The level of misogyny exhibited by women during this whole trial was disappointing and honestly terrifying. Even as you said by prominent feminsists, who seemed to want to paint themselves as “good” feminists who aren’t “irrational man haters” and who stand by the fact that feminism is about equality and that we should support male victims. This is of course as the majority of Depp supporters ignore male victims that have been a part of Me too largely because those men’s abusers had been other men. And that’s the truth, as much as these “good” feminists don’t want to admit it, it isn’t about male victims at all (evidenced by how I’ve already seen multiple comments accusing the crew member suing Depp for physical assault as being paid by Heard) , its about somehow making yourself more palatable to the masses by proving that you’re one of those nice feminists who doesn’t just support any women uncritically. The co-option of progressive language to justify reactionary positions is one of the most vile things I’ve seen in the past few years
Yes! Thank you. I’ve been thinking this for a while. I’d like to add that liberal feminists, in particular, like to pride themselves on being proponents of equality between men and women, especially under the law. That’s all fine and dandy until they start to loose sight of how power imbalances in male-female relationships are more often than not—and especially in Heard’s case—tipped in favor of men. We were told that women can be anything they want to be. That they can do anything men can do, and now that includes being equally as “bad” and as violent toward men as they are capable of being toward us. That isn’t to say that woman can never be abusive, but if being AN abuser requires one to have the upper hand in a relationship—whether physically or financially—then Heard’s case doesn’t fit the bill imo.
Thank you so much for posting this and making it public, I know how hard that decision was. This is an incredible article and I've shared it with everyone I know. Thank you for everything you do
Really important piece that you’ve written so well. Also have been to thinking about the incident with Megan thee Stallion that had been unfolding as this was happening. Megan being forced to provide evidence upon evidence of her being shot (!!!) by Tory lanez and still not being believed. It was so disgusting to see. Its horrifying the intense levels of misogyny being so proudly displayed in the general public right now.
I feel like this is what happens when you cater your feminism to men. Women desperate to prove they’re reasonable and not like the crazy feminazis, and men desperate to corroborate this for their mens rights agenda that they only speak about when there is a woman to put down.
I haven’t been following the case. I have actively avoided following this case. And yet whenever I opened YouTube, there’d be at least 3 recommended videos about Depp “owning” Heard, or fan reaction to the newest testimony, or yet another option to livestream it. Again - I actively avoided keeping up with the case, I never searched for it, I didn’t even keep up with the allegations or original lawsuit when they first came out.
And still, the algorithm tried to shove this case down my throat. And most of the thumbnails showed Depp laughing; most of the video titles applauded him for giggling, for snapping, for essentially being completely fucking unprofessional on the witness stand. I’m supposed to applaud a white man for not taking justice seriously but demonize a white woman for being emotional?
I kept thinking - regardless of what the truth is, who wins? How can we look at this and say any part of this was respectable and didn’t reveal the worst aspects of society? And that’s not me both sides-ing the issue. I genuinely want to know.
If Amber was the victim, she just got a more thorough spectacle of humiliation than actual convicted abusers or even serial killers. For fuck’s sake, people have been more forgiving of Jeffrey Dahmer.
If Depp was correct - that he was a male victim of abuse, that Amber had been lying the whole time - again, people have been using his domestic violence case as comedic fodder. They’d still be laughing along through one of the most humiliating spectacles of his life.
If both sides were equally abusive then…again! It would still be everyday people laughing at and making a spectacle of the most humiliating trial of their lives. Treating their testimonies as if they were just funny little Nintendo glitches, or something. Treating this trial as if memes were more important than any measure of truth or justice or God forbid reconciliation.
Everything surrounding this trial and its non-sequestered jury has just been disgustingly cruel. Mass shooters aren’t this dehumanized. Serial killers aren’t this dehumanized. People were angry and they latched onto the first outlet they saw and it’s, quite frankly, really damn frightening.
That last part! I did not see this much outright hate and vitriol for the Parkland shooter—who’s still alive today, btw! It seems like nothing could be worse than a woman who—gasp!—lies! 🙄
White men will lie to justify entire WARS and no one ever thinks “gee, maybe he should be shunned and humiliated, and every white man after him will be held to a near-impossible standard if they want power”.
rayne i will personally be your bodyguard and defend you if anyone tries to come at you... this essay was brilliant and you hit every single point. thank you for this <3
as much as this was a depressing read, it was also an extremely important one. i was really invested in the harvey weinstein case and ronan farrow's inquiry, and, naively, believed that we might actually be entering an era where it's possible to bring down powerful rapists and abusers. the public response to this whole fucking trial has made me so depressed and the works of people like you and michael are honestly a glimpse of hope in all of this
You changed my mind about the Depp-Heard case, you made me think about the situation and the lives of women in similar positions differently. Much love to you, thank you :)
this is really commendable work, im proud that you said all you did. there’s a lot to tackle and unpack, and you did an excellent job of marie kondo-ing this case for everyone, really making people think and re-evaluate their opinions/thought processes. love you, treat yourself kindly!
I've read and seen so much now that I don't even feel the pain or discomfort that I used to. Instead, I feel pain for you; sitting down to writer such a well delivered synopsis, analysis, and general think piece while picking through everything must be horrible on the brain.
Speaking as an abused person feels almost pallid in the face of all this. Instead, I've been coming around to this weird sort of agitation and rage with these stories- particularly harkening to when "women fight back" after years of abuse. It's so demoralizing to look back at those stories now as I tried to find out HOW in the world Depp possibly won-- what made Amber different from other victims who triumphed over their abusers with the means that they faced likewise? Victims who maimed and killed, even.
The hill that these women needed to beseech themselves on was years and years of such extreme, massive and disgusting violence that they almost became effigies of themselves. Documentation, pictures and people who likewise suffered the same had to back them up to succeed. Brigette Harris comes to mind, and I've seen people use her as a "this is one of the good ones" thing which is so disturbing...
Now seeing the mob campaigns herding out hate to people like Megan Thee Stallion and Angelina Jolie is haunting. That evidence of violence and abuse-- clear violence!-- is so wantonly brushed aside.
Truly, women have to be so utterly disfigured, so transformed to the point of near martyrdom to get a chance at being seen, heard, and validated. This entire trial has been trigger after another, especially as I found myself feeling crazy that I wasn't fully siding with Johnny. That I had trepidation, that I felt this urge to "weigh both sides" as if my gut wasn't screaming the truth of the matter.
And even if people actually believe everything they think about Amber, it's so clear he should have lost that the immense media-darling drive of this entire court case comes into crystal vision. This is some monstrous alternate universe, some sort of Whatever Happened To Baby Jane timeline where something so clearly wrong, orchestrated so effortlessly by this washed out abuser, succeeds.
Thanks for writing this. Your words are always so potent.
thank you so much for posting this; i know the backlash is terrifying. reading this honestly made me cry it just feels so hopeless. seeing the violently misogynistic tiktoks and things people have posted, especially the ones made by women who are saying that amber heard is giving abuse victims a bad name. it's horrifying to me that people can see those things and think that yes, amber is the only woman who has ever been or ever will be treated like this, and she deserves it. your point about women aligning themselves with men's viewpoints in the hope that they'll be trusted more is so tragic.
It is really tiring hearing this case be framed as a crusade against women and women's rights from the get go without even trying to meaningful have discussions about these things. Let's get to the points. I have watched the entire trial. I read the UK verdict, each of his points, and how the judge came to his conclusions. I have listened to copious (9+ hours) of audio and it is very clear that Amber is a narcissistic individual who is also very violent. Let me explain why I came to this conclusion:
1. The audio. There are many telling signs from their interactions in their audio. Firstly, they are both very aggressive and abusive to each other verbally. He calls her washed up, ugly names, cunt etc. She calls him washed up, ball-less sack of shit, etc. They had a *very* toxic relationship. However, what is also reflected that Amber tends to internalize these fights and his subsequent fleeing as -physically- painful. There are multiple examples. She says "you're pushing me against a wall" and "I'm dying" when he talks about leaving to see his daughter. They both refer to verbal altercations as "attacks" She talks about how he kicks her when she's down, and this was in reference once again, to a verbal fight. Someone with BPD often interpret things differently from a normal person. It is obvious from the audio that his words hurt her, most of their discussions on said fights revolve around said fights where she's clearly hurt by them. So from that alone, her exaggerative nature is shown. Once, she talked about barely being able to survive one of their shouting matches. Survive.
This is enhanced by the fact that she talks about him constantly "splitting", in her words "even when there is no physical violence". Her notion on the stand that he would split after hitting her doesn't square with what is in the audio. She also has an honest conversation with him at one point where she says her one criticism of him, in fights as well as in life in general is his "disappearing act", referring to his gaze being obstructed. She calls it a lack of consideration. And what example does she use? Him leaving for an hour and not texting her, again, her words. This is the same person who claims that he is a dangerous criminal wife beater with an unbreakable addiction, and her biggest criticism of him isn't his drinking, isnt his splitting to do drugs, isnt his beating her up....but his disappearing for a while (in that instance, an hour) and not letting her know. It does is square with her words on the stand. What it does square with is what you believe to be proof of abuse. A highly exaggerative person would take a tap on the bottom as an attack. Her personal assistant claimed that she was a very hyperbolic person who regularly abused her. You don't believe her? And if you do, then you believe that Amber once again lied about being abusive to her, but wouldn't dare lie about her own abuse.
2. The constant contradictions to her testimony.
Here are just a few:
A. Regarding the bathroom incident where they talk about her kicking a door in his head and punching him. In her 2016 deposition and in Virginia, she described the incident as her trying to escape him, hiding in a bathroom and him trying to get in. She tries to close to door, causing her to scrap her feet and she kicks the door in his head and punches him in retaliation. Sure, this doesnt add up to what's actually being heard (he says he was hiding and at no point did she ever deny that), but maybe you can rationalize it. But in the UK, she testified that he was in the bathroom reeling and potentially going to overdose, she then bangs on the door trying to save his life. He is passed out leaning on the door and that causes her to scrape her toes and the rest is known. These are fundamentally different situations. You can rationalize forgetting events or missing key details. But you cannot rationalize two diametrically opposed situations occurring when she was privy to the audio in both. This does not make sense.
B. Amber said that the first year (2012) was a bliss, completely peaceful. He was sober and never hit her when he was sober. She mentioned that she will never forget the day it first happened. But- then there pictures that come out and show that her first alleged lip bleed (and her holding a card allegedly written by him threatening to return) that is dated in 2012. So okay, she says she forgot and had to go to her therapist notes to remember the exact date. Turns out he did drink their first year and did get violent. Then, she submits an undrafted email that she allegedly wrote in 2013 (!) where she says again, the first year was a bliss, and then things changed when you started to attack me and drink. So less than a year into their relationship, after their first spat, she forgot when he was actually viscous and would attack her? That's what we're supposed to believe.
C. Amber claimed in the UK trial that in 2013 Johnny backhanded her so hard that her blood splattered on a smeg fridge that they had in their home. She specifically mentioned remembering because she had made a joke about it the next day. Only to later recant that when it came out (via receipts) that the fridge wasnt bought until late 2014. She never mentioned it again.
There are just some of the contradictions that she has. I can bring up her alleging that he burned one of her photos, showed a picture that showed no burns and in a glass frame, later said it wasnt *that* picture, and then showed a picture of an obscured painting with no burns only to say that Johnny burned the back of it. There is so much to look into.
3. Her credibility. There is no objective way to look at *everything*, I mean everything, not twitter threads by Ivana and Michele Dauber, I mean her testimony, her history of law fudging, her history of abuse that was witnessed and conclude that we MUST believe her. Examples:
A. Regarding the dog situation in Australia. Kevin Murphy, an assistant, alleged that Amber pressured him to make Kate James falsify documents to get the dogs to Australia. He didn't, but instead did it himself. He admitted to lying under oath to the high judge in the UK because Amber pressured his job if he didn't. The judge found that Murphy wasn't credible because he lied under oath. The judge also concluded that Amber wasn't guilty because she didn't actually pressure Kate James to falsify documents, only maybe suggested it. There was an email submitted showing Amber telling Murphy about getting Kate James to be quiet about this and about "greasing" a vet. The judge did not accept this as substantial proof, but found Johnny guilty of proof on one occasions despite saying "Seen in isolation, the evidence that Mr Depp assaulted Ms Heard on this occasion might not be sufficient. However, taken with the evidence as a whole, I find that it did in fact occur". A judge claimed, in her reasoning that the evidence for this occasion wasn't sufficient, but still concluded that it happened. Does that seem logical?
B. Another occasion, it came to light that Samantha McMillen was working as an assistant to Amber Heard, however Amber had to declare her as an assistant and didn't. Amber claimed that Samantha was not her assistant, but just a friend. A check was presented from Amber that directly named Samantha as an assistant. There was an email presented that Samantha wrote that claimed she was Amber's assistant. However, Amber claimed that she only called her assistant and gave her checks because she was struggling financially and didn't want to make her feel bad. the judge found that to be serviceable conclusion. Again, this is just another bizarre situation that happens to make Amber look bad, but she's not lying?
I find it offensive to group people in a camp of misogyny for simply not believing her. Many of us has dealt with narcissists who deflect blame, who internalize, and who gaslight. I am not a fan of either of them. I am writing this because I urge you to do research, to talk to people outside of your bubble. I am asking you to do critical thinking instead of pointing the finger. I have grown up around violence. My mother would punch and throw things at my dad whenever she was angry, and he never initiated a fight. Far too often, I had to put my body between them, not to her from him, but to protect her from her. It may seem crazy to think that the man, the one with the financial and social power would dare be a victim, but it happens. Have an open mind, have conversations with people who wont just regurgitate the same thing. I can't know for certain whether she was abused. Maybe she is a pathological liar, unable to tell the truth, but is still a victim. It's possible, but whats disrespectful is calling anyone who doubts it a woman hater or a Depp stan.
This is not a case of people hating an imperfect woman. This is a case of people doing their research which includes, reading the documents, watching the trial, taking in all the evidence and coming to a conclusion, something I highly doubt you took the time to do before you wrote this. And that's disappointing.
The level of misogyny exhibited by women during this whole trial was disappointing and honestly terrifying. Even as you said by prominent feminsists, who seemed to want to paint themselves as “good” feminists who aren’t “irrational man haters” and who stand by the fact that feminism is about equality and that we should support male victims. This is of course as the majority of Depp supporters ignore male victims that have been a part of Me too largely because those men’s abusers had been other men. And that’s the truth, as much as these “good” feminists don’t want to admit it, it isn’t about male victims at all (evidenced by how I’ve already seen multiple comments accusing the crew member suing Depp for physical assault as being paid by Heard) , its about somehow making yourself more palatable to the masses by proving that you’re one of those nice feminists who doesn’t just support any women uncritically. The co-option of progressive language to justify reactionary positions is one of the most vile things I’ve seen in the past few years
Yes! Thank you. I’ve been thinking this for a while. I’d like to add that liberal feminists, in particular, like to pride themselves on being proponents of equality between men and women, especially under the law. That’s all fine and dandy until they start to loose sight of how power imbalances in male-female relationships are more often than not—and especially in Heard’s case—tipped in favor of men. We were told that women can be anything they want to be. That they can do anything men can do, and now that includes being equally as “bad” and as violent toward men as they are capable of being toward us. That isn’t to say that woman can never be abusive, but if being AN abuser requires one to have the upper hand in a relationship—whether physically or financially—then Heard’s case doesn’t fit the bill imo.
Thank you so much for posting this and making it public, I know how hard that decision was. This is an incredible article and I've shared it with everyone I know. Thank you for everything you do
Really important piece that you’ve written so well. Also have been to thinking about the incident with Megan thee Stallion that had been unfolding as this was happening. Megan being forced to provide evidence upon evidence of her being shot (!!!) by Tory lanez and still not being believed. It was so disgusting to see. Its horrifying the intense levels of misogyny being so proudly displayed in the general public right now.
I feel like this is what happens when you cater your feminism to men. Women desperate to prove they’re reasonable and not like the crazy feminazis, and men desperate to corroborate this for their mens rights agenda that they only speak about when there is a woman to put down.
I haven’t been following the case. I have actively avoided following this case. And yet whenever I opened YouTube, there’d be at least 3 recommended videos about Depp “owning” Heard, or fan reaction to the newest testimony, or yet another option to livestream it. Again - I actively avoided keeping up with the case, I never searched for it, I didn’t even keep up with the allegations or original lawsuit when they first came out.
And still, the algorithm tried to shove this case down my throat. And most of the thumbnails showed Depp laughing; most of the video titles applauded him for giggling, for snapping, for essentially being completely fucking unprofessional on the witness stand. I’m supposed to applaud a white man for not taking justice seriously but demonize a white woman for being emotional?
I kept thinking - regardless of what the truth is, who wins? How can we look at this and say any part of this was respectable and didn’t reveal the worst aspects of society? And that’s not me both sides-ing the issue. I genuinely want to know.
If Amber was the victim, she just got a more thorough spectacle of humiliation than actual convicted abusers or even serial killers. For fuck’s sake, people have been more forgiving of Jeffrey Dahmer.
If Depp was correct - that he was a male victim of abuse, that Amber had been lying the whole time - again, people have been using his domestic violence case as comedic fodder. They’d still be laughing along through one of the most humiliating spectacles of his life.
If both sides were equally abusive then…again! It would still be everyday people laughing at and making a spectacle of the most humiliating trial of their lives. Treating their testimonies as if they were just funny little Nintendo glitches, or something. Treating this trial as if memes were more important than any measure of truth or justice or God forbid reconciliation.
Everything surrounding this trial and its non-sequestered jury has just been disgustingly cruel. Mass shooters aren’t this dehumanized. Serial killers aren’t this dehumanized. People were angry and they latched onto the first outlet they saw and it’s, quite frankly, really damn frightening.
That last part! I did not see this much outright hate and vitriol for the Parkland shooter—who’s still alive today, btw! It seems like nothing could be worse than a woman who—gasp!—lies! 🙄
White men will lie to justify entire WARS and no one ever thinks “gee, maybe he should be shunned and humiliated, and every white man after him will be held to a near-impossible standard if they want power”.
rayne i will personally be your bodyguard and defend you if anyone tries to come at you... this essay was brilliant and you hit every single point. thank you for this <3
i personally will be a backup bodyguard !!!
metoo really was just cutting off the nose to save the face of hollywood
meetoo was just popping some zits. Nothing was cut off.
very true tbf
i love you please write a book
as much as this was a depressing read, it was also an extremely important one. i was really invested in the harvey weinstein case and ronan farrow's inquiry, and, naively, believed that we might actually be entering an era where it's possible to bring down powerful rapists and abusers. the public response to this whole fucking trial has made me so depressed and the works of people like you and michael are honestly a glimpse of hope in all of this
You changed my mind about the Depp-Heard case, you made me think about the situation and the lives of women in similar positions differently. Much love to you, thank you :)
I feel way less insane after reading this!
amazing. genuinely brilliant. will be sharing this with every single person in my life that has breathed near this case over the last couple weeks
this is really commendable work, im proud that you said all you did. there’s a lot to tackle and unpack, and you did an excellent job of marie kondo-ing this case for everyone, really making people think and re-evaluate their opinions/thought processes. love you, treat yourself kindly!
I've read and seen so much now that I don't even feel the pain or discomfort that I used to. Instead, I feel pain for you; sitting down to writer such a well delivered synopsis, analysis, and general think piece while picking through everything must be horrible on the brain.
Speaking as an abused person feels almost pallid in the face of all this. Instead, I've been coming around to this weird sort of agitation and rage with these stories- particularly harkening to when "women fight back" after years of abuse. It's so demoralizing to look back at those stories now as I tried to find out HOW in the world Depp possibly won-- what made Amber different from other victims who triumphed over their abusers with the means that they faced likewise? Victims who maimed and killed, even.
The hill that these women needed to beseech themselves on was years and years of such extreme, massive and disgusting violence that they almost became effigies of themselves. Documentation, pictures and people who likewise suffered the same had to back them up to succeed. Brigette Harris comes to mind, and I've seen people use her as a "this is one of the good ones" thing which is so disturbing...
Now seeing the mob campaigns herding out hate to people like Megan Thee Stallion and Angelina Jolie is haunting. That evidence of violence and abuse-- clear violence!-- is so wantonly brushed aside.
Truly, women have to be so utterly disfigured, so transformed to the point of near martyrdom to get a chance at being seen, heard, and validated. This entire trial has been trigger after another, especially as I found myself feeling crazy that I wasn't fully siding with Johnny. That I had trepidation, that I felt this urge to "weigh both sides" as if my gut wasn't screaming the truth of the matter.
And even if people actually believe everything they think about Amber, it's so clear he should have lost that the immense media-darling drive of this entire court case comes into crystal vision. This is some monstrous alternate universe, some sort of Whatever Happened To Baby Jane timeline where something so clearly wrong, orchestrated so effortlessly by this washed out abuser, succeeds.
Thanks for writing this. Your words are always so potent.
thank you so much for posting this; i know the backlash is terrifying. reading this honestly made me cry it just feels so hopeless. seeing the violently misogynistic tiktoks and things people have posted, especially the ones made by women who are saying that amber heard is giving abuse victims a bad name. it's horrifying to me that people can see those things and think that yes, amber is the only woman who has ever been or ever will be treated like this, and she deserves it. your point about women aligning themselves with men's viewpoints in the hope that they'll be trusted more is so tragic.
It is really tiring hearing this case be framed as a crusade against women and women's rights from the get go without even trying to meaningful have discussions about these things. Let's get to the points. I have watched the entire trial. I read the UK verdict, each of his points, and how the judge came to his conclusions. I have listened to copious (9+ hours) of audio and it is very clear that Amber is a narcissistic individual who is also very violent. Let me explain why I came to this conclusion:
1. The audio. There are many telling signs from their interactions in their audio. Firstly, they are both very aggressive and abusive to each other verbally. He calls her washed up, ugly names, cunt etc. She calls him washed up, ball-less sack of shit, etc. They had a *very* toxic relationship. However, what is also reflected that Amber tends to internalize these fights and his subsequent fleeing as -physically- painful. There are multiple examples. She says "you're pushing me against a wall" and "I'm dying" when he talks about leaving to see his daughter. They both refer to verbal altercations as "attacks" She talks about how he kicks her when she's down, and this was in reference once again, to a verbal fight. Someone with BPD often interpret things differently from a normal person. It is obvious from the audio that his words hurt her, most of their discussions on said fights revolve around said fights where she's clearly hurt by them. So from that alone, her exaggerative nature is shown. Once, she talked about barely being able to survive one of their shouting matches. Survive.
This is enhanced by the fact that she talks about him constantly "splitting", in her words "even when there is no physical violence". Her notion on the stand that he would split after hitting her doesn't square with what is in the audio. She also has an honest conversation with him at one point where she says her one criticism of him, in fights as well as in life in general is his "disappearing act", referring to his gaze being obstructed. She calls it a lack of consideration. And what example does she use? Him leaving for an hour and not texting her, again, her words. This is the same person who claims that he is a dangerous criminal wife beater with an unbreakable addiction, and her biggest criticism of him isn't his drinking, isnt his splitting to do drugs, isnt his beating her up....but his disappearing for a while (in that instance, an hour) and not letting her know. It does is square with her words on the stand. What it does square with is what you believe to be proof of abuse. A highly exaggerative person would take a tap on the bottom as an attack. Her personal assistant claimed that she was a very hyperbolic person who regularly abused her. You don't believe her? And if you do, then you believe that Amber once again lied about being abusive to her, but wouldn't dare lie about her own abuse.
2. The constant contradictions to her testimony.
Here are just a few:
A. Regarding the bathroom incident where they talk about her kicking a door in his head and punching him. In her 2016 deposition and in Virginia, she described the incident as her trying to escape him, hiding in a bathroom and him trying to get in. She tries to close to door, causing her to scrap her feet and she kicks the door in his head and punches him in retaliation. Sure, this doesnt add up to what's actually being heard (he says he was hiding and at no point did she ever deny that), but maybe you can rationalize it. But in the UK, she testified that he was in the bathroom reeling and potentially going to overdose, she then bangs on the door trying to save his life. He is passed out leaning on the door and that causes her to scrape her toes and the rest is known. These are fundamentally different situations. You can rationalize forgetting events or missing key details. But you cannot rationalize two diametrically opposed situations occurring when she was privy to the audio in both. This does not make sense.
B. Amber said that the first year (2012) was a bliss, completely peaceful. He was sober and never hit her when he was sober. She mentioned that she will never forget the day it first happened. But- then there pictures that come out and show that her first alleged lip bleed (and her holding a card allegedly written by him threatening to return) that is dated in 2012. So okay, she says she forgot and had to go to her therapist notes to remember the exact date. Turns out he did drink their first year and did get violent. Then, she submits an undrafted email that she allegedly wrote in 2013 (!) where she says again, the first year was a bliss, and then things changed when you started to attack me and drink. So less than a year into their relationship, after their first spat, she forgot when he was actually viscous and would attack her? That's what we're supposed to believe.
C. Amber claimed in the UK trial that in 2013 Johnny backhanded her so hard that her blood splattered on a smeg fridge that they had in their home. She specifically mentioned remembering because she had made a joke about it the next day. Only to later recant that when it came out (via receipts) that the fridge wasnt bought until late 2014. She never mentioned it again.
There are just some of the contradictions that she has. I can bring up her alleging that he burned one of her photos, showed a picture that showed no burns and in a glass frame, later said it wasnt *that* picture, and then showed a picture of an obscured painting with no burns only to say that Johnny burned the back of it. There is so much to look into.
3. Her credibility. There is no objective way to look at *everything*, I mean everything, not twitter threads by Ivana and Michele Dauber, I mean her testimony, her history of law fudging, her history of abuse that was witnessed and conclude that we MUST believe her. Examples:
A. Regarding the dog situation in Australia. Kevin Murphy, an assistant, alleged that Amber pressured him to make Kate James falsify documents to get the dogs to Australia. He didn't, but instead did it himself. He admitted to lying under oath to the high judge in the UK because Amber pressured his job if he didn't. The judge found that Murphy wasn't credible because he lied under oath. The judge also concluded that Amber wasn't guilty because she didn't actually pressure Kate James to falsify documents, only maybe suggested it. There was an email submitted showing Amber telling Murphy about getting Kate James to be quiet about this and about "greasing" a vet. The judge did not accept this as substantial proof, but found Johnny guilty of proof on one occasions despite saying "Seen in isolation, the evidence that Mr Depp assaulted Ms Heard on this occasion might not be sufficient. However, taken with the evidence as a whole, I find that it did in fact occur". A judge claimed, in her reasoning that the evidence for this occasion wasn't sufficient, but still concluded that it happened. Does that seem logical?
B. Another occasion, it came to light that Samantha McMillen was working as an assistant to Amber Heard, however Amber had to declare her as an assistant and didn't. Amber claimed that Samantha was not her assistant, but just a friend. A check was presented from Amber that directly named Samantha as an assistant. There was an email presented that Samantha wrote that claimed she was Amber's assistant. However, Amber claimed that she only called her assistant and gave her checks because she was struggling financially and didn't want to make her feel bad. the judge found that to be serviceable conclusion. Again, this is just another bizarre situation that happens to make Amber look bad, but she's not lying?
I find it offensive to group people in a camp of misogyny for simply not believing her. Many of us has dealt with narcissists who deflect blame, who internalize, and who gaslight. I am not a fan of either of them. I am writing this because I urge you to do research, to talk to people outside of your bubble. I am asking you to do critical thinking instead of pointing the finger. I have grown up around violence. My mother would punch and throw things at my dad whenever she was angry, and he never initiated a fight. Far too often, I had to put my body between them, not to her from him, but to protect her from her. It may seem crazy to think that the man, the one with the financial and social power would dare be a victim, but it happens. Have an open mind, have conversations with people who wont just regurgitate the same thing. I can't know for certain whether she was abused. Maybe she is a pathological liar, unable to tell the truth, but is still a victim. It's possible, but whats disrespectful is calling anyone who doubts it a woman hater or a Depp stan.
This is not a case of people hating an imperfect woman. This is a case of people doing their research which includes, reading the documents, watching the trial, taking in all the evidence and coming to a conclusion, something I highly doubt you took the time to do before you wrote this. And that's disappointing.