International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Social Issues & Current Events (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=82)
-   -   The Johnny Depp/Amber Heard thing (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=307772)

whoanellie 4th May 2022 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IsThisTheLife (Post 13798278)
The defence have produced an expert in psychology who, like Dr. Shannon Curry, has appraised Heard face-to-face over many hours.

There are a few problems with her testimony though.

- she hasn't restricted her testimony to her evaluation but has repeated, verbatim, Heard's allegations against Depp as given to her (hearsay).

- she always refers to victims of partner abuse as "she/her" and to perpetrators as "he/him/his", NEVER they/them/their.

Oops.

What did you make of Depp's attorneys disclosing what Curry's diagnoses would be before she ever met with Heard?

Ziggurat 4th May 2022 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whoanellie (Post 13798576)
What did you make of Depp's attorneys disclosing what Curry's diagnoses would be before she ever met with Heard?

That it's kind of obvious that she has borderline personality disorder.

theprestige 4th May 2022 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whoanellie (Post 13798576)
What did you make of Depp's attorneys disclosing what Curry's diagnoses would be before she ever met with Heard?

You're begging the question. Heard's lawyers never actually proved disclosure of the diagnosis. They tried to insinuate it. You bought into their game. If you were a juror, would you hang a guilty verdict on such thin evidence?

whoanellie 5th May 2022 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theprestige (Post 13798589)
You're begging the question. Heard's lawyers never actually proved disclosure of the diagnosis. They tried to insinuate it. You bought into their game. If you were a juror, would you hang a guilty verdict on such thin evidence?

The disclosure 'expert designation' is discussed here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNpEeIus_tY
at ~ the 4 minute mark. There is no doubt that Depp's attorneys disclosed what they claimed Curry's diagnoses would be before Curry ever met with Heard.
Depp is the plaintiff. Heard is the defendant. There is no 'guilty' verdict in a civil trial.
I do believe that the issue with this disclosure of diagnoses raises bigger questions about Curry's credibility than pronoun usage raises about Hughes' credibility.

Wildy 6th May 2022 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IsThisTheLife (Post 13798198)
I've put on 2kg/4lb from all the popcorn I've eaten.

I highly recommend Ozzy Man Reviews YT channel for an over-view of the proceedings.

Dr. Shannon Curry; he, like me, found her specs going on was the push over the cliff. What a woman.

I've been watching the proceedings on Nick Rekeita's channel since I want to hear what a peanut gallery of lawyers think about this as well. He had a pretty similar view on Dr Curry, and that was after he'd called out his chat for being simps because of their reaction to her just showing up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 13798218)
The muffin story was amazing! :)

It was reaching by Cat Lady to try and discredit her. There was very little to actually discredit so they had to attack her character.

Quote:

Originally Posted by whoanellie (Post 13798576)
What did you make of Depp's attorneys disclosing what Curry's diagnoses would be before she ever met with Heard?

I think that bringing it up was silly. I think I get the idea they were trying to argue, that since Depp's attorneys "knew" what the results would be in advance means that she interpreted her evidence in a biased fashion, but I don't think it'll work with the jury.

The Don 6th May 2022 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13798585)
That it's kind of obvious that she has borderline personality disorder.

I thought we weren't entitled to make judgements like this unless:
  • We had the necessary qualifications as a clinical psychologist
  • We had directly examined the person specifically with intent to make a clinical diagnosis

Or does that only apply to ex-Presidents. :rolleyes:

Ziggurat 6th May 2022 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Don (Post 13799646)
I thought we weren't entitled to make judgements like this unless:
  • We had the necessary qualifications as a clinical psychologist

You are allowed to, there's just no reason for anyone to care about it.

Quote:

  • We had directly examined the person specifically with intent to make a clinical diagnosis

This is important for professionals because people do take their opinion seriously even when they shouldn't. For lay people it doesn't really matter because of the former point.

In regards to this trial, though, it still wouldn't matter, because 1) the lawyers aren't presenting their opinion to the court, and 2) the allegation is that the psychologist told them what diagnosis she would arrive at before her examination, but if there's an alternative reason for them to believe Heard had BPD, even one which might get them "in trouble" on this forum, then we can't conclude the allegation is correct. And it's that allegation which could potentially cause problems in the court, not whether counsel might not meet our irrelevant standards.

I know you really wanted to try to play gocha games with off-topic derails, but this didn't work. So stick to the actual subject of the thread.

theprestige 6th May 2022 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whoanellie (Post 13798998)

The disclosure 'expert designation' is discussed here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNpEeIus_tY
at ~ the 4 minute mark. There is no doubt that Depp's attorneys disclosed what they claimed Curry's diagnoses would be before Curry ever met with Heard.

Agreed. And look how differently you phrased it this time around.
Quote:

Depp is the plaintiff. Heard is the defendant. There is no 'guilty' verdict in a civil trial.
I am confident that you understood my point.
Quote:

I do believe that the issue with this disclosure of diagnoses raises bigger questions about Curry's credibility than pronoun usage raises about Hughes' credibility.
Agreed.

IsThisTheLife 13th May 2022 07:12 PM

You know who Johnny reminds me of? Damien Echols.

dann 13th May 2022 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildy (Post 13799519)
It was reaching by Cat Lady to try and discredit her. There was very little to actually discredit so they had to attack her character.


The segment about the muffins was a little short in ThisIsTheLife's link. The uncut version is better:
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
I don't think it's a good strategy for a lawyer to annoy the judge. :)

dann 15th May 2022 01:36 AM

SNL, May 15, 2022:
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

IsThisTheLife 16th May 2022 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 13806491)
SNL, May 15, 2022:
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

I may be wrong, but I don't think this is going to curry favour amongst the hoipoloi. Amongst the media whores who are still equivocating/prevaricating maybe, but not the great unwashed.

Heard is currently not having a fun time at the hands of another rather impressive woman on Johnny Depp's team.

"Borderline personaity disorder"? I think not - heard is a full-blown sociopath.

dann 17th May 2022 05:42 AM

One doesn't rule out the other:
Quote:

Antisocial personality disorder and borderline personality disorder are two distinct conditions, although they do have some overlapping features. It's possible to have both, since many people have more than one personality disorder.
Antisocial vs. Borderline Personality Disorders (VeryWellMind, July 13, 2020)

Ziggurat 17th May 2022 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IsThisTheLife (Post 13808070)
I may be wrong, but I don't think this is going to curry favour amongst the hoipoloi.

This is just a reminder of how unfunny SNL has become. Everything just... falls flat. There's no punch to it, no surprise, no novelty. Even the pacing of the delivery is painful to watch.

How does this show still even exist? It's fallen so far from the days of "Jane, you ignorant slut".

dudalb 17th May 2022 03:33 PM

I still maintian who wins the legal battle is sort of a moot point.
Both have managed to damage their careers to the point where they will never be the same.
IN addition, Depp just looks in terms of physical appreance, terrible. I guess the booze, drugs, and high living caught up with him. I can't see the guy on the wintess stand every playing Jack Sparrow again, I don't care how much make up they put on him.
Heard never was really A list, her career is pretty much over as far a major roles go.

Ziggurat 17th May 2022 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 13809057)
I still maintian who wins the legal battle is sort of a moot point.
Both have managed to damage their careers to the point where they will never be the same.

The damage to JDs career happened before the trial. This is undoing much of that. Perhaps not all, but much.

Quote:

IN addition, Depp just looks in terms of physical appreance, terrible. I guess the booze, drugs, and high living caught up with him. I can't see the guy on the wintess stand every playing Jack Sparrow again, I don't care how much make up they put on him.
He's never going to do it again because he feels betrayed by Disney and will not work with them again even if they ask. But he still has box office potential. He has a lot of very loyal fans. He will continue to make movies, even if he's not in major franchises.

Quote:

Heard never was really A list, her career is pretty much over as far a major roles go.
I agree there.

dudalb 17th May 2022 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13809144)
The damage to JDs career happened before the trial. This is undoing much of that. Perhaps not all, but much.



He's never going to do it again because he feels betrayed by Disney and will not work with them again even if they ask. But he still has box office potential. He has a lot of very loyal fans. He will continue to make movies, even if he's not in major franchises.



I agree there.

You are coming off as a Depp fanboy.

theprestige 17th May 2022 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 13809145)
You are coming off as a Depp fanboy.

You are coming off as a Heard fanboy.

ZiprHead 17th May 2022 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 13809145)
You are coming off as a Depp fanboy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by theprestige (Post 13809147)
You are coming off as a Heard fanboy.

"Leave Britney alone! You're lucky she even performs for you bastards!"

Ziggurat 17th May 2022 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 13809145)
You are coming off as a Depp fanboy.

I don't think you've actually been paying attention to the trial. I think you've been reading about it from press which is still sympathetic to Heard. You don't actually have an argument you can make on the merits, so you attack my character instead.

But what's actually going on in the courtroom? Amber has produced lots of evidence that Depp passes out, allegedly from drug/alcohol abuse. Which, yeah, I'm not going to hire him to babysit my kids. But he's a rich Hollywood actor, who gives a **** if he gets drunk/stoned/high and passes out? Don't they all?

The important allegations were the physical abuse, not the drug use. And that's come up empty. Her claims have gotten more outlandish, but with nothing to back them up when there should be mountains of evidence in support. She's been caught in multiple lies, and the only actual evidence of physical abuse in the trial so far is that Heard physically abused Depp, by her own admission.

The worst thing this trial has shown about Depp is that he has bad taste in women.

dann 18th May 2022 07:36 AM

In the photos I've seen, Depp might as well have been asleep on a couch instead of drunk or stoned.
The photos only prove that Heard liked to make embarrassing photos of him, a very narcissistic thing to do.
She reminds me of Diana, 'the people's princess', 25-30 years ago. Diana also loved to portray herself as an innocent victim, but her performance was much more professional. People actually bought her self-portrayal as somebody who cared for poor people like the homeless. All she had to do was to have a lot of photos taken of her talking to poor people. Heard's stunt of pretending that the money she was hoping to get would be donated to charity blew up in her face when she didn't follow through. It was like a Trump charity. She could have learned from professional hypocrites and chosen the photo solution. It costs nothing! You would expect an actress (or at least her agent) to know about things like that.

Chanakya 18th May 2022 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 13809704)
In the photos I've seen, Depp might as well have been asleep on a couch instead of drunk or stoned.
The photos only prove that Heard liked to make embarrassing photos of him, a very narcissistic thing to do.
She reminds me of Diana, 'the people's princess', 25-30 years ago. Diana also loved to portray herself as an innocent victim, but her performance was much more professional. People actually bought her self-portrayal as somebody who cared for poor people like the homeless. All she had to do was to have a lot of photos taken of her talking to poor people. Heard's stunt of pretending that the money she was hoping to get would be donated to charity blew up in her face when she didn't follow through. It was like a Trump charity. She could have learned from professional hypocrites and chosen the photo solution. It costs nothing! You would expect an actress (or at least her agent) to know about things like that.


Indeed.

Somehow YT's flooded with these video snippets of the trial, and I've actually, for the first time, watched a whole bunch of them, each ranging from one or two minutes, up to around 15 minutes or so in duration. And I have to say, they make for riveting watching. Amber's getting skewered in there. Deservedly so, or at least that's how it seems to me.


I'm all pro-Depp at this point, seriously ---- even thought she's absolutely hot, if somewhat older than she used to be, while he's absolutely not (not hot, not "not older"). But still, I guess it's the skeptical thing to do to ask: What's with this whole deluge of videos suddenly floating around on Youtube? Practically all of them totally showing up Amber as the villain and Johnny Depp as the wronged guy?

(Of course, one set of possible answers to that set of questions might be: Because people are finding this interesting. And because that's how things actually were, because AH was actually trying out a bit of RL vamping that went wrong, and because JD was actually the victim here. Might well be that that's how and why it is. Maybe.)

Ziggurat 18th May 2022 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chanakya (Post 13809879)
(Of course, one set of possible answers to that set of questions might be: Because people are finding this interesting. And because that's how things actually were, because AH was actually trying out a bit of RL vamping that went wrong, and because JD was actually the victim here. Might well be that that's how and why it is. Maybe.)

That certainly would explain it, and I'm inclined to believe it.

But even suspending judgment on that, there are other reasons we can point to. Depp is much more charismatic, his claims are much simpler, there hasn't been real contradictory evidence presented to refute his claims, and frankly, Depp's legal team is better than Heard's. All of these contribute to better anti-Heard clips than anti-Depp clips.

dudalb 18th May 2022 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theprestige (Post 13809147)
You are coming off as a Heard fanboy.

I don't like either one and think they are both trainwrecks.
I thought I had made that clear.
You are the one cheerleadng for Depp as being the good guy here. Forgive if I think your right wing politics has a lot to do with this.

Ziggurat 18th May 2022 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 13809993)
I don't like either one and think they are both trainwrecks.
I thought I had made that clear.
You are the one cheerleadng for Depp as being the good guy here. Forgive if I think your right wing politics has a lot to do with this.

Politics almost certainly have something to do with why you're reacting so negatively to other people's positions. You still won't actually address the contents of anyone's arguments.

Matthew Best 18th May 2022 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 13809704)
Heard's stunt of pretending that the money she was hoping to get would be donated to charity blew up in her face when she didn't follow through. It was like a Trump charity.

In court on Monday, jurors were shown a clip from Ms Heard’s appearance on Danish TV show RTL Late Night in October 2018, where she said that ““$7m was donated in total”.

“I split the amount between the ACLU and CHLA,” she said on the show. “I wanted nothing.”

Mr Depp’s attorney Camille Vasquez pressed Ms Heard over the statements saying: “Sitting here today, Ms Heard, you still haven’t donated the $7m divorce settlement to charity, isn’t that right?”

Ms Heard told the court that she uses the terms “pledged” and “donated” interchangeably.

I use pledge and donation synonymously,” she testified, insisting that she does “intend to fulfill those obligations”.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b2080940.html

:dl:

dann 19th May 2022 12:53 AM

I don't think RTL Late Night was Danish. I think it was German or Dutch, but yeah.
If she has to pay Depp, she'll blame him for taking the money that was meant for the ACLU.

dann 19th May 2022 08:28 AM

Quote:

During the redirect examination of Amber Heard on Tuesday, Heard stated that she believes Johnny Depp won't look at her because he's guilty and lying. Amber said, "I survived that man, I'm here, and I'm able to look at him."
Amber Heard Says Johnny Depp is Guilty Because He Won't Look at Her (Law&Crime Network on YouTube, May 19, 2022)
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

Quote:

Johnny Depp's legal team questioned Amber Heard during cross-examination Tuesday, probing the actress on why Depp will no longer look at her. "He can't," Heard said after an audio recording of Depp swearing she'll never see his eyes again was played in court.
Audio From 2016 Explains Why Johnny Depp 'Can't' Look At Amber Heard (Newsweek on YouTube, May 17, 2022)
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

If it is a deliberate strategy, it may be a variation of the grey rock method (Medical News Today, Feb 1, 2021).
The Price and Payoff of a Gray Rock Strategy (Psychology Today, Nov 4, 2019)

Shadowdweller 19th May 2022 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 13810899)
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

Yeah - amongst the things I think that last clip fails to fully convey is the fact that:
1) After accusing Depp of domestic abuse and filing a (temporary) restraining order against him

2) Amber Heard proceeded to ambush Depp at his hotel and

3) Try to touch him and to pull his glasses off without his permission.

Because she "just wanted a hug". And then of course has the gall to claim that he won't meet her eyes because he knows he's guilty after being told in consequence for the above that she will never see his eyes again. There are strong reasons why public opinion has not been in Heard's favor.

TheGoldcountry 19th May 2022 03:10 PM

I'm getting the sick feeling that some of her claims may be true, but that she's torpedoed herself by willfully lying just to gild the lily.

It's just going to make it harder for abuse victims across the board to be believed. I'm sure that a lot of victims may be on her side, but I doubt they're enjoying her methods. Especially lying about the donated money.

Chanakya 20th May 2022 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Best (Post 13810433)
In court on Monday, jurors were shown a clip from Ms Heard’s appearance on Danish TV show RTL Late Night in October 2018, where she said that ““$7m was donated in total”.

“I split the amount between the ACLU and CHLA,” she said on the show. “I wanted nothing.”

Mr Depp’s attorney Camille Vasquez pressed Ms Heard over the statements saying: “Sitting here today, Ms Heard, you still haven’t donated the $7m divorce settlement to charity, isn’t that right?”

Ms Heard told the court that she uses the terms “pledged” and “donated” interchangeably.

I use pledge and donation synonymously,” she testified, insisting that she does “intend to fulfill those obligations”.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b2080940.html

:dl:


Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 13810899)
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

If it is a deliberate strategy, it may be a variation of the grey rock method (Medical News Today, Feb 1, 2021).
The Price and Payoff of a Gray Rock Strategy (Psychology Today, Nov 4, 2019)



Heh yes. The other day I saw a bunch of these trial vids, brief ones that kept popping up, all of which, while utterly banal, in a sense made for oddly compulsive watching. And those two kind of stood out I guess: the one about the donations not made, the part where Amber Heard's lies and deception were clearly exposed in cross-examination, and the one about the eyes.

Actually, I'm thinking, both of those will make for cool memes, those two utterly, memorably banal and weird quotes: "I use 'pledge' and 'donation' synonymously (!!!)" ; and "You'll never see my eyes again (!!!)". I mean both those are so utterly weird that your jaws can't make up their mind whether to drop to the floor, or to turn up in a hearty LOL.


eta: And, talking of weirdness, that utterly gross "fecal matter" thing? I'm afraid that's the point when Amber stopped being hot. I mean she's hot, a lying manipulative dishonest character but still utterly hot, but what the heck, that fecal matter business?! I see her pic or vid now, and no longer does she come across as remotely hot, only as someone who'd do the unmentionable deed, the other (and unbelievable) unmentionable deed, in bed. That, and "hot", simply don't go together.

dann 20th May 2022 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chanakya (Post 13811747)
eta: And, talking of weirdness, that utterly gross "fecal matter" thing? I'm afraid that's the point when Amber stopped being hot. I mean she's hot, a lying manipulative dishonest character but still utterly hot, but what the heck, that fecal matter business?! I see her pic or vid now, and no longer does she come across as remotely hot, only as someone who'd do the unmentionable deed, the other (and unbelievable) unmentionable deed, in bed. That, and "hot", simply don't go together.


Hot is subjective, of course, but I never found her hot. She looks like an ice princess.

mgidm86 21st May 2022 01:55 PM

Cool thread.

Wildy 22nd May 2022 05:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13809247)
I don't think you've actually been paying attention to the trial. I think you've been reading about it from press which is still sympathetic to Heard. You don't actually have an argument you can make on the merits, so you attack my character instead.

But what's actually going on in the courtroom? Amber has produced lots of evidence that Depp passes out, allegedly from drug/alcohol abuse. Which, yeah, I'm not going to hire him to babysit my kids. But he's a rich Hollywood actor, who gives a **** if he gets drunk/stoned/high and passes out? Don't they all?

The important allegations were the physical abuse, not the drug use. And that's come up empty. Her claims have gotten more outlandish, but with nothing to back them up when there should be mountains of evidence in support. She's been caught in multiple lies, and the only actual evidence of physical abuse in the trial so far is that Heard physically abused Depp, by her own admission.

They're working on the implication that because Depp abused drugs and alcohol that also means he's a physical abuser.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry (Post 13811299)
I'm getting the sick feeling that some of her claims may be true, but that she's torpedoed herself by willfully lying just to gild the lily.

But which claims seem true after you strip away the guilding?

Quote:

It's just going to make it harder for abuse victims across the board to be believed. I'm sure that a lot of victims may be on her side, but I doubt they're enjoying her methods. Especially lying about the donated money.
That's only if she's telling at least some kind of truth there. Just remember that she's also the person who is recorded as saying that nobody would believe Depp claiming he was abused because he's a man.

theprestige 22nd May 2022 06:48 AM

One wonders if she even pledged. If saying you're gonna donate gives you the same frisson as actually donating...

"To pledge" is just the aspirational form of "to donate", after all.

dann 22nd May 2022 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildy (Post 13813336)
Quote:

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry (Post 13811299)
It's just going to make it harder for abuse victims across the board to be believed. I'm sure that a lot of victims may be on her side, but I doubt they're enjoying her methods. Especially lying about the donated money.

That's only if she's telling at least some kind of truth there. Just remember that she's also the person who is recorded as saying that nobody would believe Depp claiming he was abused because he's a man.


We know that some people are raped. We also know that some people falsely accuse other people of being rapists. Both things exist.
Some people are actual victims of domestic abuse. Some people falsely accuse others of having abused them.

The latter would only make the former harder to believe if we were under the delusion that each and every accusation of rape or abuse is true, and there is no reason to think so. We already know that some of them aren't.
If Johnny Depp turns out to have been falsely accused, it won't make it harder to believe that other men have abused their wives or girlfriends. If he turns out to have abused Amber Heard, it won't make it harder to believe that other men have been falsely accused.

TheGoldcountry 22nd May 2022 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 13813647)
We know that some people are raped. We also know that some people falsely accuse other people of being rapists. Both things exist.
Some people are actual victims of domestic abuse. Some people falsely accuse others of having abused them.

The latter would only make the former harder to believe if we were under the delusion that each and every accusation of rape or abuse is true, and there is no reason to think so. We already know that some of them aren't.
If Johnny Depp turns out to have been falsely accused, it won't make it harder to believe that other men have abused their wives or girlfriends. If he turns out to have abused Amber Heard, it won't make it harder to believe that other men have been falsely accused.

This is of course the logical position to take.

I'm talking about the toxic MRAs and others who will use this high-profile case every time an abuse case comes up. Of course, one case has no bearing on the other one, but that won't stop them spreading their toxic ********.

It's same as it always was, it's just depressing and angering to me.

theprestige 22nd May 2022 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry (Post 13813671)
This is of course the logical position to take.

I'm talking about the toxic MRAs and others who will use this high-profile case every time an abuse case comes up. Of course, one case has no bearing on the other one, but that won't stop them spreading their toxic ********.

It's same as it always was, it's just depressing and angering to me.

The "toxic MRAs" are just balancing out the toxic radfems who #believeallwomen a priori, and insist we must treat every rape allegation as true up front.

You're more mad at the people calling out Heard for lying, than you are mad at Heard for lying. Really, you should be leading the charge against women who make false accusations like this.

dudalb 23rd May 2022 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry (Post 13813671)
This is of course the logical position to take.

I'm talking about the toxic MRAs and others who will use this high-profile case every time an abuse case comes up. Of course, one case has no bearing on the other one, but that won't stop them spreading their toxic ********.

It's same as it always was, it's just depressing and angering to me.

THIS.
IMHO Depp and Heard deserve each other; both are toxic.
But try telling the MRAers that.

dudalb 23rd May 2022 02:23 PM

I repeatl whoever wins in court is a minor matter now. They have wrecked each others reputation.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:25 PM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-22, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.