EXCLUSIVE: 'I can't promise I won't get physical again, I get so mad I lose it.' LISTEN as Amber Heard admits to 'hitting' ex-husband Johnny Depp

C4Cat

C4Cat

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
14,307
YoungSandwich said:
Ooo, snappy. Maybe you guys could put your heads together and come up with an argument just as good as your comebacks.
Click to expand...
If life wasn't too short to be arguing with misogynists over celebrities and their domestic violence, we would!
 
2

2023

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 22, 2012
Messages
10,673
C4Cat said:
Hopefully Knight No. 1 will take my advice and realise that life is too short to be arguing with misogynists over celebrities and their domestic violence!
Click to expand...

But he's so close to having Amber tell him to suck her dick. A few more posts, some drug filled flights, a couple of donations pledges; maybe an apartment or 2 and I'm pretty sure she'll be yelling at him to suck her dick too!
 
cerebus

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
49,122
2021 said:
But he's so close to having Amber tell him to suck her dick. A few more posts, some drug filled flights, a couple of donations pledges; maybe an apartment or 2 and I'm pretty sure she'll be yelling at him to suck her dick too!
Click to expand...

Now where would he ever have gotten the impression that this thread is full of misogynists?
 
ShaunSA

ShaunSA

Derailment Squad
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
49,775
cerebus said:
Now where would he ever have gotten the impression that this thread is full of misogynists?
Click to expand...

I was once accused by someone of being MyBB's biggest misogynist

You guys throw the word around so much it doesn't mean anything anymore
 
cerebus

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
49,122
ShaunSA said:
I was once accused by someone of being MyBB's biggest misogynist

You guys throw the word around so much it doesn't mean anything anymore
Click to expand...

More or less than you throw around 'white knight' for anyone defending abuse victims, would you estimate?
 
tetrasect

tetrasect

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
9,105
cerebus said:
What term is used for those who intentionally overlook evidence of abuse to defend washed up alcoholics?
Click to expand...

The only "evidence" of sexual violence (which is what the headline of her article is) was Amber's testimony.
Nobody is overlooking that. In fact everybody (except maybe you since you didn't watch the trial) looked at it very closely and found it to be unbelievable, incompatible with the photographic evidence, disputed by other witnesses and fabricated.

Nobody is disputing that she had a swollen lip. It just doesn't match up with the injuries she would sustain if her testimony were true and fails to prove her claims.

What did match the evidence though is the fact that when Amber Heard got abusive toward Depp he tried to escape (not assault her) and that when he wasn't with her she got extremely agitated and jealous, to the point where she seemingly started having some kind of mental breakdown.

This whole case is a result of jealousy and subsequent revenge by a mentally unstable liar.

She even said, when asked if, on the day of her court appearance for a restraining order, she had notified the paparazzi, who were given the exact location where she would be (the public exit, not the celebrity exit) and what side of her face to take pictures of (on the one and only day she didn't wear makeup): "What actual survivor of domestic violence wants that?"

Indeed. What actual domestic abuse survivor does?
 
Last edited:
2

2023

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 22, 2012
Messages
10,673
cerebus said:
Now where would he ever have gotten the impression that this thread is full of misogynists?
Click to expand...

Not sure actually. If it was full of misogynists they would have attacked Vasquez and the judge. I don't recall anyone here having anything bad to say about them at all?
 
tetrasect

tetrasect

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
9,105
ponder said:
I see she's under investigation for perjury in Aus relating to her dog incident.
Click to expand...

Interesting...

So Amber failed to declare the dogs knowing full well that it was illegal.
When caught, she pretended to have "forgotten" to present the (non-existent) documents and proceeded to falsify them and order staff (witnesses) to lie under oath or face termination (along with lying under oath herself).

They really should have made a much bigger deal about this during the trial as it speaks volumes to her character and willingness to deceive.
 
Last edited:
Howdy

Howdy

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2021
Messages
4,830
2021 said:
Not sure actually. If it was full of misogynists they would have attacked Vasquez and the judge. I don't recall anyone here having anything bad to say about them at all?
Click to expand...
Damn, I was even told I'm crushing on Vasquez by @Emjay

(she was right) :laugh:
 
cerebus

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
49,122
I doubt this will succeed since it's going to Azcarte but I think they have a good chance at CoA. The inconsistencies in the verdict and the lack of proof of either actual malice or earnings loss are glaring issues. Juror 15 though...


Heard’s lawyers also asked the court to investigate whether one juror improperly served on the jury.

On a court list, the juror’s birthday was 1945. But the juror, identified in the filing as Juror 15, “was clearly born later than 1945. Publicly available information demonstrates that he appears to have been born in 1970.This discrepancy raises the question whether Juror 15 actually received a summons for jury duty and was properly vetted by the court to serve on the jury.”

The court clerk’s office has a statutory obligation to verify the identity of the jurors. But in this case, “it appears his identity could not have been verified…”



326cec2915dbfd03891f011d5d25c68f.jpg
 
tetrasect

tetrasect

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
9,105
cerebus said:
I doubt this will succeed since it's going to Azcarte but I think they have a good chance at CoA. The inconsistencies in the verdict and the lack of proof of either actual malice or earnings loss are glaring issues. Juror 15 though...


Heard’s lawyers also asked the court to investigate whether one juror improperly served on the jury.

On a court list, the juror’s birthday was 1945. But the juror, identified in the filing as Juror 15, “was clearly born later than 1945. Publicly available information demonstrates that he appears to have been born in 1970.This discrepancy raises the question whether Juror 15 actually received a summons for jury duty and was properly vetted by the court to serve on the jury.”

The court clerk’s office has a statutory obligation to verify the identity of the jurors. But in this case, “it appears his identity could not have been verified…”
Click to expand...
LOL that's ridiculous. They're saying that "Juror 15" was some random guy who walked into court and posed as a juror for months on end, based on a typo? :ROFL::ROFL::ROFL:


Let's take a look at Heard's other "arguments" mentioned in the article:

According to the court brief, “Ms. Heard never even became aware of the headline until Mr. Depp filed the lawsuit against her.”
Click to expand...
Pathetic lie.

Heard’s lawyers argued that republication requires “editing and retransmitting the defamatory material or redistributing the material with the goal of reaching a new audience.” Heard, they argued, “never edited or played any role with the respect to the headline” and the tweet she added does not constitute editing the article.
Click to expand...
Weak and unsubstantiated argument. Editing has nothing to do with it. Lawyers should know basic English.

In arguing that Depp’s award was excessive, Heard’s lawyers contended that Depp and his legal team broadened the parameters of damages against the actor during the trial. Depp “represented to the court he would limit his damages to the period Dec. 18, 2018 through Nov. 2, 2020,” the legal brief argued. Instead, Depp “continued to urge the jury to restore his reputation and legacy to his children as a result of Ms. Heard accusing Mr. Depp in May 2016 of domestic violence.”
Click to expand...
Huh? His reputation and legacy were restored by the verdict, not the damages. This argument makes no sense.

These lawyers must be having a laugh at getting paid to put this rubbish on paper.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top