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:Really amazed that people assume Johnny was the first one who laid a hand and therefore Amber must have lived the relationship in self-defense instead of the other way around—especially when she has the proven history of DV and was recorded many times admitting to instigating fights. Mind boggling, really.

Only women can be believed.

Yup. Too many still think men can't be victims. Such as the PP with the "abuse" post. Jerk.

Men can be abuse victims, but JD isn’t. He’s a washed-up junkie desperate to blame anyone but himself for ruining his life.

He’s seemed to of right sided it now. I’m sure offers are coming in for him while Heard is now an untouchable pariah.

If she plays it right, she can get villain roles after all her performances. She would make an awesome cruella, wicked step mother, witch, hired assassin, etc.

In all seriousness she’ll either have to do video on demand roles or maybe turn to YouTube or onlyfans to support herself.

She’ll end up on the reality and talk show circuit.

I really don't believe this and I'm not a AH fan. She seems like a really stubborn person and a fighter. She'll probably end up with some rich lesbian and to keep her dignity, she'll do some sort of work for women's rights. We can expect a book and more plastic surgery.

She is no longer hot enough to snag a rich lesbian. Maybe another Elon Musk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to Sephora to check out Savage, I vaguely remember it being pretty delicious.

It was a trashy and racist ad campaign, so not surprising Dior didn’t drop him.

BTW, it’s Sauvage, not Savage, but that’s a common mistake given how the racist ad campaign played on the similarities between the words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ACLU gets a black eye here, too. If your lawyers are ghost writing an op-Ed that results in a multi-million dollar judgment, that is less than ideal legal work.

I hope JD goes after them next. The ACLU has lost its way.

ACLU is suing him for 86k claiming it’s what it cost them to prepare paperwork evidence for the trial. Hope they never get it.

86 K is a high cost for this. For a cost that high, I assume they fought the production extensively with pricey outside counsel. We're not talking about copying costs.

Also they involved themselves by writing her op ed. Nobody will owe them damages.

It’s not damages, it’s reimbursement that is specifically provided for under New York law. No one is impressed by your ignorance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really amazed that people assume Johnny was the first one who laid a hand and therefore Amber must have lived the relationship in self-defense instead of the other way around—especially when she has the proven history of DV and was recorded many times admitting to instigating fights. Mind boggling, really.

Only women can be believed.

Yup. Too many still think men can't be victims. Such as the PP with the "abuse" post. Jerk.

Men can be abuse victims, but JD isn’t. He’s a washed-up junkie desperate to blame anyone but himself for ruining his life.

He’s seemed to of right sided it now. I’m sure offers are coming in for him while Heard is now an untouchable pariah.

If she plays it right, she can get villain roles after all her performances. She would make an awesome cruella, wicked step mother, witch, hired assassin, etc.

In all seriousness she’ll either have to do video on demand roles or maybe turn to YouTube or onlyfans to support herself.

She’ll end up on the reality and talk show circuit.

I really don't believe this and I'm not a AH fan. She seems like a really stubborn person and a fighter. She'll probably end up with some rich lesbian and to keep her dignity, she'll do some sort of work for women's rights. We can expect a book and more plastic surgery.

She is no longer hot enough to snag a rich lesbian. Maybe another Elon Musk.

I doubt there will ever be another man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really amazed that people assume Johnny was the first one who laid a hand and therefore Amber must have lived the relationship in self-defense instead of the other way around—especially when she has the proven history of DV and was recorded many times admitting to instigating fights. Mind boggling, really.

Only women can be believed.

Yup. Too many still think men can't be victims. Such as the PP with the "abuse" post. Jerk.

Men can be abuse victims, but JD isn’t. He’s a washed-up junkie desperate to blame anyone but himself for ruining his life.

He’s seemed to of right sided it now. I’m sure offers are coming in for him while Heard is now an untouchable pariah.

If she plays it right, she can get villain roles after all her performances. She would make an awesome cruella, wicked step mother, witch, hired assassin, etc.

In all seriousness she’ll either have to do video on demand roles or maybe turn to YouTube or onlyfans to support herself.

She’ll end up on the reality and talk show circuit.

I really don't believe this and I'm not a AH fan. She seems like a really stubborn person and a fighter. She'll probably end up with some rich lesbian and to keep her dignity, she'll do some sort of work for women's rights. We can expect a book and more plastic surgery.

She is no longer hot enough to snag a rich lesbian. Maybe another Elon Musk.

I doubt there will ever be another man.

This. It’s glaringly obvious that she only ever dated men in order to support her lifestyle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to Sephora to check out Savage, I vaguely remember it being pretty delicious.

It was a trashy and racist ad campaign, so not surprising Dior didn’t drop him.

BTW, it’s Sauvage, not Savage, but that’s a common mistake given how the racist ad campaign played on the similarities between the words.

I disagree that it was racist, unless the whole world needs to adopt American views, fears and arguments, framed to make everyone feel impure.
It's also a clever choice of a world that covers a few meanings. The ad was beautifully filmed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ACLU gets a black eye here, too. If your lawyers are ghost writing an op-Ed that results in a multi-million dollar judgment, that is less than ideal legal work.

I hope JD goes after them next. The ACLU has lost its way.

ACLU is suing him for 86k claiming it’s what it cost them to prepare paperwork evidence for the trial. Hope they never get it.

86 K is a high cost for this. For a cost that high, I assume they fought the production extensively with pricey outside counsel. We're not talking about copying costs.

Also they involved themselves by writing her op ed. Nobody will owe them damages.

It’s not damages, it’s reimbursement that is specifically provided for under New York law. No one is impressed by your ignorance.

Unpaid reimbursement to which someone is entitled by law IS damages. Let's calm down.

[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:Really amazed that people assume Johnny was the first one who laid a hand and therefore Amber must have lived the relationship in self-defense instead of the other way around—especially when she has the proven history of DV and was recorded many times admitting to instigating fights. Mind boggling, really.

Only women can be believed.

Yup. Too many still think men can't be victims. Such as the PP with the "abuse" post. Jerk.

Men can be abuse victims, but JD isn’t. He’s a washed-up junkie desperate to blame anyone but himself for ruining his life.

He’s seemed to of right sided it now. I’m sure offers are coming in for him while Heard is now an untouchable pariah.

If she plays it right, she can get villain roles after all her performances. She would make an awesome cruella, wicked step mother, witch, hired assassin, etc.

In all seriousness she’ll either have to do video on demand roles or maybe turn to YouTube or onlyfans to support herself.

She’ll end up on the reality and talk show circuit.

I really don't believe this and I'm not a AH fan. She seems like a really stubborn person and a fighter. She'll probably end up with some rich lesbian and to keep her dignity, she'll do some sort of work for women's rights. We can expect a book and more plastic surgery.

She is no longer hot enough to snag a rich lesbian. Maybe another Elon Musk.

I doubt there will ever be another man.

This. It’s glaringly obvious that she only ever dated men in order to support her lifestyle.

It's absurd, not to see through this. Someone trashing powerful men was only picking powerful men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ACLU gets a black eye here, too. If your lawyers are ghost writing an op-Ed that results in a multi-million dollar judgment, that is less than ideal legal work.

I hope JD goes after them next. The ACLU has lost its way.

ACLU is suing him for 86k claiming it’s what it cost them to prepare paperwork evidence for the trial. Hope they never get it.

86 K is a high cost for this. For a cost that high, I assume they fought the production extensively with pricey outside counsel. We're not talking about copying costs.

Also they involved themselves by writing her op ed. Nobody will owe them damages.

It’s not damages, it’s reimbursement that is specifically provided for under New York law. No one is impressed by your ignorance.

Unpaid reimbursement to which someone is entitled by law IS damages. Let's calm down.

Not in the context of this motion. And I am perfectly calm. Please stop trafficking in sexist tropes of women who disagree with you being hysterical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ACLU gets a black eye here, too. If your lawyers are ghost writing an op-Ed that results in a multi-million dollar judgment, that is less than ideal legal work.

I hope JD goes after them next. The ACLU has lost its way.

ACLU is suing him for 86k claiming it’s what it cost them to prepare paperwork evidence for the trial. Hope they never get it.

86 K is a high cost for this. For a cost that high, I assume they fought the production extensively with pricey outside counsel. We're not talking about copying costs.

Also they involved themselves by writing her op ed. Nobody will owe them damages.

It’s not damages, it’s reimbursement that is specifically provided for under New York law. No one is impressed by your ignorance.

Unpaid reimbursement to which someone is entitled by law IS damages. Let's calm down.

Not in the context of this motion. And I am perfectly calm. Please stop trafficking in sexist tropes of women who disagree with you being hysterical.

Wow, just the absolute weirdest pissing matches on this site. You cannot have a cause of action without damages. What you describe cannot exist as a "lawsuit." I won't engage further because who cares, but this is too strange not to respond at all. Sorry you're having such big feelings about this. Can't be a pleasant experience. Legitimately hope you feel better soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ACLU gets a black eye here, too. If your lawyers are ghost writing an op-Ed that results in a multi-million dollar judgment, that is less than ideal legal work.

I hope JD goes after them next. The ACLU has lost its way.

ACLU is suing him for 86k claiming it’s what it cost them to prepare paperwork evidence for the trial. Hope they never get it.

86 K is a high cost for this. For a cost that high, I assume they fought the production extensively with pricey outside counsel. We're not talking about copying costs.

Also they involved themselves by writing her op ed. Nobody will owe them damages.

It’s not damages, it’s reimbursement that is specifically provided for under New York law. No one is impressed by your ignorance.

Unpaid reimbursement to which someone is entitled by law IS damages. Let's calm down.

Not in the context of this motion. And I am perfectly calm. Please stop trafficking in sexist tropes of women who disagree with you being hysterical.

Wow, just the absolute weirdest pissing matches on this site. You cannot have a cause of action without damages. What you describe cannot exist as a "lawsuit." I won't engage further because who cares, but this is too strange not to respond at all. Sorry you're having such big feelings about this. Can't be a pleasant experience. Legitimately hope you feel better soon.

Also, for what it's worth, you're engaging in conversation with another woman. It's fascinating that you appear to have assumed you weren't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ACLU gets a black eye here, too. If your lawyers are ghost writing an op-Ed that results in a multi-million dollar judgment, that is less than ideal legal work.

I hope JD goes after them next. The ACLU has lost its way.

ACLU is suing him for 86k claiming it’s what it cost them to prepare paperwork evidence for the trial. Hope they never get it.

86 K is a high cost for this. For a cost that high, I assume they fought the production extensively with pricey outside counsel. We're not talking about copying costs.

Also they involved themselves by writing her op ed. Nobody will owe them damages.

It’s not damages, it’s reimbursement that is specifically provided for under New York law. No one is impressed by your ignorance.

Unpaid reimbursement to which someone is entitled by law IS damages. Let's calm down.

Not in the context of this motion. And I am perfectly calm. Please stop trafficking in sexist tropes of women who disagree with you being hysterical.

Wow, just the absolute weirdest pissing matches on this site. You cannot have a cause of action without damages. What you describe cannot exist as a "lawsuit." I won't engage further because who cares, but this is too strange not to respond at all. Sorry you're having such big feelings about this. Can't be a pleasant experience. Legitimately hope you feel better soon.

The ACLU didn’t file a lawsuit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ACLU gets a black eye here, too. If your lawyers are ghost writing an op-Ed that results in a multi-million dollar judgment, that is less than ideal legal work.

I hope JD goes after them next. The ACLU has lost its way.

ACLU is suing him for 86k claiming it’s what it cost them to prepare paperwork evidence for the trial. Hope they never get it.

86 K is a high cost for this. For a cost that high, I assume they fought the production extensively with pricey outside counsel. We're not talking about copying costs.

Also they involved themselves by writing her op ed. Nobody will owe them damages.

It’s not damages, it’s reimbursement that is specifically provided for under New York law. No one is impressed by your ignorance.

Unpaid reimbursement to which someone is entitled by law IS damages. Let's calm down.

Not in the context of this motion. And I am perfectly calm. Please stop trafficking in sexist tropes of women who disagree with you being hysterical.

Wow, just the absolute weirdest pissing matches on this site. You cannot have a cause of action without damages. What you describe cannot exist as a "lawsuit." I won't engage further because who cares, but this is too strange not to respond at all. Sorry you're having such big feelings about this. Can't be a pleasant experience. Legitimately hope you feel better soon.

Also, for what it's worth, you're engaging in conversation with another woman. It's fascinating that you appear to have assumed you weren't.

Men aren’t the only ones who use sexist tropes to silence other women when they don’t like what those women have to say.

[Anonymous]

Dr. Spiegel speaks: https://www.newsweek.com/i-testified-heard-vs-depp-backlash-horrific-1711386

I never noticed any hate towards him. People treated him more like a joke; not sure if that's worse.
Even his article reads somewhat naif (my dog! :cry

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Spiegel speaks: https://www.newsweek.com/i-testified-heard-vs-depp-backlash-horrific-1711386

I never noticed any hate towards him. People treated him more like a joke; not sure if that's worse.
Even his article reads somewhat naif (my dog! :cry

It’s not that hard to find hateful comments about him online. He has gotten threats. By continuing to degrade him and dismiss the message of the piece, you are only demonstrating how much you need to take it to heart.