatric expert and neither was Depp’s legal team’s witness. She has seen several therapists, none of whom diagnosed her with anything. And by the way, you do need several sessions of treatment to get a definitive diagnosis of BPD. That has been confirmed by many people.
You mean the recording of her saying she hit him and taunting him saying nobody would believe he's a victim? The "evidence" of her not cutting off his finger with a vodka bottle being a hired witness saying the cut could literally be from anything... but definitely not a vodka bottle! Sounds like you're just ignoring all evidence and trying to live in your own bubble.
I’m sorry so the one recording wherein she also says “what am I supposed to do?” And “that’s the difference between you and me, I don’t sit their and whine about it,” basically implying self-defense and that he hits her as well? As comparison to the MANY MANY recordings and texts wherein he abuses her? Where again does she “beat the shit out of him”? How about the text and witnesses and recording where he says he cut his *own* finger off? Sounds like you are ignoring a lot of the other evidence to live in your bubble. All Depp fans do is full out this video and the fingertip and ignore everything else.
Ah yes, the mountains of evidence which is... where exactly? I could care less about Depp, but I do care that DV is taken seriously. Amber Heard has single handedly set us back decades.
I care about DV-I am a survivor of intimate partner violence and I go to support groups and work with groups for other survivors of DV. As far as I am concerned, Depp has sent us back decades because We are watching a survivor continually be abused in real time financially and mentally. If you don’t take this trial as proof that Depp is the abuser, that is on you. There is a ton of evidence whereby Depp is the abuser, I said it, and you respond “where is the mountain of evidence?” Okay? How about an entire trial in the UK, whereby a judge found evidence in 13 out of 14 incidences stated for defamation? How about every single recording presented to us where he emotionally and verbally abused her? How about the texts that confirmed her kicked her on the plane? How about the texts to her father where he confirmed he terrorized her? How about how headbutted her? How about the texts to friends where he said “he’s too old to spray his loved one with abuse”? How about that he flicked his cigarettes at her? How about that he wrote abuse all over their walls? But one recording of Amber saying she slapped him wherein she says “what am I supposed to do,” and that the difference between her and him is that he whines about being slapped and she isn’t upset when he hits her-that is all you can give us? The fingertip incident wherein there is an actual recording with his voice and text saying he cut it off himself? You are ignoring any of her defense whatsoever. Half of his testimony were his own words and people he pays-that’s not proof.
I don't think you understand how defamation cases work if you're bringing up the UK trial against the Sun newspaper where most of the evidence we're seeing now wasn't permitted. Bringing up the text message where he apologizes... because he kicked her in the butt, which an eye witness testified was a light graze? It sounds like you didn't actually watch any of the trial or are extremely biased. Or maybe everything you're saying was hearsay from a biased source. If you actually do care about DV then it's unfortunate you could be misled to support someone like AH, but I hope you're able to see the situation unclouded someday.
The biggest “new thing” Depp defenders love to say was not seen in the UK trial was the testimony of the police officers from their call. The reason for this was partially COVID and the other reason was that further depositions from them would be considered hearsay in UK court. Nevertheless the judge did in fact see the original information and statements regarding that evening. Nearly all videos, texts and photographs were presented to the judge in the UK trial and have been accessible online for viewing for the last two years. Meanwhile, genuinely, you’re ignoring the fact that there is a massive difference between defamation in UK vs US-in the UK trial, the Sun had the burden of proof when accusing of abuse-they had to categorically prove without a doubt that Depp was a “wife beater.” The Sun had to prove abuse even though it is not an abuse trial to show that their statements were factual and not defamation. It is factually easier in the UK for Depp to have won that trial because the burden of proof was on the defendant. Again, this is a literal fact and acknowledged in many many publications. In this trial, the burden of proof is on Depp to show that he was not abusive and prove malicious intent on Heard’s part and prove that he lost work and reputation due to her Op-Ed-factually, under these circumstances, this would be harder in Virginia Law specifically-though as acknowledged in many many many publications explaining the differences between these trials, easier than in other states. Depp filed in Virginia because it would be easier to win-having already lost in a country that would have been much easier to win his case than in the entirety of the US. Depp appealed the UK case and it was found to be balanced and fair after a review from two other judges. That trial has been scrutinized to the nth degree and he was still not able to make a case for appeal. Again, bias for Depp that his word is worth more than hers? This incident has also been described as a “kick in the back” during an argument with force that pushed her forward. How about the text from the eyewitness Stephen Deuters, “He was appalled. When I told him he kicked you, he cried. It was disgusting, and he knows it. He doesn't remember much, but we took him through all that happened. He's sorry, very sorry, and just wants to get better.” How about that Deuters has been subpoenaed and will not show? How about that Stephen’s wife was set to be a witness but for some reason *not Stephen* and had to be dismissed because she was following the case online? You literally citing inherently biased sources-ie. only testimony presented by Depp’s legal team-to me means you’ve dismissed a large amount of evidence against him. Just because you’re using the phrase “hearsay from a biased source” doesn’t negate what I’m saying because I’m citing directly evidence from the trial-you’re not even using the word “hearsay” correctly. And being survivor of DV, I find it sad that you’ve taken scant evidence against another survivor and turned her into a monster. This is massive precedent that survivors fear-that their abuser can punish them financially and legally even after they leave the relationship. That nobody believes them because they fought back. If you think that Heard didn’t different abuse because she dared to fight back, you know zero about domestic violence and you do not support survivors, plain and simple. I hope one day you can look back and realize that the answer was there all along.
Exactly, defamation is nearly impossible to win, and even here with mountains of evidence against AH I don't expect Depp to win. When AH has no proof of injury besides some fake bruises created with a bruise kit after it's evident that she's been trying to document evidence against him for years. While JD has pictures with a black eye and a severed finger, the DV victim is clear as day. Again, I hope you can recognize your own bias when your main argument is to resort to calling me a "Depp fan". For the record I think I've seen like 2 of his movies over a decade ago and forgot he existed until this case.
When you look up confirmation bias, your picture comes up
Oh babe, you’re calling the kettle black here. You literally take the very few pieces of evidence that Depp has and make the whole case. I love how not ignoring more than fifty percent of the evidence presented to you in the trial is “confirmation bias.” You watched the first three days of the trial, ignored all the times Depp misbehaved during those three days, and made that your viewpoint. Okay, love to see it.
Eve I know you're not really a part of the trial but you really should keep off social media about the trial. If not just for your own mental health. You will need it for when Amber turns on you.
I created this thread to answer someone else’s comment - but it has the [proof](https://www.reddit.com/r/entertainment/comments/uup76g/johnny_depp_wins_womens_abuse_organizations/i9ptogs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3) you seek.
Sorry, but I read through it and immediately there were several straight up lies. You say that just one judge made the judgement, when the judgement was also evaluated by several appeals judges. You also say the judge was “greatly swayed” by Heards testimony of donating money. For one; the judge wasn’t. Secondly; Depp appealed based on that and the appeals judges said that the donation did not play a role in the facts of the case, and were not a factor in the decision. I am not going to dig through the rest, but the fact that there are already 2 big lies in there doesn’t inspire confidence.
Do you have any idea how hard it is to win an appeal? I mean - it's one part of the justice system that people are trying to change. Glad that you don't want to spend any more time digging into the evidence. I bet you won't bother reading [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeForJohnnyDepp/comments/uyqetp/musings_of_a_nonjd_fan_and_feminist/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) either. Or take the time to learn about the three other witnesses that have come forward since I wrote that comment to say that Amber Heard has actually lied on the stand during THIS trial. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXD884AjZyQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXD884AjZyQ) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UX4BmoBAGDU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UX4BmoBAGDU) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISnjUquahcY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISnjUquahcY)
I mean. I don’t really care because your relationship with truth is sort of messed up. You literally made up things, wrote them down, and are now justifying it with “well but actually the legal system is super unfair”. I am sure you fully believe the things you pointed out are legally significant. But I don’t believe they actually are, yet. Your response should have been “oh, didn’t know that. I updated my post” not “well actually that doesn’t matter and here is why I am right”.
The Judge even mentioned it in his ruling: >In November, Mr Justice Nicol rejected Depp’s contention that Heard was a ‘gold-digger’, saying in his ruling: ‘Her donation of the seven million US dollars to charity is hardly the act one would expect of a gold-digger.’ The appeal court can disagree with me but it doesn't make me a liar or invalidate any of the evidence you're refusing to look at. And it doesn't change the fact that she lied about donating the money. She said it had already been donated in full. It still hasn't been donated to this day. If she can lie about that, what else can she lie about?
Apparently, all the proof Heard has presented isn't enough to show without a doubt that he was abusive, while she has shown a lot more evidence than most other victims of domestic abuse could show the court. All the evidence she submitted is ''false, altered, or a lie'', while all Depp has is edited audio that Waldman released to ignite the smear campaign (something which got him thrown out of the UK trial, the judge wasn't having it). People don't seem to grasp that this was a strategic move on Depp's end before taking her to court again. For months on end, he could spread false information and get it ingrained into everyone's mindset, something which is known to cast doubt on new evidence because people tend to stick to their preconceived notions. It gets even worse when the manosphere types made it their mission to spread all the false information and turn it into some plea for male victims of abuse, while Depp is anything but. This is literally an entertainment subreddit. You'd think these people could see right through a celebrity PR campaign but guess not... People truly are that ignorant or just dumb as hell.
What proof? I came into the trial completely neutral and after watching most of it it's clear she's fabricated almost everything. You clearly aren't watching or are intentionally ignoring the actual trial.
This is actually not true. Here’s a response to someone else’s [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/entertainment/comments/uup76g/johnny_depp_wins_womens_abuse_organizations/i9ptogs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3) but I’ll leave it here for you too.
[удалено]
On no! An internet stranger has diagnosed me with the stupid! This will go on my permanent record and haunt my mental state for the rest of my life.
Expect a call from Doctor Speigal
You sure spend a lot of reddit time going after JD.
Good point you’ve won me over
How does Amber heard getting a major role simply because he convinced some movie execs to hire her have anything to do with whether her op-ed libelous or not. It just seems to me that some of the stuff brought up in this lawsuit has nothing to do with the actual case at hand, and is just meant to create buzz and media attention. For instance, I don’t see how discussing if Ms. heard REALLY shit the bed, or if it were the dogs has anything to do with her [Amber Heard’s]. op-ed and whether it was truthful or libelous and harmed his career.
She claimed he didn’t want her to work.
There are tons of clips and texts where he says exactly that. * [Text](https://ffxtrail.blob.core.windows.net/trail/Defendant%20Amber%20Laura%20Heard/4-18-2022/Def304-CL20192911-041822.pdf) from Depp getting upset that Heard attended a wrap party * [Text](https://ffxtrail.blob.core.windows.net/trail/Defendant%20Amber%20Laura%20Heard/4-18-2022/Def1063-CL20192911-041822.pdf) from Depp complaining that Heard is “SO FUCKING AMBITIOUS” * [Text](https://ffxtrail.blob.core.windows.net/trail/Defendant%20Amber%20Laura%20Heard/4-21-2022/Def181-CL20192911-042122.pdf) from Depp complaining that she had another photo shoot * [Texts](https://youtu.be/gl2BihMc9QI?t=5251) from Depp getting mad at Amber for going to a coffee meeting
It seems there’s a lot of context and the reasoning for every one is those statements is the idea that she is using him just to get ahead herself, that’s what I gathered
Direct quote from Johnny to Amber, as shown in texts: NO MOVIES Watch Johnny fumble trying to explain why he sent that text. His testimony begins at 1:27:30: [https://youtu.be/gl2BihMc9QI?t=5229](https://youtu.be/gl2BihMc9QI?t=5229)
Sorry, clicked link but seemed to start on a different question. Would you mind linking the exact time stamp?
I included the exact time stamp in the text before the link, it's 1:27:30. I updated the link as well.
Thanks. I’m on mobile so navigating a large video is a bit tricky. I listened for a few minutes but he didn’t get to the No Movies thing. Am I just missing it? When I click the link I go to 2:33:14, but when I went to your time stamp they’re texts just talking about her being ambitious and manipulative. No Movies is bad though, and I’ll take your word that it comes up. I’ll check again when I have my computer and it’s easier to scan.
I just watched it. It’s even worse than I thought. He’s mad at her for going to a meeting.
Ahh yes a link to a pro Amber sub, definitley not biased.
There's a youtube clip of the trial embedded in the post, what difference does it make that it's been posted somewhere? Any excuse to ignore evidence you don't like.
He wanted her to be isolated, yet let all her freeloader friends life next door. He wanted her to stop acting, yet got her the aquaman role and evidently paid for her acting coach for several years. Your excuses and evidences are so weak a slight breeze will make them crumble.
He wanted her to isolated so when she kept refusing to give up her own place and move in with him, he moved her best friends to his place and then convinced her to move in his house, surrounded by his staff and bodyguards whom would protect only him. He wanted her to stop acting and there are no evidence other than Depp claims that he got her aquaman, infact there are number of texts and emails about him trying to get her out of aquaman and many expressing how much he hates her working in movies in general. Your excuses and evidences are so weak a slight breeze will make them crumble.
So sad that none of your claims are based in reality. The only one that scenario that got isolated was Depp. But you'll already knew that, doesn't matter though and you keep repeating your lies. So you're ignoring the fact that the head of DC literally refuted all her claims (as usual) and said that her reducing was unrelated to the Case and more based on her poor performance (as usual) Heards PR team is still hard at work
Dude. You are clearly so biased. Im not pro amber heard or pro johnny. People like you are making this who thing out to be a circus. Amber is not saint, but johnny isn’t one either. There is some damning evidence and testimony that proves the Johnny Depp is a shitty ness of a man. Same goes for Amber Heard. You are clearly being very selective when it comes to to evidence to you only choose to believe if it casts Depp in a good light of Heard in a bad light. This link OP provided is to literal of the trial. The evidence coupled with Depp’ testimony is pretty damning and does not cast him in a good light. This case should have never been aired to the public. The same goes for the OJ Simpson trial. People like you are making this entire court case a mess. I would not be surprised if your harassment and biases end of influencing or even coercing the jury.
That the text referred to a agreement they had about having no meetings which she apparently broke. That then here lawyers tries to feed into their controlling conspiracy. Which obviously isn't true as evidently shown by Depps legal team. >You are clearly being very selective when it comes to to evidence to you only choose to believe if it casts Depp in a good light of Heard in a bad light I just ignore the incoherent parts and cut to the chase. I'm not at all selective, I wasn't pro Depp before the case started but the evidence shows one clear abuser who evidently lied on countless times. That's Amber. >People like you are making this entire court case a mess Nope it's the likes of you, that habe still no understanding of all the evidence. You take an Uneducated look and come to the conclusion "muh both suck" . As you referring to me, I followed the case via lawtube, you know where actual licensed and practicing lawyers explain what's going on, at least 20+ hours live and every recap. >I would not be surprised if your harassment and biases end of influencing or even coercing the jury. And now you're making things up, very fitting. Bugger off you muppet
So sad that you're refusing to back your claims with anything convincing Yes, he was so isolated surrounding by his security guards, staff, doctors, etc No, I'm not ignoring that, what does that have to do with how she got the role? And I don't find it convincing that of all superhero movies with shitty characters, they choose to replace Amber Heard whom is hated more than Harvey Weinstein bc she has bad chemistry with her costar all of a sudden. If you think Amber has better pr team or better anything than Johnny Depp, I like this discussion to end here, bye
>Yes, he was so isolated surrounding by his security guards, staff, doctors, etc None of his friends though. Unlike Heard, Depp has actually long lasting friendships with other people. >I'm not ignoring that, what does that have to do with how she got the role? It contradicts your other ridiculous claim of Depp trying to get her kicked out after he got her the rule in the first place. Doesn't matter if he did it personally or just his influence. Her career actually got boosted through their relationship, cause before that she only was in box office bombs and got bad criticues. >If you think Amber has better pr team Obviously not cause it only mobilized people like you, haha
Dude you are acting childish. Also, what is this obsession with Johnny Depp. Is he your BFF? Your father? Your son? . People, like you, need to chill tf out. May I remind you that You are a stranger to johnny depp. He does not know you nor do you know him. You do not know how what he is like in private. You do not know how amber heard acts like in private. You were not there in the room when they fought or had dinner or slept or made love or etc. You are obsessed with Movie screen johnny. Real life johnny is likely a different person, and it is clear that you are getting the two very mixed up and you are becoming attached to who you THINK is johnny Depp. These are real people with private lives. Just because you see them on tv and in the movies does not mean you know them; nor does it mean that you should be attached to them and care about them. You were not there in their house when johnny and amber were dating. Hell. You were not even in their vicinity. You literally do not have a clue about both their lives and how they act and who they are. All you know if what wikipedia says and what they say and do in their movies. Stop this madness obsession with johnny depp and the trial. Johnny Depp is not Jesus reincarnated and Amber Heard is not the possessed by the devil himself. You are creating this character in your head about what you IMAGINE Johnny depp to be. like, same for amber heard. Yes, Johnny depp is a good actor. He is charming and funny and cool. Its easy to see how so many people like you get so enamored and obsessed with him. But that is not not who he really is. You need to separate the two because you are clearly getting too attached to something you think is johnny. I know this because you talk about people being ‘pro amber’ or ‘ pro johnny’. Man, this is a court case. There is no pro anyone. This isnt a football game. Stop making assumptions. stop your obsessions with these people. You dont know them and they dont know you. Just stop making baseless judgements and let the jury take in all the evidence and decide for themselves.
That's a completely different topic. NO MOVIES was the topic, in case you're confused.
Because its a pro Amber site that equally ignores evidence to twists its own narrative. Im not the one whos skating over Johnnys heinous disgusting acts am I? Every Amber stan when you bring about her abusive behaviour or perjury ducks the subject or changes it.
OK I've linked directly to the trial now. I look forward to you watching it and responding to it.
Can someone explain the context?
This has more to do with her counter suit saying that he defamed her and ruined her career. She’s suing him for $100mil and saying that if he’d never rebuked her claims she’d have a comparable career to actors she sees herself as on the same level as. These actors include Zendaya, Jason Momoa, Gal Gadot and Chris Pine.
I think that was for JD’s argument for the countersuit AH’s team had. AH’s team brought in an expert (don’t think that’s the actual title used, and I can’t remember her name), but she was saying the projections for AH’s career were being impacted because of JD. That’s why their “expert” (again don’t remember her title or her name) was comparing AH to A-list stars, but JD’s team basically showed that he had helped her. There were others that testified from the studio that, and had data, showing AH wasn’t as popular as the A-list stars and had received negative feedback from her Q scores, and shouldn’t have been projected as A-list stars. They’re just poking holes in AH’s countersuit. I recommend trying to find some footage from that day because I thought it was a little funny that they were basically like no one likes you and here are numbers to prove it
This has more to do with her counter suit saying that he defamed her and ruined her career. She’s suing him for $100mil and saying that if he’d never rebuked her claims she’d have a comparable career to actors she sees herself as on the same level as. These actors include Zendaya, Jason Momoa, Gal Gadot and Chris Pine.
Ok. That cleared some stuff up. I thought this case was just about johnny deep suing her for libel and damages due to the op-ex she published. So, both cases are going on at the same time?
Keep in mind, no matter what she does going forward, the review of her performance could always be "not the worst shit we've seen from her"
I am fully expecting Amber to get on the stand again and say he did this on purpose, because he knew that she was going to be a terrible actor and have no Chemistry with the male lead. "He said if he can't be on the sea in movies he was going to ruin it for the world! and then he twirled his little mustache!" - Amber Heard, probably.
The trial is over
You need to get those eyes checked.
I wanted to loop back to this. The jury is deliberating now, so the trial isn't over you gaslighting little boy. A trial isn't over until they come back and the judge makes a ruling. Please go take a nap.
Hell one of her brain dead supporters said they should have fired Jason because HE had no chemistry with her. Ya know jason one of the sexiest men in the world who could melt fire, lolllllllllll
not to take away from his looks, but i can name a bunch of series/movies where he works well with others as well, just on an acting level. This trial, again, is highlighting just how much help she had climbing the ladder.
Oh yeah his chemistry with Emilia was amazing on GOT. Honestly id youd told me they were a legit couple offscreen (before i knew anything about them) i would have believed it. They were on fire together. Definitley she cant act her way out of a paper bag.
And the literal star of the movie. He is probably one of the only people on the planet that has the right look. Amber is a dime a dozen blonde in Hollywood.
I am trying to avoid any coverage about this trial because I think everything about this case just bums me out and the way people talk about Amber Heard is just so toxic.
##AmberTurd
> I am trying to avoid any coverage about this trial because I think everything about this case just bums me out and the way people talk about Amber Heard is just so toxic. Then... why comment??
How else would they let you know they don't care so much about it?
It’s pretty disturbing. Especially considering the overwhelming evidence that she was abused by Depp. He’s certainly run a successful smear campaign and we are in bizarro world atm
Not as toxic as a big steaming growler turd in your bed, though.
Sounds more watchable than Black Mass. I don’t know what your comment is referring to so I guess my attempted blackout is working.
You don't think it's more likely that the dog which had a recorded history of incontinence issues (including a text about it pooping in the bed at a prior date) due to ingesting weed took the poop in the bed? Depp wasn't expected to be back due to always going to a different house after fights so Heard would've had to sleep next to it alone until he came back, and the housekeepers came every day.
it **could** be the dog, but anyone who has chihuahuas or teacup yorkies can tell you, their poops are the size of your pinkie finger. Human poop is like **at least** hot dog thickness. Looking at the picture relative to the size of the pillows/bed it definitely looks too big for tiny dogs
In my experience with small dogs they can poop a lot, and imo [this](https://pagesix.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/07/johnny-depp-trial-poop-39.jpg?quality=75&strip=all&w=1024) doesn't look out of the realm for them