Amber Heard divorcing Depp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you are saying is the equivalent of saying the girl had on a short skirt before she got raped. Inflammatory adn irrelevant.

Amber's history of abuse has LITERALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. Because she hasn't been accused of abusing Johnny Depp. That would be the only fact that would make her police history relevant.

Wrong. Amber's history of abuse is relevant in that it paints a picture of her potential for domestic abuse towards other partners, especially if she hasn't addressed her anger management problems.

Relapse is real when your cash cow scenario a'int working according to plan... Calculating Amber wants to get paid.

AMBER HASN'T BEEN ACCUSED OF ANYTHING. What does her potential for domestic abuse have to do with a relationship where no one has said she was abusive? It might be a reason to warn future partners NOT to date her but it has absolutely nothing to do with this case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can you people get so worked up about two people you don't even know?

I am actually more worked up about this other PP's complete lack of understanding of logical thought processes than anything to do with Depp.

But I think it is less to do with these two people and more to do with the common message repeated in this thread that what is reflecting badly on the woman here is how brazenly she is talking about it and loudly she is exposing him. And how that's seen as 'improper' and somehow also seen as proof of her guilt (of what??) and his innocence. Which is kind of just generally upsetting from a victim's rights perspective.

The past history of both people should be an open book.

Only if it's relevant. Haven't you watched law and order? Unless past bad behavior shows a pattern it can't be introduced because it's prejudicial. If amber had accused someone of abusing her in the last to get a payday i'd agree it meant something, but she hasn't.

Of course the rules are different in the court of public opinion but you all really need to take a logic class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn't she be available? A costume fitting? Really? Poor excuse not to be there for a deposition.

http://www.tmz.com/2016/06/10/amber-heard-deposition-johnny-depp-dress-fitting/

She wants $$$$$ to make it go away. She avoided giving a statement under oath. Interesting

And yet Depp hasn't sued her for defamation yet. If I was a rich celebrity with bajillions of dollars at my disposal and my $$$$ coming from a lot of family films I'd be pretty concerned about clearing my name.

Ted Cruz didn't sue for defamation of character when he was accused of cheating on his wife. Not all people decide to go that route.

BECAUSE it was TRUE, peanut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you are saying is the equivalent of saying the girl had on a short skirt before she got raped. Inflammatory adn irrelevant.

Amber's history of abuse has LITERALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. Because she hasn't been accused of abusing Johnny Depp. That would be the only fact that would make her police history relevant.

Wrong. Amber's history of abuse is relevant in that it paints a picture of her potential for domestic abuse towards other partners, especially if she hasn't addressed her anger management problems.

Relapse is real when your cash cow scenario a'int working according to plan... Calculating Amber wants to get paid.

AMBER HASN'T BEEN ACCUSED OF ANYTHING. What does her potential for domestic abuse have to do with a relationship where no one has said she was abusive? It might be a reason to warn future partners NOT to date her but it has absolutely nothing to do with this case.

Amber has a police record for domestic violence. Do you get arrested for domestic violence without an incident that ends in someone calling the police on you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you are saying is the equivalent of saying the girl had on a short skirt before she got raped. Inflammatory adn irrelevant.

Amber's history of abuse has LITERALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. Because she hasn't been accused of abusing Johnny Depp. That would be the only fact that would make her police history relevant.

Wrong. Amber's history of abuse is relevant in that it paints a picture of her potential for domestic abuse towards other partners, especially if she hasn't addressed her anger management problems.

Relapse is real when your cash cow scenario a'int working according to plan... Calculating Amber wants to get paid.

AMBER HASN'T BEEN ACCUSED OF ANYTHING. What does her potential for domestic abuse have to do with a relationship where no one has said she was abusive? It might be a reason to warn future partners NOT to date her but it has absolutely nothing to do with this case.

Amber has a police record for domestic violence. Do you get arrested for domestic violence without an incident that ends in someone calling the police on you?

She hasn't been accused of anything related to abuse in the context of this incident. Nothing you said responds to the comment you're responding to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you are saying is the equivalent of saying the girl had on a short skirt before she got raped. Inflammatory adn irrelevant.

Amber's history of abuse has LITERALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. Because she hasn't been accused of abusing Johnny Depp. That would be the only fact that would make her police history relevant.

Wrong. Amber's history of abuse is relevant in that it paints a picture of her potential for domestic abuse towards other partners, especially if she hasn't addressed her anger management problems.

Relapse is real when your cash cow scenario a'int working according to plan... Calculating Amber wants to get paid.

AMBER HASN'T BEEN ACCUSED OF ANYTHING. What does her potential for domestic abuse have to do with a relationship where no one has said she was abusive? It might be a reason to warn future partners NOT to date her but it has absolutely nothing to do with this case.

Amber has a police record for domestic violence. Do you get arrested for domestic violence without an incident that ends in someone calling the police on you?

She hasn't been accused of anything related to abuse in the context of this incident. Nothing you said responds to the comment you're responding to.

Arrested or not, it may show a pattern of either instigating or escalating fights in order to control the situation/ get her way.

Just because it's not in the media doesn't mean there isn't more to the story; remember, she's the only one going that route at this point, so things are a little one sided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you are saying is the equivalent of saying the girl had on a short skirt before she got raped. Inflammatory adn irrelevant.

Amber's history of abuse has LITERALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. Because she hasn't been accused of abusing Johnny Depp. That would be the only fact that would make her police history relevant.

Wrong. Amber's history of abuse is relevant in that it paints a picture of her potential for domestic abuse towards other partners, especially if she hasn't addressed her anger management problems.

Relapse is real when your cash cow scenario a'int working according to plan... Calculating Amber wants to get paid.

AMBER HASN'T BEEN ACCUSED OF ANYTHING. What does her potential for domestic abuse have to do with a relationship where no one has said she was abusive? It might be a reason to warn future partners NOT to date her but it has absolutely nothing to do with this case.

Amber has a police record for domestic violence. Do you get arrested for domestic violence without an incident that ends in someone calling the police on you?

She hasn't been accused of anything related to abuse in the context of this incident. Nothing you said responds to the comment you're responding to.

Arrested or not, it may show a pattern of either instigating or escalating fights in order to control the situation/ get her way.

Just because it's not in the media doesn't mean there isn't more to the story; remember, she's the only one going that route at this point, so things are a little one sided.

Oh yeah his side is really pulling a lot of punches.

[Anonymous]

Bad boys smoke.

Yuck!

[Anonymous]

I never understood the appeal of Johnny Depp. "Bad boys" are disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Video released of a violent fight between them, hope all you Depp apologists have used this time to come to terms with the fall of your idol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Video released of a violent fight between them, hope all you Depp apologists have used this time to come to terms with the fall of your idol

Nope! Most of remember his destruction of property charges from before. There STILL is no proof or evidence that he hit Amber. On the contrary there are still those pesky police reports showing she had no injuries, pictures the next day with no injuries, and eye witnesses stating she had no bruises in the days before she made her false claims.

And so bizarre that she keeps tantruming and avoiding her depositions... If the truth was on her side it wouldn't be such a struggle for her to speak it in a legal setting. And funny enough, Amber is the one that has committed domestic violence before. And witness supported the events.

Now the real question is - when are you going to stop supporting the fantasist that is Heard?

[Anonymous]

I'm pretty sure they're both entirely nuts, which is the only conclusion I draw from that video. I don't think introducing that into evidence will actually be very helpful to her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm pretty sure they're both entirely nuts, which is the only conclusion I draw from that video. I don't think introducing that into evidence will actually be very helpful to her.

+1 I automatically became very suspicious of her when she missed her deposition. Something in the milk ain't clean.

[Anonymous]

I just watched the video and I must be missing something. Yes, he's drunk. Yes, he's stomping around. Yes, he's angry. Yes, he banged the cabinets. Yes, he poured himself another drink. Yes, he caught her secretly filming him.

Thank God no one ever sees me or DH when we are drunk and irritable. Yes, we stomp around. (For the record, DH often stomps around when sober.) Yes, we bang the cabinets shut sometimes.

OMG - we are obviously horrible people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn't she be available? A costume fitting? Really? Poor excuse not to be there for a deposition.

http://www.tmz.com/2016/06/10/amber-heard-deposition-johnny-depp-dress-fitting/

She wants $$$$$ to make it go away. She avoided giving a statement under oath. Interesting

And yet Depp hasn't sued her for defamation yet. If I was a rich celebrity with bajillions of dollars at my disposal and my $$$$ coming from a lot of family films I'd be pretty concerned about clearing my name.

Ted Cruz didn't sue for defamation of character when he was accused of cheating on his wife. Not all people decide to go that route.

BECAUSE it was TRUE, peanut.

Are you kidding? Liberace sued and won $20 mil b/c a magazine hinted he was gay:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedailymirror/2007/05/liberace_sues_c.html

He was gay. Just b/c he won doesn't mean it wasn't true what was said. Some people don't have the money or time to waste going to trial.