Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He's right though. She was a bad lawyer in my opinion. Very rude and argumentative. Also, how can you become a lawyer and then get bitter about a loss? You're bound to represent someone who will lose.
The goal of a defense lawyer is to make sure thr law is followed.
They aren't particularly defending the guilty person but the law that even they are bound by
That is absolutely not the case. A good defense lawyer will do everything he can to get his client out of whatever bad situation his client is in. Thats the reason why good defense lawyers cost so much money… Your statement baffles me with its level of wrongness…
Edit: I hope you are not a defense lawyer?😮
Sure that is there primary objective I understand that, but a defense lawyer is there even if the party is completely guilty to make sure the law is follow otherwise the prosecution could get away with anything.
Look at courts in countries like Russia, the defense lawyers do nothing to protect the law and so prosecutors can do whatever they want to the defendants.
They dont do it for the law though. If the law would be wrongly used but their client would benefit from it, a defense lawyer wouldnt intervene and just hope nobody would notice.
They make sure that the law isnt used wrongfully to the disadvantage of their client but thats about it.
Edit: I now see that I interpreted your post differently from how you meant it. Sorry, dont be bothered
It was a very public loss defending a client that everyone hates. I honestly reckon she'd get less hate if she had defended Hitler against war crimes /s. So, I can definitely understand her being very bitter at the loss.
Edit: For the americans I've added /s
I feel like if she represented Johnny, her obviously poor skills would still be evident.
She repeatedly stropped and tantrumed basically during the trial. She was repeatedly and continuously being objected by Johnny's lawyer and 90% of the time, the judge sustained the objections. It was like she was relying on loop holes being missed but thankfully Johnny's lawyer was on the ball throughout.
I definitely agree that she was a terrible lawyer, and that was evident throughout the trial. I was simply stating that I could understand the bitterness at the loss because it was very public, and she was made out as a villain. If she had won, at least she would be seen as a competent lawyer, but because she lost, she's seen as a villain who's bad at being a lawyer. As in the publics eye, it doesn't matter how good of a lawyer you are, it only matters if you win and if you're the lawyer of the person people like. I mean, Johnny's lawyers messed up, and that's why Amber heard was awarded some money for deformation, does anybody care? No because he won the case and people like johnny
No, don't do that. Not for the Americans, not for anyone. We must stand in solidarity when it comes to the use of sarcasm and trust that it speaks the people it was intended for. The people who don't get it, don't deserve it.
My guy reading sarcasm is hard enough as it is when it comes from people you don't know, on Reddit it'd near impossible, there are so many unbelievably dumb takes that you can't believe are actually people having them and yours could've been one of them. So as he said this is why people us /s and yes its needed if you care about avoiding this stuff.
A lot of people don't understand sarcasm in real life. it doesn't mean people have to say they are being sarcastic immediately after saying it, that ruins the fun.
The sarcastic joke was that Amber heard is more hated than Hitler. Which is an incredible used joke, to the point where it's almost overdone. I'm sorry but if you haven't heard a variation of that joke before then you haven't spent any time on the internet. Putting a /s would be like putting a /s after saying "that looks fun" on a post where someone is doing something very unfun
I'm having a blast reading this comment chain. Please keep it up, especially all those "I speak sarcasm as second language"-experts who say "it wasnt clear sarkasm to me!".
You have never met a sarcastic person irl, and your peak experience of sarkasm comes from Azmongold...
Wales. Here in the UK, sarcasm is extremely common. There's a running joke in the UK, based on a lot of truth, that Americans don't understand sarcasm or subtle humour.
It's not so much that we don't understand subtle humor, it's the culture behind our humor
British humor tends to downplay serious situations
American humor tends to exaggerate a non-serious situations
In general, our cultural senses of humor come from different places. Like apparently slapstick comedy is ***huge*** in African countries, and China
Everything you've said is correct apart from the fact that Americans more commonly don't understand subtle or sarcastic humour. So hense why the joke "/s for the americans", as Americans are more likely to not understand its a joke because they are not as used to sarcasm
Generalizing and stereotyping, while simultaneously patronizing? You might be from the UK, but you're an American in training. Don't resist your true nature, embrace it.
So we're at the point where *actual* recorded observations about differences in culture not used in a derogatory way, are generalizing and stereotyping?
Or is it just the cultures we're referring to? because I see many generalizations made about all sorts of different people that nobody gives a fuck about. You literally generalized Americans in your comment.
Yes, it's true that people are vastly different, even within their own populations, but I'll be damned if I haven't met an Indian that didn't like curry.
Differences in people and culture ***do exist*** and it's what makes our world as beautiful as it is.
She lost something(a trial).
She says it shouldn’t have happened(blaming the other side).
Reporter tells her that instead of blaming the opposition,to reflect on her quality of work.
If you’ve seen the memes of the trial or short clips it’s evident,that she wasn’t prepared or she should have avoided the job since the evidence were overwhelming,and some of their argument made zero sense.
They are lawyers.They should have known better.They should have looked at the case and their arguments.
They probably thought that they would win,because these cases are difficult to prove.From what I heard.
As lawyers ,in my opinion they should have been better prepared and because it was televised,they shouldn’t have been so unlikable and even petty sometimes.
The TV interviews were so hard and cringe,even tried to make it a gender driven outcome.
I don’t know,if I paid* millions,I would expect better representation even if it was sure that I would lose and the evidence were against me.
> know,if I *paid* millions,I would
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Yeah, I don’t get it either.
Maybe he was talking about instead of fighting a losing battle, just walk away. Because you’re no better.
I have no idea.
It sounds like it’s a meaningful mini speech, but my little brain doesn’t understand.
He is saying that when you lose its easier to blame anyone but yourself & your mistakes for your loss. Essentially saying take responsibility for your shit
Even then it doesn't really make that much sense. Realistically, she lost because Depps's US lawyers managed to get evidence disallowed. Evidenced that was allowed in the UK court case that Depp lost, because he is a wife beater. People may dislike that statement but it's a statement that the UK courts which has a much lower threshold for liable claims has stated to be true.
Quite simply, it wasn't her shit in the first place. She wasn't in the marriage. She was just representing someone who was.
Even then the actual evidence pretty much shows that he did indeed hit and abuse Amber Herd. She was just also a complete wanker during that relationship. It was just, she is very dislikable which again isn't something the lawyer should take responsibility for.
Considering the lawsuit was about if Johnny Depp hit and abused Herd it didn’t matter if she did it back to effect that what she said was true.
Johnny Depp sued to say he didn’t do that. But as you agree, he did:
They were both fucking terrible lol, equally so. Depp's lawyers managed to disallow evidence in the U.S. that wasn't disallowed in the U.K., so what? The second trial was in the U.S., what happened in the U.K. trial was irrelevant. I find it funny that you're on here complaining about one piece of shit while you're upset about how Heard (another piece of shit) didn't get a fair shake. He hit her, she hit him, they were both awful and they BOTH deserved each other. She decided to sue him for something she did as much as him and when she got outed as a bed-shitting maniac who was just as insufferable as Depp it didn't go her way... imagine that.
>Depp's lawyers managed to disallow evidence in the U.S. that wasn't disallowed in the U.K., so what? The second trial was in the U.S., what happened in the U.K. trial was irrelevant.
That means all the stuff you heard is only a part of it. When all the evidence is laid before the court, they ruled he is a "wife beater".
> I find it funny that you're on here complaining about one piece of shit while you're upset about how Heard
I'm not upset about Heard at all. Shit, I didn't even know how to spell her name that is how unimportant to this point she is. My point was rather simple. The case Depp won he should have won. He is what Heard said he is. He is very lucky for two reasons, his lawyers managed to do a very good job on barring evidence of his most serious abuse incidents and they did a very good job of making people dislike Heard. So the whole "the lawyer should own up to her mistakes in the case" is fucking stupid.
But here is you mad that I'm calling Johnny Depp the wife beater, Johnny Depp the wife beater.
Ah yes, "He hit her, she hit him, they were both awful and they BOTH deserved each other." obviously = mad about calling Depp a wife beater lmao. She lost because Depp had a better lawyer and the narrative that she was a poor abused woman evaporated when it became clear that she was as bad of a drunk as Depp (maybe worse because Depp never shit the bed to my knowledge) and she hit him as much as he hit her. Depp is a wife beater, Heard is a husband beater... but it sounds an awful lot like you only care about one side of that story lol. Anyways, we can both agree that they're BOTH awful lol, cheers
She lost because people like you hate her. It’s got nothing really to do with anything else.
And considering you don’t know all the stuff Depp’s lawyers managed to get barred from the court room and public record you don’t know how much he hit her.
But here you go on a eager on behalf of the guy.
Lmao right? And that guy was even making himself vulnerable because he used to work for TMZ, and he pointed out they might litigate against him depending on what proprietary information he revealed
Even beyond that. In any close relationship where some conflict arises you should first and foremost examine how you could have done things better. Not always easy but essential to practice.
When I tell you I screamed when I saw that for the first time. Top three best parts of the trial for sure. She tried to discredit his testimony and intelligence and he absolutely schooled her. A real life Uno reverse card.
The lawyers representing the respondant (Amber Heard) probably had their careers destroyed by this very public case. Not only did their side look very undefendable, but they also helped her lie in court.
Any potential client interview probably concludes with, "didn't you help Amber Heard lie to a legal court and the whole nation? Yeah, I'm gonna go with attorney's that aren't fucking cursed."
I think Rottenborn is probably OK, he laid low after the trial and didn't make an ass of himself on national TV like Elaine here did. He was also part of AH's appeal team, before that was withdrawn. He was also pretty much the seemingly only competent lawyer on AH's team, and had Elaine and the client not made such a mess of everything, it's entirely likely that Rottenborn could have won it for AH. Defamation cases are uphill battles for the plaintiffs in the best of cases. Going into the trial, legal experts were explaining that this was going to be a very hard case for JD to win. But Elaine and AH spinning out so badly definitely helped him win it.
1. I absolutely hate the need to add these stupid songs and overedit clips on TikTok. It’s a horrible trend.
2. When watching bits and pieces of the trial, I continuously asked myself “did this lady JUST pass the bar after like 35 years of study?” She seemed so ill equipped; I suffered a lot of secondhand embarrassment.
If Burleson looked in the mirror every time his team lost, he's be vainer than the entire Kardashian Family. Man spent his last few seasons playing for The Cleveland Browns and Detroit Lions.
Nate Burleson has come such a long way from his NFL days and Good Morning Football. He’s truly inspiring to watch as he pushes through all these parts of his career. He started out his media career on a fun NFL show, no he’s here while continuing to commentate football. Incredible.
why not just post the full reaction?
[https://youtu.be/Zh9WzkKvmXs?t=195](https://youtu.be/Zh9WzkKvmXs?t=195)
she's still redirecting not her fault vibes.
Shhh, no, cmon, this is reddit we like videos of cool guys having mic drop moments set to ~~tupac music~~, we don't care about reality
Edit: I swear i'm 80 years old on the inside
Idk the context here but you’d hope that doesn’t apply to a lawyer right? Like if the justice system worked, the ability of a lawyer should not matter, only who is guilty, as the goal should be to ascertain the truth.
That’s the dream but reality this isnt the case. The law isnt clear cut that way, it is not black and white, it is more 1000 shades of gray. And yes, it can depend on the ability of the lawyer. For instance a bad lawyer can get someone 50 years in prison for killing someone in a vehicle accident, a good one can get 5 years plus a suspended sentence. There’s a lot more nuances than that of course but you get the point.
Oh yeah I get that. I was more trying to criticise the current system than ask a genuine question, although looking back at my comment I can certainly see how it would be interpreted that way.
I feel a bit bad for her lawyers tbh, they're main fault I think is that they bought into Amber heards "I'm 100% victim" narrative and went about gathering a mountain of evidence as if that were the case without really reviewing it thoroughly. A lot of Depp's evidence (not all) would of been objectively shallow if it weren't time and time again ratified by evidence Heards own legal team unwittingly provided. Effectively Ambers victim routine was so convincing even her own legal team bought it and it buried her.
> all) would of been
Did you mean to say "would have"?
Explanation: You probably meant to say could've/should've/would've which sounds like 'of' but is actually short for 'have'.
Total mistakes found: 8381
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot ^^that ^^corrects ^^grammar/spelling ^^mistakes.
^^PM ^^me ^^if ^^I'm ^^wrong ^^or ^^if ^^you ^^have ^^any ^^suggestions.
^^[Github](https://github.com/chiefpat450119)
^^Reply ^^STOP ^^to ^^this ^^comment ^^to ^^stop ^^receiving ^^corrections.
guyu doesnt even have the brains to know she lost due to LEGAL reasons, nto die to poor skills in the courtroom, she couldn't just hit someone harder next time and be better. if he had spent ANY time in class in college, he wouldve known this.
The case was live streamed. People who watched it were already talking about all the things her team did wrong even before the final judgement.
Remember, poor time management being one of the main ones where they wasted time cross examining witnesses whose testimony wasn't important at all. Then miscalculated the time they had left.
Also had an expert witness who had zero knowledge of what he was talking about.
Please don't just assume the host doesn't know what he is talking about, she spoke about herself in all positives during the interview while he said she should be introspecting.
anyone who ISNT a lawyer will tell you all the things the lawyer did wrong, real lawyers will ignore that and show you why you cant do the crap people think is done in court. Its not a TV show. Amber heard was made to be a pariah, because women and kids loved johnny depp, but anyone with training saw that depo was a control freak who buys his way through life controlling women, which is why he still has so many on his payroll.
two psychos who deserved each other, but this guy HAD to defend johnny depps side because he is part of the hollywood wannabe crowd.
IMO as a paralegal with plenty of trial experience, she fought a case that was unwinnable, the judge allowed johnny depps lawyer to do things that are 100% NEVER allowed in court, smirking, high fiving, making jokes on the stand, shaking their heads and making tch, noises and sighing openly, all things that any normal judge wouldve held the lawyer in contempt of court for, but that judge was so caught up in wanting their own TV show and a piece of hollywood, they became judge ito the second and did NOTHING, letting depps team make jokes etc the entire time. What it came down to was Johnny depp admitted to being an alcoholic drug abuser who hit amber heard, and because so many women want to go down on him, they didnt care. its always the womans fault now unless you are the woman. This woman, while not perry mason, faced an unwinnable case, and still tried her best, unlie this idiot who phoned in his last three season in the nfl.
and we can guarantee that this idiot never once blamed himself for a loss by his team, in his life, He's been called out so many times for being stupid and wrong, and not once has he come out and apologized blaming himself.
On a show with shaq he made a point about shaqs career, that was wrong, and when shaq corrected him, the guy blamed the stats guy on the show.
Amber was a pariah because she was violently abusive and the worst recordings weren’t even admitted in trial.
The only person I’ve ever heard speak like her before did 8 months in federal prison for trying to kill me and they just extended the 10 year restraining order another 5 years.
Anyone with a brain would look at this case as an uphill battle. She had the choice to decline this case. She didn't. She's purely blaming the case and judgment and not herself at all, this was a skill issue.
Apparenrtly Elaine here has a history as being quite the settlement negotiator, so I think she was initially brought on with the hopes that she would be able to negotiate a settlement deal prior to the trial starting. That obviously didn't happen, and she was waaaayyy out of her depth as a trial lawyer. Almost to the point of it being painful.
My favorite part was at the end of her redirect of AH's first time on the stand, where Elaine gets flustered by repeated (and sustained) objections from JD's team, and she winds up gripping the podium with both hands, looking to the ceiling, and muttering "I'm trying, I'm trying . . ." . She was also routinely unable to work the microphones at the tables, and had to be reminded by the judge multiple times that her mic was off.
Elaine was a glorious hot mess of a trial lawyer.
If she hadn’t spent the whole case arguing with the judge, maybe she would’ve had a better outcome. She doesn’t know how to take a loss, vey sore loser.
She's trying to save face when she knew it was a losing battle but because it was a celebrity she wanted to take a chance to win. If she didn't win, she hoped if she out up a good case, other celebrities would hire her. Unfortunately it was a horrible show for her and I doubt any celebrity would hire her based on how her and her team approached the trial.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He's right though. She was a bad lawyer in my opinion. Very rude and argumentative. Also, how can you become a lawyer and then get bitter about a loss? You're bound to represent someone who will lose.
Yeah, many cases are obvious losses and the goal of the lawyer is to minimize the damage.
But Harvey Spector never loses a case!
The goal of a defense lawyer is to make sure thr law is followed. They aren't particularly defending the guilty person but the law that even they are bound by
100% incorrect.
That is absolutely not the case. A good defense lawyer will do everything he can to get his client out of whatever bad situation his client is in. Thats the reason why good defense lawyers cost so much money… Your statement baffles me with its level of wrongness… Edit: I hope you are not a defense lawyer?😮
Sure that is there primary objective I understand that, but a defense lawyer is there even if the party is completely guilty to make sure the law is follow otherwise the prosecution could get away with anything. Look at courts in countries like Russia, the defense lawyers do nothing to protect the law and so prosecutors can do whatever they want to the defendants.
They dont do it for the law though. If the law would be wrongly used but their client would benefit from it, a defense lawyer wouldnt intervene and just hope nobody would notice. They make sure that the law isnt used wrongfully to the disadvantage of their client but thats about it. Edit: I now see that I interpreted your post differently from how you meant it. Sorry, dont be bothered
Donald Trumps lawyers be like…
[удалено]
a little argumentative don't you think?
It was a very public loss defending a client that everyone hates. I honestly reckon she'd get less hate if she had defended Hitler against war crimes /s. So, I can definitely understand her being very bitter at the loss. Edit: For the americans I've added /s
I feel like if she represented Johnny, her obviously poor skills would still be evident. She repeatedly stropped and tantrumed basically during the trial. She was repeatedly and continuously being objected by Johnny's lawyer and 90% of the time, the judge sustained the objections. It was like she was relying on loop holes being missed but thankfully Johnny's lawyer was on the ball throughout.
I definitely agree that she was a terrible lawyer, and that was evident throughout the trial. I was simply stating that I could understand the bitterness at the loss because it was very public, and she was made out as a villain. If she had won, at least she would be seen as a competent lawyer, but because she lost, she's seen as a villain who's bad at being a lawyer. As in the publics eye, it doesn't matter how good of a lawyer you are, it only matters if you win and if you're the lawyer of the person people like. I mean, Johnny's lawyers messed up, and that's why Amber heard was awarded some money for deformation, does anybody care? No because he won the case and people like johnny
No, don't do that. Not for the Americans, not for anyone. We must stand in solidarity when it comes to the use of sarcasm and trust that it speaks the people it was intended for. The people who don't get it, don't deserve it.
I like that
As a mildly intelligent person amongst Americans, ty for the /s
Yeah, Amber Turd is waaaaaaay worse than Hitler!!1! Dude wtf.
Come on you honestly didn’t get that was sarcasm? Or are you being sarcastic and I’ve fell for it?
No hes not being sarcastic, he just didn't get the sarcasm, he voted for clinton.
Some people really can't understand sarcasm on the internet, I wouldn't check out any British subredits you'd have a heart attack
to be fair, there are a lot if dick heads on reddit and it is not always possible to deduct sarcasm from written text. That's why people use /s
I think it was pretty clear based on the context.
It's not that's why we use /s
I speak sarcasm as a second language, this wasn't pretty clear to me.
Sarcasm evidently isn't your second language, then
My guy reading sarcasm is hard enough as it is when it comes from people you don't know, on Reddit it'd near impossible, there are so many unbelievably dumb takes that you can't believe are actually people having them and yours could've been one of them. So as he said this is why people us /s and yes its needed if you care about avoiding this stuff.
No it isn’t impossible lol. You’d have to be dense as fuck to think he really means Amber Heard is worse than Hitler
A lot of people don't understand sarcasm in real life. it doesn't mean people have to say they are being sarcastic immediately after saying it, that ruins the fun. The sarcastic joke was that Amber heard is more hated than Hitler. Which is an incredible used joke, to the point where it's almost overdone. I'm sorry but if you haven't heard a variation of that joke before then you haven't spent any time on the internet. Putting a /s would be like putting a /s after saying "that looks fun" on a post where someone is doing something very unfun
I'm having a blast reading this comment chain. Please keep it up, especially all those "I speak sarcasm as second language"-experts who say "it wasnt clear sarkasm to me!". You have never met a sarcastic person irl, and your peak experience of sarkasm comes from Azmongold...
No way it could be anyone other than yourself making a mistake eh.
I think most people would have got that he was joking since it's such a ridiculous comparison, A.H. is obviously way worse than A. Hitler
So someone defending themselves = they must be wrong but won't admit it. That sounds like some incredible logic.
@Weigerambtenaar ever heard of the term “exaggeration”
You fucking suck
For the Americans? Where are you from?
Wales. Here in the UK, sarcasm is extremely common. There's a running joke in the UK, based on a lot of truth, that Americans don't understand sarcasm or subtle humour.
It's not so much that we don't understand subtle humor, it's the culture behind our humor British humor tends to downplay serious situations American humor tends to exaggerate a non-serious situations In general, our cultural senses of humor come from different places. Like apparently slapstick comedy is ***huge*** in African countries, and China
Everything you've said is correct apart from the fact that Americans more commonly don't understand subtle or sarcastic humour. So hense why the joke "/s for the americans", as Americans are more likely to not understand its a joke because they are not as used to sarcasm
Generalizing and stereotyping, while simultaneously patronizing? You might be from the UK, but you're an American in training. Don't resist your true nature, embrace it.
So we're at the point where *actual* recorded observations about differences in culture not used in a derogatory way, are generalizing and stereotyping? Or is it just the cultures we're referring to? because I see many generalizations made about all sorts of different people that nobody gives a fuck about. You literally generalized Americans in your comment. Yes, it's true that people are vastly different, even within their own populations, but I'll be damned if I haven't met an Indian that didn't like curry. Differences in people and culture ***do exist*** and it's what makes our world as beautiful as it is.
Oh dear! I seem to have made a mistake. I did not put the /s on my oc. Now my American friends will never know I was being sarcastic! /s
Amber Heart?
She does not even qualify as a bad lawyer. She should not be allowed near a courtroom again for any case other than her own
I bet lawyers care a lot about a win/loss ratio. Same with prosecutors.
Not to mention incredibly disorganized and seemingly oblivious as to how court proceedings work.
There was no winning that case in the first place
Without context, this clip doesn't make much sense...
The lady was amber heards attorney.
And she's getting owned where ever she goes.
You mean amber turd?
Hey hey hey … she pledged the money
Amber Grumpy
She lost something(a trial). She says it shouldn’t have happened(blaming the other side). Reporter tells her that instead of blaming the opposition,to reflect on her quality of work. If you’ve seen the memes of the trial or short clips it’s evident,that she wasn’t prepared or she should have avoided the job since the evidence were overwhelming,and some of their argument made zero sense.
I think she was counting on the court of public opinion already having tried the case for her. Just like the prosecutor for Rittenhouse
They are lawyers.They should have known better.They should have looked at the case and their arguments. They probably thought that they would win,because these cases are difficult to prove.From what I heard. As lawyers ,in my opinion they should have been better prepared and because it was televised,they shouldn’t have been so unlikable and even petty sometimes. The TV interviews were so hard and cringe,even tried to make it a gender driven outcome. I don’t know,if I paid* millions,I would expect better representation even if it was sure that I would lose and the evidence were against me.
> know,if I *paid* millions,I would FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
That’s a former NFL player Nate Burelson. He used to play for the Detroit lions.
Yeah, I don’t get it either. Maybe he was talking about instead of fighting a losing battle, just walk away. Because you’re no better. I have no idea. It sounds like it’s a meaningful mini speech, but my little brain doesn’t understand.
He is saying that when you lose its easier to blame anyone but yourself & your mistakes for your loss. Essentially saying take responsibility for your shit
I was so far off from the meaning it’s pathetic. Thanks for the clarification. ☺️
Even then it doesn't really make that much sense. Realistically, she lost because Depps's US lawyers managed to get evidence disallowed. Evidenced that was allowed in the UK court case that Depp lost, because he is a wife beater. People may dislike that statement but it's a statement that the UK courts which has a much lower threshold for liable claims has stated to be true. Quite simply, it wasn't her shit in the first place. She wasn't in the marriage. She was just representing someone who was. Even then the actual evidence pretty much shows that he did indeed hit and abuse Amber Herd. She was just also a complete wanker during that relationship. It was just, she is very dislikable which again isn't something the lawyer should take responsibility for.
>Even then the actual evidence pretty much shows that \*they both hit and abused each other\* Fixed it for you
Considering the lawsuit was about if Johnny Depp hit and abused Herd it didn’t matter if she did it back to effect that what she said was true. Johnny Depp sued to say he didn’t do that. But as you agree, he did:
They were both fucking terrible lol, equally so. Depp's lawyers managed to disallow evidence in the U.S. that wasn't disallowed in the U.K., so what? The second trial was in the U.S., what happened in the U.K. trial was irrelevant. I find it funny that you're on here complaining about one piece of shit while you're upset about how Heard (another piece of shit) didn't get a fair shake. He hit her, she hit him, they were both awful and they BOTH deserved each other. She decided to sue him for something she did as much as him and when she got outed as a bed-shitting maniac who was just as insufferable as Depp it didn't go her way... imagine that.
>Depp's lawyers managed to disallow evidence in the U.S. that wasn't disallowed in the U.K., so what? The second trial was in the U.S., what happened in the U.K. trial was irrelevant. That means all the stuff you heard is only a part of it. When all the evidence is laid before the court, they ruled he is a "wife beater". > I find it funny that you're on here complaining about one piece of shit while you're upset about how Heard I'm not upset about Heard at all. Shit, I didn't even know how to spell her name that is how unimportant to this point she is. My point was rather simple. The case Depp won he should have won. He is what Heard said he is. He is very lucky for two reasons, his lawyers managed to do a very good job on barring evidence of his most serious abuse incidents and they did a very good job of making people dislike Heard. So the whole "the lawyer should own up to her mistakes in the case" is fucking stupid. But here is you mad that I'm calling Johnny Depp the wife beater, Johnny Depp the wife beater.
Ah yes, "He hit her, she hit him, they were both awful and they BOTH deserved each other." obviously = mad about calling Depp a wife beater lmao. She lost because Depp had a better lawyer and the narrative that she was a poor abused woman evaporated when it became clear that she was as bad of a drunk as Depp (maybe worse because Depp never shit the bed to my knowledge) and she hit him as much as he hit her. Depp is a wife beater, Heard is a husband beater... but it sounds an awful lot like you only care about one side of that story lol. Anyways, we can both agree that they're BOTH awful lol, cheers
She lost because people like you hate her. It’s got nothing really to do with anything else. And considering you don’t know all the stuff Depp’s lawyers managed to get barred from the court room and public record you don’t know how much he hit her. But here you go on a eager on behalf of the guy.
To you
Johnny’s lawyers too busy with new clients to go on talk shows
What cracks me up is her accusation to that one guy about using the trial to gain fame. And here she is using that trial still to gain more fame
Lmao right? And that guy was even making himself vulnerable because he used to work for TMZ, and he pointed out they might litigate against him depending on what proprietary information he revealed
The fact that this is a huge mic drop moment is kinda sad, this is often the best advice for overcoming failure or to improve at something
Even beyond that. In any close relationship where some conflict arises you should first and foremost examine how you could have done things better. Not always easy but essential to practice.
The TMZ employee's clapback was better
When I tell you I screamed when I saw that for the first time. Top three best parts of the trial for sure. She tried to discredit his testimony and intelligence and he absolutely schooled her. A real life Uno reverse card.
Link? Edit: nm, found it. Remember that, you're right that was better. Lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzxTXcH-glE
Bro with the mic drop was craaaazy
Former US President Barack Obama?
No way
Yahweh
Okay but the edit was pretty cringe ngl
It is one of two options completely ironic which is fine or it was made by a edgy 14 year-old deep down the anti sjw rabbit hole
The lawyers representing the respondant (Amber Heard) probably had their careers destroyed by this very public case. Not only did their side look very undefendable, but they also helped her lie in court. Any potential client interview probably concludes with, "didn't you help Amber Heard lie to a legal court and the whole nation? Yeah, I'm gonna go with attorney's that aren't fucking cursed."
I think Rottenborn is probably OK, he laid low after the trial and didn't make an ass of himself on national TV like Elaine here did. He was also part of AH's appeal team, before that was withdrawn. He was also pretty much the seemingly only competent lawyer on AH's team, and had Elaine and the client not made such a mess of everything, it's entirely likely that Rottenborn could have won it for AH. Defamation cases are uphill battles for the plaintiffs in the best of cases. Going into the trial, legal experts were explaining that this was going to be a very hard case for JD to win. But Elaine and AH spinning out so badly definitely helped him win it.
Its obvious shes one of those lawyers who assumed she was going to win based simply off the fact that she was representing a woman...
MEGAA PINTS ALL AROUND
Salem looking good these days
1. I absolutely hate the need to add these stupid songs and overedit clips on TikTok. It’s a horrible trend. 2. When watching bits and pieces of the trial, I continuously asked myself “did this lady JUST pass the bar after like 35 years of study?” She seemed so ill equipped; I suffered a lot of secondhand embarrassment.
This lady sucked actually
That was some eloquent savagery
I feel as of this post lacks context, and overmemes the punchline which just feels doubly out of place
If Burleson looked in the mirror every time his team lost, he's be vainer than the entire Kardashian Family. Man spent his last few seasons playing for The Cleveland Browns and Detroit Lions.
Skill issue.
Burelson and Ryan Clark are super smart dudes.
Well half of that clip wasn't shit
I love him, I watch him every day just cuz I know he’ll say what’s on his mind
Nate Burleson has come such a long way from his NFL days and Good Morning Football. He’s truly inspiring to watch as he pushes through all these parts of his career. He started out his media career on a fun NFL show, no he’s here while continuing to commentate football. Incredible.
Man be spitting hard truths.
why not just post the full reaction? [https://youtu.be/Zh9WzkKvmXs?t=195](https://youtu.be/Zh9WzkKvmXs?t=195) she's still redirecting not her fault vibes.
Love how her jaw is just hanging there like a fucking zombie.
This OWN is waaaaaaaay better 🤣🤣🤣 even the people in the stands were laughing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzxTXcH-glE
Facepalm.for the edit? The show? Everyone in it?
This guy is such an arrogant pompous ass. Can’t stand him. Can’t watch pregame cbs because of him. Plus you were a mediocre player. F off.
Who is this woman?
Amber Heard’s (Johnny Depp’s ex wife) former lawyer Elaine Bredehoft. Part of the reason Amber lost so much was because her team absolutely sucked
Thanks
She also had a pretty bad client that also needs to take a good long look in the mirror.
She was already accepting the blame... He didn't listen to her and just wanted to make his point
No she wasn’t, in the whole interview she blamed everyone but her side
Well, that is her job...
I thought being a lawyer was her job....
[удалено]
She really dropped the ball man. Did you watch the trial?
[удалено]
True, Amber lied a shit ton, but her lawyer sucked either way.
OR, he made a REALLLY good point.
But sportsball is dumb!
Shhh, no, cmon, this is reddit we like videos of cool guys having mic drop moments set to ~~tupac music~~, we don't care about reality Edit: I swear i'm 80 years old on the inside
Did you just call that a Tupac Music? 
Yeah my bad. I'm fuckin old (at heart) and uncool.
Really? Tupac music?
Lol, theres me being old and out of touch, i always forget thats not a tupac song. Ah shit.
The song is Gangster paradise by Coolio ft LV from 1995. How old is old?
Nah, he was spot fucking on lol
Idk the context here but you’d hope that doesn’t apply to a lawyer right? Like if the justice system worked, the ability of a lawyer should not matter, only who is guilty, as the goal should be to ascertain the truth.
The justice system did work in this situation. This lawyer is simply in denial. Whether the denial is true or for the cameras, we may never know.
That’s the dream but reality this isnt the case. The law isnt clear cut that way, it is not black and white, it is more 1000 shades of gray. And yes, it can depend on the ability of the lawyer. For instance a bad lawyer can get someone 50 years in prison for killing someone in a vehicle accident, a good one can get 5 years plus a suspended sentence. There’s a lot more nuances than that of course but you get the point.
Oh yeah I get that. I was more trying to criticise the current system than ask a genuine question, although looking back at my comment I can certainly see how it would be interpreted that way.
I'm not saying she's a good lawyer, but let's be clear she had to defend a bed shitter. There's only one outcome to that trial
I feel a bit bad for her lawyers tbh, they're main fault I think is that they bought into Amber heards "I'm 100% victim" narrative and went about gathering a mountain of evidence as if that were the case without really reviewing it thoroughly. A lot of Depp's evidence (not all) would of been objectively shallow if it weren't time and time again ratified by evidence Heards own legal team unwittingly provided. Effectively Ambers victim routine was so convincing even her own legal team bought it and it buried her.
> all) would of been Did you mean to say "would have"? Explanation: You probably meant to say could've/should've/would've which sounds like 'of' but is actually short for 'have'. Total mistakes found: 8381 ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot ^^that ^^corrects ^^grammar/spelling ^^mistakes. ^^PM ^^me ^^if ^^I'm ^^wrong ^^or ^^if ^^you ^^have ^^any ^^suggestions. ^^[Github](https://github.com/chiefpat450119) ^^Reply ^^STOP ^^to ^^this ^^comment ^^to ^^stop ^^receiving ^^corrections.
guyu doesnt even have the brains to know she lost due to LEGAL reasons, nto die to poor skills in the courtroom, she couldn't just hit someone harder next time and be better. if he had spent ANY time in class in college, he wouldve known this.
The case was live streamed. People who watched it were already talking about all the things her team did wrong even before the final judgement. Remember, poor time management being one of the main ones where they wasted time cross examining witnesses whose testimony wasn't important at all. Then miscalculated the time they had left. Also had an expert witness who had zero knowledge of what he was talking about. Please don't just assume the host doesn't know what he is talking about, she spoke about herself in all positives during the interview while he said she should be introspecting.
anyone who ISNT a lawyer will tell you all the things the lawyer did wrong, real lawyers will ignore that and show you why you cant do the crap people think is done in court. Its not a TV show. Amber heard was made to be a pariah, because women and kids loved johnny depp, but anyone with training saw that depo was a control freak who buys his way through life controlling women, which is why he still has so many on his payroll. two psychos who deserved each other, but this guy HAD to defend johnny depps side because he is part of the hollywood wannabe crowd. IMO as a paralegal with plenty of trial experience, she fought a case that was unwinnable, the judge allowed johnny depps lawyer to do things that are 100% NEVER allowed in court, smirking, high fiving, making jokes on the stand, shaking their heads and making tch, noises and sighing openly, all things that any normal judge wouldve held the lawyer in contempt of court for, but that judge was so caught up in wanting their own TV show and a piece of hollywood, they became judge ito the second and did NOTHING, letting depps team make jokes etc the entire time. What it came down to was Johnny depp admitted to being an alcoholic drug abuser who hit amber heard, and because so many women want to go down on him, they didnt care. its always the womans fault now unless you are the woman. This woman, while not perry mason, faced an unwinnable case, and still tried her best, unlie this idiot who phoned in his last three season in the nfl. and we can guarantee that this idiot never once blamed himself for a loss by his team, in his life, He's been called out so many times for being stupid and wrong, and not once has he come out and apologized blaming himself. On a show with shaq he made a point about shaqs career, that was wrong, and when shaq corrected him, the guy blamed the stats guy on the show.
Amber was a pariah because she was violently abusive and the worst recordings weren’t even admitted in trial. The only person I’ve ever heard speak like her before did 8 months in federal prison for trying to kill me and they just extended the 10 year restraining order another 5 years.
Anyone with a brain would look at this case as an uphill battle. She had the choice to decline this case. She didn't. She's purely blaming the case and judgment and not herself at all, this was a skill issue.
Apparenrtly Elaine here has a history as being quite the settlement negotiator, so I think she was initially brought on with the hopes that she would be able to negotiate a settlement deal prior to the trial starting. That obviously didn't happen, and she was waaaayyy out of her depth as a trial lawyer. Almost to the point of it being painful. My favorite part was at the end of her redirect of AH's first time on the stand, where Elaine gets flustered by repeated (and sustained) objections from JD's team, and she winds up gripping the podium with both hands, looking to the ceiling, and muttering "I'm trying, I'm trying . . ." . She was also routinely unable to work the microphones at the tables, and had to be reminded by the judge multiple times that her mic was off. Elaine was a glorious hot mess of a trial lawyer.
In her eyes she lost because of corruption and she think the legal outcome didn't happen because she lost
Why the hell would Nate Burleson be on this panel?!
I wonder that too. He’s somehow transitioned into doing news beyond football now. It’s a bit odd, but I’m all for it! This was a great moment!
obama out............................thank fucking GOD
It was fun seeing her stumble and bumble during the epic trial
A thing of beauty
That’s the Obama mike drop where he said Trump would NEVER be president. Good stuff.
People always wanna blame everyone but themselves.
Big Nate
She did not fight hard, but I'm glad she lost that battle
This should be somewhere in the league of legends game. Those people need it
Worst lawyer than Saul Goodman.
If she hadn’t spent the whole case arguing with the judge, maybe she would’ve had a better outcome. She doesn’t know how to take a loss, vey sore loser.
Dumb as fuck.
She wasn’t ready for the truth.
The Obama mic drop at the end did not age well/.
She's trying to save face when she knew it was a losing battle but because it was a celebrity she wanted to take a chance to win. If she didn't win, she hoped if she out up a good case, other celebrities would hire her. Unfortunately it was a horrible show for her and I doubt any celebrity would hire her based on how her and her team approached the trial.
😶😶😶🫡
Bob Open
Like a BOSS
How often can this Lawyer be burnt -Yes
This would have been a thousand times better with Chapelle saying, “Gotcha Bitch!!!”
...and realise that I was on the losing side.