I don’t hate myself enough to delve deep into the depp/heard lore. I see that people seem to think he’s absolved, is that real? Do they both suck equally? Tell me how to feel, fellow echo chamber members!
I don’t hate myself enough to delve deep into the depp/heard lore. I see that people seem to think he’s absolved, is that real? Do they both suck equally? Tell me how to feel, fellow echo chamber members!
As far as I’ve absorbed from osmosis though it wasn’t just public opinion, he was also legally absolved? If im wrong I’d love to get a straight answer about it. Even “feminists” I know have told me they’re on his side
Legally, he got a small slap on the wrist, whereas Amber got hit with with a pretty big fine. Specifically (only know this after looking it up now) Amber got awarded $2mil, and Depp got $15mil.
But the whole trial wasn't about abuse, it was about defamation. It seems like they both suck and were shitty to each other, and just because it was 'proven' that Amber lied about about some of the abuse doesn't necessarily prove anything about any of her other statements. Even libs who 100% trust US courts can't lean on it for a verdict about abuse when that's not what the trial was about.
I've seen people say "Oh, but he hit her once, he'd have lost the trial so hard!" to mean that he's innocent, but I don't find that very convincing. From what I've seen, I think its pretty obvious he was also abusive.
Amber.
A ton of people assumed this was some kind of weird criminal-but-civil case where it was about proving or disproving abuse, rather than disputing allegedly-spurious accusations against Depp in a publication. Heard being found liable for defamation with regards to some specific claims made in a public article does not, in any way, mean that Depp did not abuse her, only that the abuse alleged in the publication specified was portrayed in a way that was, to some degree, knowingly false. Regardless of someone being abusive, legally speaking in the US, you can't lie about what they did in a public space to disparage them, even if they're a rotten person that deserves to be made a pariah.
If a hypothetical spouse of mine cheated on me and stole my money from my bank account before eloping, I can't disparage them by going to local media and claiming they, like, poisoned neighborhood dogs as a hobby. That's a pretty hyperbolic example, but hopefully that makes sense.
People, especially dipshits with axes to grind about MeToo and women in videogames, are not going to be interested in accepting that nuanced, but nonetheless critical distinction, and want to declare Depp innocent of all accusations of abuse, which is not at all what was determined in this case.
Yeah that's how PR astroturfing bullshit works - it gives people a vague sense of what "the truth" is without actually telling them any of the details. Notice that feminists you know have told you they're on his side without actually telling you anything meaningful about the case.
Like I said, I don't know what happened, and I don't care to know, either. But I know how to smell bullshit.