Johnny Depp trial in Fairfax County

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, just because she did not write it does not mean she did not get on that bandwagon. Why else would she write an oped? It was perfect timing and opportunity.

Because she was finally divorced with a domestic violence restraining order against Depp. She also announced her ACLA ambassadorship or whatever it's called. She had an attorney proof the Op Ed for any/all legal issues. Lastly, she had every right to speak or write about her experience.

I don't have an issue with her writing an oped about her experience if she was really abused, the issue with her is that she is an instigator in a lot of their fights as evidenced by her own recordings. To say that she is abused without mentioning that she is an instigator in their fights is untruthful, and worse when she speaks as an ambassador for the abused women.

This reflects a really poor understanding of the cycle of violence. Setting aside this specific case, domestic violence tends not to be a linear sequence of constant abuse. After an abusive incident, the abuser tends to be remorseful at first, but then anger and other negative emotions build and build until it explodes in another episode of physical abuse. That period when the anger is building again can be torture for an abuse victim because they know another abusive outburst is coming but they don’t know when. The result is that abuse victims will sometimes do things during that period to provoke their abuser just to get the next episode of abuse over with. It’s a protective response, but the consequence is that it looks like the victim is an instigator themselves.

This type of rationale is hurtful to those who are abused. Then it comes down to proving who started it. Chicken or the egg cycle

You are denying that the cycle of violence exists? I don’t know what to tell you, because it is all very well-established as an element of domestic abuse.

I guess you don’t believe victims unless they look the way you think a victim should look.

NP, I was abused and I never provoked nor initiated abuse against my aggressor just to prepare myself for a beating. If anything, I was on tip toes barely breathing trying not to provoke. Just stop. You're harming real abuse victims with this logic.

There isn't one way to be an abuse victim. Plenty of victims fight back.

I'm sorry you experienced abuse but it in no way qualifies you to discount the experiences of others.

I was not trying to discount others abuse, but it is interesting that so many people on DCUM think they are qualified to opine on the matter when they have no experience beyond television. BTW, fighting back is not the same as provoking and instigating a provocation. That is not fighting back.

DP. I am the one who posted the original explanation of provocation by abuse victims. I spent over a decade working as a pro bono attorney for victims of domestic violence. In addition to learning the legal landscape, I had to develop a very strong foundational knowledge of domestic abuse itself, particularly the psychological aspect, to properly understand my clients’ situations and how to effectively explain them to a court. And in doing that work, I spent over a decade being threatened, stalked and harassed by abusers. Do not dare to tell me I don’t know anything about domestic violence.

It would seem that the abuse would be repeated much more often with frequent intentional provoking?

Wow. And that girl in the short skirt was asking for it huh pp?

DP, I don't think PP was talking about victim blaming but more about the chance of more frequent abuse with intentional provoking, which makes sense. So why would an abused person seek to provoke?

For a whole host of reasons, but it is important to understand that this typically isn’t a conscious, calculated decision to provoke, it’s more of a subconscious decision for self-preservation or to protect others. For instance, if there are children in the household, the abuse victim might provoke the abuser to make sure the abuse is directed toward them instead of the kids, or to ensure it happens at a time when the kids aren’t around to see it. Or a victim may know the abuse will be even worse if it happens when the abuser has been drinking, so they’ll provoke the abuser at a time when they’re sober because it’s more likely to be limited to a few slaps instead of being pushed down the stairs. Or it could be as simple as the psychological torture of wondering when the abuse will happen again (which itself is a form of psychological abuse) becoming so unbearable that the abuse victim will provoke their abuser to get it over with an maintain some illusion of control over the situation.

This is a widely-recognized phenomenon, so if you would like to understand it better, I would recommend doing some research to educate yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The ignorance of domestic violence in this thread is staggering. If you want to learn about the cycle of violence and the ways people may shorten aspects of the cycle google it. There are thousands of pieces of education available.

+1. I’m the former pro bono attorney, and it makes my heart ache to see so much misinformation and ignorance about abuse being promoted here. Thieve types of attitudes exhibited here are a big reason why domestic violence is so insidious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ignorance of domestic violence in this thread is staggering. If you want to learn about the cycle of violence and the ways people may shorten aspects of the cycle google it. There are thousands of pieces of education available.

+1. I’m the former pro bono attorney, and it makes my heart ache to see so much misinformation and ignorance about abuse being promoted here. Thieve types of attitudes exhibited here are a big reason why domestic violence is so insidious.

Going back to what you said about women being more likely to be domestic violence victims and why... My grandfather was a victim and he literally didn't have the words to say what was happening to him and despite having a PhD and being smart and well-traveled and street smart, could not comprehend the idea that men can be victims of women in this way. It's probably a generational thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, just because she did not write it does not mean she did not get on that bandwagon. Why else would she write an oped? It was perfect timing and opportunity.

Because she was finally divorced with a domestic violence restraining order against Depp. She also announced her ACLA ambassadorship or whatever it's called. She had an attorney proof the Op Ed for any/all legal issues. Lastly, she had every right to speak or write about her experience.

I don't have an issue with her writing an oped about her experience if she was really abused, the issue with her is that she is an instigator in a lot of their fights as evidenced by her own recordings. To say that she is abused without mentioning that she is an instigator in their fights is untruthful, and worse when she speaks as an ambassador for the abused women.

This reflects a really poor understanding of the cycle of violence. Setting aside this specific case, domestic violence tends not to be a linear sequence of constant abuse. After an abusive incident, the abuser tends to be remorseful at first, but then anger and other negative emotions build and build until it explodes in another episode of physical abuse. That period when the anger is building again can be torture for an abuse victim because they know another abusive outburst is coming but they don’t know when. The result is that abuse victims will sometimes do things during that period to provoke their abuser just to get the next episode of abuse over with. It’s a protective response, but the consequence is that it looks like the victim is an instigator themselves.

This type of rationale is hurtful to those who are abused. Then it comes down to proving who started it. Chicken or the egg cycle

You are denying that the cycle of violence exists? I don’t know what to tell you, because it is all very well-established as an element of domestic abuse.

I guess you don’t believe victims unless they look the way you think a victim should look.

I guess you don’t believe victims unless they have a vagina.

I would suggest you read the rest of the discussion before you make assumptions.

.I read every post. Try again.

[Anonymous]

Do you guys believe that he raped her like she says? I tend to think she's telling some truth and he's telling some truth--him maybe more so. I disagree that the jury would have to find for her if they found he verbally or emotionally abused her. The op ed said she was reporting sexual violence. I feel like there is a big difference in being a jackass and throwing things and engaging in mutual combat at times and being an abuser who beats your wife on a monthly rotation and has raped your wife with a glass bottle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ignorance of domestic violence in this thread is staggering. If you want to learn about the cycle of violence and the ways people may shorten aspects of the cycle google it. There are thousands of pieces of education available.

+1. I’m the former pro bono attorney, and it makes my heart ache to see so much misinformation and ignorance about abuse being promoted here. Thieve types of attitudes exhibited here are a big reason why domestic violence is so insidious.

Well, not that's not quite right. DV is insidious, the attitudes here are a reflection of a microcosm of ignorant and ill informed people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you guys believe that he raped her like she says? I tend to think she's telling some truth and he's telling some truth--him maybe more so. I disagree that the jury would have to find for her if they found he verbally or emotionally abused her. The op ed said she was reporting sexual violence. I feel like there is a big difference in being a jackass and throwing things and engaging in mutual combat at times and being an abuser who beats your wife on a monthly rotation and has raped your wife with a glass bottle.

No, I don’t believe her. That’s what’s sad. I want to believe her but after watching the trial, I can’t. I think she was wrong to write the OP-Ed and she’s the one that opened the door to someone wanting to defend themselves. If she wanted to be left alone, she could have done it-easily. But she invited the paparazzi into her life-first when she filed for the TRO and second when she wrote the OP-ed.

[Anonymous]

The PP’s describing the cycle of domestic violence and it’s phenomena are instructive. But the evidence in this case is inconsistent to me of what you describe. AH’s actions do not match up with anything you are saying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ignorance of domestic violence in this thread is staggering. If you want to learn about the cycle of violence and the ways people may shorten aspects of the cycle google it. There are thousands of pieces of education available.

+1. I’m the former pro bono attorney, and it makes my heart ache to see so much misinformation and ignorance about abuse being promoted here. Thieve types of attitudes exhibited here are a big reason why domestic violence is so insidious.

Going back to what you said about women being more likely to be domestic violence victims and why... My grandfather was a victim and he literally didn't have the words to say what was happening to him and despite having a PhD and being smart and well-traveled and street smart, could not comprehend the idea that men can be victims of women in this way. It's probably a generational thing.

You might want to go back and reread what I said, because you clearly misunderstood it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, just because she did not write it does not mean she did not get on that bandwagon. Why else would she write an oped? It was perfect timing and opportunity.

Because she was finally divorced with a domestic violence restraining order against Depp. She also announced her ACLA ambassadorship or whatever it's called. She had an attorney proof the Op Ed for any/all legal issues. Lastly, she had every right to speak or write about her experience.

I don't have an issue with her writing an oped about her experience if she was really abused, the issue with her is that she is an instigator in a lot of their fights as evidenced by her own recordings. To say that she is abused without mentioning that she is an instigator in their fights is untruthful, and worse when she speaks as an ambassador for the abused women.

This reflects a really poor understanding of the cycle of violence. Setting aside this specific case, domestic violence tends not to be a linear sequence of constant abuse. After an abusive incident, the abuser tends to be remorseful at first, but then anger and other negative emotions build and build until it explodes in another episode of physical abuse. That period when the anger is building again can be torture for an abuse victim because they know another abusive outburst is coming but they don’t know when. The result is that abuse victims will sometimes do things during that period to provoke their abuser just to get the next episode of abuse over with. It’s a protective response, but the consequence is that it looks like the victim is an instigator themselves.

This type of rationale is hurtful to those who are abused. Then it comes down to proving who started it. Chicken or the egg cycle

You are denying that the cycle of violence exists? I don’t know what to tell you, because it is all very well-established as an element of domestic abuse.

I guess you don’t believe victims unless they look the way you think a victim should look.

I guess you don’t believe victims unless they have a vagina.

I would suggest you read the rest of the discussion before you make assumptions.

.I read every post. Try again.

I literally wrote that I know men are also victims of domestic violence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The PP’s describing the cycle of domestic violence and it’s phenomena are instructive. But the evidence in this case is inconsistent to me of what you describe. AH’s actions do not match up with anything you are saying.

Then how do you explain JD’s texts ? The disgusting violent texts? And the ones where he apologizes so profusely to AH? The whole thing about the “monster”? How can someone ignore that while determining if there has been interpersonal violence or even just emotional abuse? What about the notes from the marriage counselor? Why would AH bring them to marriage counseling if not to try to help?

I would say possibly one of the most damning things for AH’s case was the insistence on the postnup and having no prenup. And then saying I’m not in your will, said at basically near the end of the marriage if I remember correctly.

Also in the audio recordings, her frustration at JD leaving constantly instead of talking about a problem seems completely real. I can completely believe her frustration there. If that was all real, I completely believe her in that context. Add on alcoholism ( how about that glass of red wine he poured in the video) and out of control drug abuse, how is that not living in a toxic relationship?

Why did they never examine the reasons why his previous long term relationships end? Instead of the fact that they began?

If he wins, what does that do to the burden of proof that domestic violence victims have ? It seems like it would be a horrible precedent. Rottenborn alluded to it in closing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ignorance of domestic violence in this thread is staggering. If you want to learn about the cycle of violence and the ways people may shorten aspects of the cycle google it. There are thousands of pieces of education available.

+1. I’m the former pro bono attorney, and it makes my heart ache to see so much misinformation and ignorance about abuse being promoted here. Thieve types of attitudes exhibited here are a big reason why domestic violence is so insidious.

Well, not that's not quite right. DV is insidious, the attitudes here are a reflection of a microcosm of ignorant and ill informed people.

Deliberately so. They aren’t normal. They are idiots reacting to a paid-for, multi-year social media campaign by Depp to destroy his ex. I’m not sad for these posters, they make me sick. And they can’t be reasoned with. I’m so sorry for anyone who suffered DV and reads this thread. The “female survivors who can’t help but support JD because Amber simply isn’t a victim!” can each burn in hell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you guys believe that he raped her like she says? I tend to think she's telling some truth and he's telling some truth--him maybe more so. I disagree that the jury would have to find for her if they found he verbally or emotionally abused her. The op ed said she was reporting sexual violence. I feel like there is a big difference in being a jackass and throwing things and engaging in mutual combat at times and being an abuser who beats your wife on a monthly rotation and has raped your wife with a glass bottle.

No, I don’t believe her. That’s what’s sad. I want to believe her but after watching the trial, I can’t. I think she was wrong to write the OP-Ed and she’s the one that opened the door to someone wanting to defend themselves. If she wanted to be left alone, she could have done it-easily. But she invited the paparazzi into her life-first when she filed for the TRO and second when she wrote the OP-ed.

And exhibit A. You’re a despicable person. No one “invites paparazzi into their life” - by which you really mean “invites creeps to mock and destroy her online in pathetic service to their fandom for her ex*” by writing an op-ed naming no one or getting a protective order.

I can’t wait for the verdict. AH doesn’t deserve this. Vicious creeps like you will have to find purpose in life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you guys believe that he raped her like she says? I tend to think she's telling some truth and he's telling some truth--him maybe more so. I disagree that the jury would have to find for her if they found he verbally or emotionally abused her. The op ed said she was reporting sexual violence. I feel like there is a big difference in being a jackass and throwing things and engaging in mutual combat at times and being an abuser who beats your wife on a monthly rotation and has raped your wife with a glass bottle.

No, I don’t believe her. That’s what’s sad. I want to believe her but after watching the trial, I can’t. I think she was wrong to write the OP-Ed and she’s the one that opened the door to someone wanting to defend themselves. If she wanted to be left alone, she could have done it-easily. But she invited the paparazzi into her life-first when she filed for the TRO and second when she wrote the OP-ed.

And exhibit A. You’re a despicable person. No one “invites paparazzi into their life” - by which you really mean “invites creeps to mock and destroy her online in pathetic service to their fandom for her ex*” by writing an op-ed naming no one or getting a protective order.

I can’t wait for the verdict. AH doesn’t deserve this. Vicious creeps like you will have to find purpose in life.

The verdict doesn’t really matter. If Depp wins he knows she doesn’t have 50 million and never will and she probably won’t win either. I imagine they both walk away with nothing but Johnny Depp got what he wanted. She’ll never work again and is publicly disliked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you guys believe that he raped her like she says? I tend to think she's telling some truth and he's telling some truth--him maybe more so. I disagree that the jury would have to find for her if they found he verbally or emotionally abused her. The op ed said she was reporting sexual violence. I feel like there is a big difference in being a jackass and throwing things and engaging in mutual combat at times and being an abuser who beats your wife on a monthly rotation and has raped your wife with a glass bottle.

No, I don’t believe her. That’s what’s sad. I want to believe her but after watching the trial, I can’t. I think she was wrong to write the OP-Ed and she’s the one that opened the door to someone wanting to defend themselves. If she wanted to be left alone, she could have done it-easily. But she invited the paparazzi into her life-first when she filed for the TRO and second when she wrote the OP-ed.

And exhibit A. You’re a despicable person. No one “invites paparazzi into their life” - by which you really mean “invites creeps to mock and destroy her online in pathetic service to their fandom for her ex*” by writing an op-ed naming no one or getting a protective order.

I can’t wait for the verdict. AH doesn’t deserve this. Vicious creeps like you will have to find purpose in life.

She literally invited tmz to the courthouse