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 $$$$$ to make it go away. She avoided giving a statement under oath. Interesting
And yet Depp hasn't sued her for defamation yet. If I was a rich celebrity with bajillions of dollars at my disposal and my $$$$ coming from a lot of family films I'd be pretty concerned about clearing my name.
Anonymous wrote:What you are saying is the equivalent of saying the girl had on a short skirt before she got raped. Inflammatory adn irrelevant.
Amber's history of abuse has LITERALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. Because she hasn't been accused of abusing Johnny Depp. That would be the only fact that would make her police history relevant.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How can you people get so worked up about two people you don't even know?
I am actually more worked up about this other PP's complete lack of understanding of logical thought processes than anything to do with Depp.
But I think it is less to do with these two people and more to do with the common message repeated in this thread that what is reflecting badly on the woman here is how brazenly she is talking about it and loudly she is exposing him. And how that's seen as 'improper' and somehow also seen as proof of her guilt (of what??) and his innocence. Which is kind of just generally upsetting from a victim's rights perspective.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn't she be available? A costume fitting? Really? Poor excuse not to be there for a deposition.
http://www.tmz.com/2016/06/10/amber-heard-deposition-johnny-depp-dress-fitting/
She wants $$$$$ to make it go away. She avoided giving a statement under oath. Interesting
And yet Depp hasn't sued her for defamation yet. If I was a rich celebrity with bajillions of dollars at my disposal and my $$$$ coming from a lot of family films I'd be pretty concerned about clearing my name.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn't she be available? A costume fitting? Really? Poor excuse not to be there for a deposition.
http://www.tmz.com/2016/06/10/amber-heard-deposition-johnny-depp-dress-fitting/
She wants $$$$$ to make it go away. She avoided giving a statement under oath. Interesting
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What you are saying is the equivalent of saying the girl had on a short skirt before she got raped. Inflammatory adn irrelevant.
Amber's history of abuse has LITERALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. Because she hasn't been accused of abusing Johnny Depp. That would be the only fact that would make her police history relevant.
Yet you can point out Johnny had a volatile relationship with Winona and that is okay? We are not talking about rape.
WTF dude. The issue at hand is whether or not Johnny Depp abused Amber Heard. Therefore Amber Heard's past is not relevant because she is not being accused of anything. Johnny Depp HAS been accused of something, therefore his past behavior IS relevant. Logic, its not THAT hard.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn't she be available? A costume fitting? Really? Poor excuse not to be there for a deposition.
http://www.tmz.com/2016/06/10/amber-heard-deposition-johnny-depp-dress-fitting/
She wants $$$$$ to make it go away. She avoided giving a statement under oath. Interesting
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/
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Amber was arrested for assaulting/domestic violence her girlfriend in 2009.
Just released...
I saw that. Curiouser and curiouser.
She also had a forensic specialist authenticate the text messages that essentially prove her story. I know Johnny Depp is beloved but she has a lot of pretty hardcore evidence. All he has is his friends saying they could never believe it (and people on his payroll saying it didn't happen that way).
And the girlfriend issued a statement saying that incident wasn't as reported and charges were never filed/amber never prosecuted. Although I'm not sure it really matters, she could have had a domestic incident with a girlfriend in the past and still have been beaten up by Depp, not mutually exclusive.
No she doesn't. She has a police report citing no injuries and the cops have reaffirmed that there were no injuries on the night she claims he hit her. She also has a now deleted Instagram pic from the next day that doesn't show any bruising.
She has witnesses photos and texts. What more do you want? And it is more subtle but there is also the fact that this is a major A-list movie star who most of hollywood will support de facto (and some in hollywood will aggressively support because he is their meal ticket like disney who doesn't want to launch pirates 5 next year with a wife beater). And the fact that every witness who comes out and supports Amber who is in the business, (like her friend talking about why she called 911 http://www.etonline.com/news/190431_amber_heard_friend_who_called_911_speaks_out_on_alleged_abuse/) is putting their careers in danger by supporting her and going against the machine. Meanwhile the only people on Depp's side are either on the payroll (and therefore have clear incentive to take his side, old costars who can't imagine him doing this or his family who have both a financial and an emotional incentive to support him.
The guys has a known substance abuse problem and a history of volatile relationships before Vanessa Paradis. So what is more likely, an addict with impulse control problems clearly going through a midlife crisis having some violent outbursts or a woman fabricating tons of evidence, producing lying witnesses and the most celebrity friendly magazine on the planet going against one of the biggest celebrities in hollywood solely on a b-list actresses' word?
If it makes you feel better Amber probably was also a gold digger. But being a gold digger and being a victim of abuse aren't mutually exclusive. And abusing someone is illegal.
Anonymous wrote:How can you people get so worked up about two people you don't even know?
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.
Yet you can point out Johnny had a volatile relationship with Winona and that is okay? We are not talking about rape.
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.