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!
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.