Johnny Depp trial in Fairfax County

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His ex Ellen Barkin testified, and I believe Smurf.

She said he tossed the bottle across the room, not at her. She didn't help AH's side.

DP. She testified that he threw a bottle across a room in her direction. That it didn’t hit does not mean that he wasn’t, at the very least, violent with a reckless disregard for harm to others.

DP. She testified that he never threatened nor hit her. He did throw the bottle at a wall. I honestly do not recall if her testimony was if the bottle was thrown in her direction, but she did say he had a temper but never threatened or hit her. St that's kind of a mixed testimony.

That's why I said it didn't help AH's side.

If I was on the jury it would have. You have no idea how they are reacting to this news. This case is about whether it is possible that she was abused, and this lends plausibility to that.

I, for example, have never thrown a bottle anywhere that could have been interpreted as aggressive. Not once in my entire life, and I think people who are capable of that are very possibly capable of violence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His ex Ellen Barkin testified, and I believe Smurf.

She said he tossed the bottle across the room, not at her. She didn't help AH's side.

You don’t consider that abusive????

I didn’t say it wasn’t.

They were throwing bottles at each other. What a mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Timothee Chalamet is getting the roles that Johnny in his prime would get. They have a similar look and a similar image. Only difference is that Timothee seems a little more talented.

Is Johnny going to sue him next?

Not pp, but PLEASE do NOT compare Timothee to Johnny. They do not have similar look or image. Timothee is well spoken, talented, tall, slim, has a beautiful relationship with his family and he's drug-free.

I think Johnny has tried to sue and fired anyone who does not agree with him!

I am fully anti Johnny Depp in the context of this trial (which, for reading comprehension, does not mean that I think Amber Heard is an angel), but as someone who has also come from a screwed up family, I think its very bad to link the bolded with 'goodness'. Plenty of good people don't have good or any relationship with their family because of the behavior of the family. And for whatever its worth, back in the day, Johnny Depp was well spoken, talented and 'slim' (don't know why you're throwing that in there). The whole comparison is that JD in his prime is comparable, and it is a good comparison. I could totally see TC being a Burton muse or inhabiting the role of Edward Scissorhands.

Are we talking about 26 year old Timothee Chalamet? I'm confused. Does it make sense to compare a 26 year old to a 58 year old? In 30 years a lot can change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Timothee Chalamet is getting the roles that Johnny in his prime would get. They have a similar look and a similar image. Only difference is that Timothee seems a little more talented.

Is Johnny going to sue him next?

Not pp, but PLEASE do NOT compare Timothee to Johnny. They do not have similar look or image. Timothee is well spoken, talented, tall, slim, has a beautiful relationship with his family and he's drug-free.

I think Johnny has tried to sue and fired anyone who does not agree with him!

I am fully anti Johnny Depp in the context of this trial (which, for reading comprehension, does not mean that I think Amber Heard is an angel), but as someone who has also come from a screwed up family, I think its very bad to link the bolded with 'goodness'. Plenty of good people don't have good or any relationship with their family because of the behavior of the family. And for whatever its worth, back in the day, Johnny Depp was well spoken, talented and 'slim' (don't know why you're throwing that in there). The whole comparison is that JD in his prime is comparable, and it is a good comparison. I could totally see TC being a Burton muse or inhabiting the role of Edward Scissorhands.

Are we talking about 26 year old Timothee Chalamet? I'm confused. Does it make sense to compare a 26 year old to a 58 year old? In 30 years a lot can change.

I think PP was saying JD in his prime is similar to TC now (in his prime)

Timothee Chalamet is getting the roles that Johnny in his prime would get. They have a similar look and a similar image.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His ex Ellen Barkin testified, and I believe Smurf.

She said he tossed the bottle across the room, not at her. She didn't help AH's side.

DP. She testified that he threw a bottle across a room in her direction. That it didn’t hit does not mean that he wasn’t, at the very least, violent with a reckless disregard for harm to others.

DP. She testified that he never threatened nor hit her. He did throw the bottle at a wall. I honestly do not recall if her testimony was if the bottle was thrown in her direction, but she did say he had a temper but never threatened or hit her. St that's kind of a mixed testimony.

That's why I said it didn't help AH's side.

If I was on the jury it would have. You have no idea how they are reacting to this news. This case is about whether it is possible that she was abused, and this lends plausibility to that.

I, for example, have never thrown a bottle anywhere that could have been interpreted as aggressive. Not once in my entire life, and I think people who are capable of that are very possibly capable of violence.

+1 I can’t believe how many people are fine with slamming cabinets and throwing wine bottles!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His ex Ellen Barkin testified, and I believe Smurf.

She said he tossed the bottle across the room, not at her. She didn't help AH's side.

DP. She testified that he threw a bottle across a room in her direction. That it didn’t hit does not mean that he wasn’t, at the very least, violent with a reckless disregard for harm to others.

DP. She testified that he never threatened nor hit her. He did throw the bottle at a wall. I honestly do not recall if her testimony was if the bottle was thrown in her direction, but she did say he had a temper but never threatened or hit her. St that's kind of a mixed testimony.

That's why I said it didn't help AH's side.

If I was on the jury it would have. You have no idea how they are reacting to this news. This case is about whether it is possible that she was abused, and this lends plausibility to that.

I, for example, have never thrown a bottle anywhere that could have been interpreted as aggressive. Not once in my entire life, and I think people who are capable of that are very possibly capable of violence.

+1 I can’t believe how many people are fine with slamming cabinets and throwing wine bottles!

+1 I am PP and also in my ENTIRE LIFE, I have never yelled and stomped around a kitchen slamming cabinets! And if I was around someone who was doing that I would consider them very volatile and I would be very nervous about what they were going to do next! I also do not understand this idea that it is all totally ok.

[Anonymous]

Who thinks it’s possible that he loses and she wins?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who thinks it’s possible that he loses and she wins?

It is not possible it is exceptionally LIKELY. Based on the actual merits of the actual legal case at hand here, and not the merits of the 'who does the general public side with' case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who thinks it’s possible that he loses and she wins?

It is not possible it is exceptionally LIKELY. Based on the actual merits of the actual legal case at hand here, and not the merits of the 'who does the general public side with' case.

Juries are extremely unpredictable but given how unbelievably convulted his case was from the beginning, I don't see him winning.

The fact that they're showing he paid to plant articles about her and paid for bots is very compelling. There's a chance she might win.

[Anonymous]

Embarrassing and lacking dignity. It could work, of course, but this is mortifying to see even in still shots.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/19/why-johnny-depps-flirt-vibe-with-lawyer-is-deliberate-body-language-expert/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who thinks it’s possible that he loses and she wins?

I think she is the psycho, but neither will win their cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who thinks it’s possible that he loses and she wins?

It is not possible it is exceptionally LIKELY. Based on the actual merits of the actual legal case at hand here, and not the merits of the 'who does the general public side with' case.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who thinks it’s possible that he loses and she wins?

It is not possible it is exceptionally LIKELY. Based on the actual merits of the actual legal case at hand here, and not the merits of the 'who does the general public side with' case.

Juries are extremely unpredictable but given how unbelievably convulted his case was from the beginning, I don't see him winning.

The fact that they're showing he paid to plant articles about her and paid for bots is very compelling. There's a chance she might win.

I didn’t see this. Link?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who thinks it’s possible that he loses and she wins?

Almost everyone agrees that I would lose on the technical legal merits of the case. However, I think AH has already lost outside the courtroom. Perhaps that was JD's point. He wanted to prove that her article claiming abuse by him while not addressing her own DV abuse was detrimental to his career and a boost to her career. Does she even have any projects in the works now? At one time, her role on Aquaman was being considered scrapped or another actress replacing her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who thinks it’s possible that he loses and she wins?

It is not possible it is exceptionally LIKELY. Based on the actual merits of the actual legal case at hand here, and not the merits of the 'who does the general public side with' case.

Juries are extremely unpredictable but given how unbelievably convulted his case was from the beginning, I don't see him winning.

The fact that they're showing he paid to plant articles about her and paid for bots is very compelling. There's a chance she might win.

Source please. I have not seen that accusation beyond DCUM, but still without citation.