Johnny Depp trial in Fairfax County

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Almost everyone agrees that JD[i][u] 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.

Sorry, I fixed the mistake.

[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.

I posted the above, I understood it as one question (does he lose and therefore she win) rather than two (does he win this case and does she then go on to win her countersuit).

I think for sure he loses, like I said above. I do not think her winning is as sure of a thing, but I do think that if he DOES lose, and coupled with the UK verdict, she will have a much better chance of winning BECAUSE of the fact that they have gone so totally nuclear on her as to truly have ruined her reputation beyond repair.

Ironically, he has actually done to her what he is accusing her of doing to him (which I do not think she has done, he is just too famous and beloved and a rehab/pr tour would in face get him back in movies). And the fact that she will have become literally unhireable because of this, and have a much better case for tying it directly to these legal proceedings (ie, she really did lose out on Aquaman 2 because of this, his losing Pirates was a much more complicated thing because his own behavior had been poor, the news reported widely prior to her op-ed, and the franchise itself was floundering financially making securing another JD paycheck for it harder).

Anyway, long way of saying I think her case wasn't super strong before the trial, but it is getting stronger with every passing day that Amber Turd trends on twitter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP. Apparently there was expert testimony about it yesterday.

https://www.ladbible.com/news/social-media-expert-testifies-negative-tweets-amber-heard-20220519.amp.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP. Apparently there was expert testimony about it yesterday.

https://www.ladbible.com/news/social-media-expert-testifies-negative-tweets-amber-heard-20220519.amp.html

Thanks. This is not expert testimony that depp has done this (articles or bots).

[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.

I posted the above, I understood it as one question (does he lose and therefore she win) rather than two (does he win this case and does she then go on to win her countersuit).

I think for sure he loses, like I said above. I do not think her winning is as sure of a thing, but I do think that if he DOES lose, and coupled with the UK verdict, she will have a much better chance of winning BECAUSE of the fact that they have gone so totally nuclear on her as to truly have ruined her reputation beyond repair.

Ironically, he has actually done to her what he is accusing her of doing to him (which I do not think she has done, he is just too famous and beloved and a rehab/pr tour would in face get him back in movies). And the fact that she will have become literally unhireable because of this, and have a much better case for tying it directly to these legal proceedings (ie, she really did lose out on Aquaman 2 because of this, his losing Pirates was a much more complicated thing because his own behavior had been poor, the news reported widely prior to her op-ed, and the franchise itself was floundering financially making securing another JD paycheck for it harder).

Anyway, long way of saying I think her case wasn't super strong before the trial, but it is getting stronger with every passing day that Amber Turd trends on twitter.

I agree with all of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP. Apparently there was expert testimony about it yesterday.

https://www.ladbible.com/news/social-media-expert-testifies-negative-tweets-amber-heard-20220519.amp.html

Thanks. This is not expert testimony that depp has done this (articles or bots).

She doesn’t need to prove that Depp hired someone to do this. It goes to the extent of her damages on her defamation claim. Regardless of who is behind the bot activity, Depp set this in motion by making allegedly false claims against her. The bot activity has prompted those false claims, increasing the damage to her reputation. “I didn’t think it would hurt her as badly as that” is not a defense to a defamation claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP. Apparently there was expert testimony about it yesterday.

https://www.ladbible.com/news/social-media-expert-testifies-negative-tweets-amber-heard-20220519.amp.html

Thanks. This is not expert testimony that depp has done this (articles or bots).

I watched his testimony and the Takeaway was that justice for Johnny was so much more popular than any other term but he had to create a separate graph just so you could see the peaks and valleys of all of the other terms. Bots were not brought up unless I missed that part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

As if he need bots...I mean: "paid bots" and additional articles of how calculated and unlikeable Amber is

[Anonymous]

I think it will be a hung jury as they are both abusers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP. Apparently there was expert testimony about it yesterday.

https://www.ladbible.com/news/social-media-expert-testifies-negative-tweets-amber-heard-20220519.amp.html

That article did not state what you claimed.

[Anonymous]

His case looks stronger and stronger. She is just not believable. Too many people have come out and said how nice he is. The people on her side just look bitter like Ellen Barkin and even his old manager. I am also skeptical that Disney would admit they wouldn’t rehire because they thought he was an abuser. That would have been a lawsuit. He continues to look like a guy who walked into a crazy relationship. I hope he wins. Proving defamation is tough but at a minimum he is getting his good name back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP. Apparently there was expert testimony about it yesterday.

https://www.ladbible.com/news/social-media-expert-testifies-negative-tweets-amber-heard-20220519.amp.html

Thanks. This is not expert testimony that depp has done this (articles or bots).

I watched his testimony and the Takeaway was that justice for Johnny was so much more popular than any other term but he had to create a separate graph just so you could see the peaks and valleys of all of the other terms. Bots were not brought up unless I missed that part.

I think part of the point was that the volume of content generated at specific moments during the trial strongly suggested that it wasn’t purely organic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP. Apparently there was expert testimony about it yesterday.

https://www.ladbible.com/news/social-media-expert-testifies-negative-tweets-amber-heard-20220519.amp.html

That article did not state what you claimed.

Huh? The article discusses the social media expert’s testimony. What did I misrepresent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP. Apparently there was expert testimony about it yesterday.

https://www.ladbible.com/news/social-media-expert-testifies-negative-tweets-amber-heard-20220519.amp.html

Thanks. This is not expert testimony that depp has done this (articles or bots).

[/b]She doesn’t need to prove that Depp hired someone to do this. [b]It goes to the extent of her damages on her defamation claim. Regardless of who is behind the bot activity, Depp set this in motion by making allegedly false claims against her. The bot activity has prompted those false claims, increasing the damage to her reputation. “I didn’t think it would hurt her as badly as that” is not a defense to a defamation claim.

You or another poster said, DP paid for bots. That is an intentional act that you claimed he committed to destroy her reputation. That is not what the social media testified about at trial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP. Apparently there was expert testimony about it yesterday.

https://www.ladbible.com/news/social-media-expert-testifies-negative-tweets-amber-heard-20220519.amp.html

That article did not state what you claimed.

Huh? The article discusses the social media expert’s testimony. What did I misrepresent?

JD [/b]paid[b] bots to spread negative comments on SM.