Court TV - Depp vs. Heard defamation trial

That's not really a victim's "job" though, is it. It's on the Prosecution. MeToo is a thing, whether you get the right help or not. But I'm less interested on how this affects show business cases, as real people with real lives that aren't under a public microscope constantly. I'm not going to take my cue from a ripped-from-the-tabloids trial, as to whether or not the Prosecution is doing their best.

 

Unless I'm missing something, this could absolutely affect non-celebrities. For decades people put up with harassment and abuse in the workplace, for a variety of reasons, but often because the abuser was in a position of power over the victim. At least to some degree, MeToo has changed this, and if you are facing abuse from a superior in the workplace you can go on social media and call the person out by name. Nobody wants that to happen to them and people are all now aware that it's a possibility. In most cases people will side with the victim, and there will be some action taken against the abuser by the company, because it's not a good PR move for them to not address it.

So my question is this, when someone comes forward in this way, are they subject to a libel suit? And if so, will they lose the suit if it can't be demonstrated that abuse took place? Because a lot of the time, harassment and abuse simply leave no hard evidence behind. If so, the fate of the abuser may still be decided by public opinion, regardless of the outcome of the case, but the fate of the victim will be much worse if they lose.

If this were to happen in a high profile case, it sends a message to the general public, that you better not call someone out unless you have some evidence to back up your claims of abuse.

Not meaning to argue, just want to be clear about why I think this case may have ramifications. I could totally be wrong!

 

Well stated.

 

Any girl that puts her turd on my bed is no friend of mine.







You know, that would make a good lyric

 

Depp, what can I say. Pretty much could have been the Brando or Dean of his generation. Scissorhands, Gilbert Grape etc..what a great start.

Then he just went completely weird. Im all for eccentric, artsy and whatever a motivation may be. I dont care. Dress up in a Godzilla costume and rub peanutbutter on your nose in your spare time. I..dont..care. But when an artist just goes "out there" for the sake of "out there" then yeah, no. Horrible choices of movies for the most part with weirdness cult of personality taking over his gift.

I hated his Cpt Jack character. Personal taste perhaps. And then to do like 5 of them or whatever? Money day. Or even worse he thinks it is his iconic role and legacy. Which I guess it is.

To me Depp is the definition of missed opportunity.

Looks like he is doing ok in this case though. Im with the room. Put them in a room together and leave them to their own devices. Crazies.

Im hoping the jury gives zero to either.

 

Depp has done quite well with his career (his choices of which roles to pursue). The fact that he goes (or went) after roles that are off the well-tread trails is admirable, IMHO. He's not poor by any stretch.

His choice of roles, movie-wise, is (overall) better than his choices of marriage material.

Never get married again, JD. But then again ... when the heart rules the mind ....

 

pirates aside, which he made for his kids, his filmography's excellent. i looked through his imdb and i can't see a period of films i don't like. i read a biography of him and it shows how 'fame' and 'wealth' if not handled responsibly can mess up a person

 

The Me Too movement has been mentioned a few times in this thread. This movement started with absolutely great intentions but I have struggled with some of the impact it has had.

The media, in particular, seems to have gone to the other extreme and decided that their approach is to 'believe all victims' before a court has even decided that there has been a victim.

A perfect storm has been created by the Me Too movement which means that celebrities are particularly vulnerable to false accusations when the media feel that they cannot question the motives of accusers.

I stand by the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty'.

 

It may not be apparent from my above posts, but I agree with you and have wrestled with the movement quite a bit. It's a tough balance and I agree that the innocent until guilty idea is very important, especially with regards to the legal system. Also, I'm sure it goes without saying that there is no guarantee that the court of public opinion is right about anything!

I appreciate what you're saying. Another thing to factor in is that innocent until proven guitly actually means "not guilty" until proven guilty, which is precisely why the verdict is called "not guilty". It does not mean that innocence has been established, but that guilt has not. So I still lean towards the idea that we should be wary of putting legal pressure on people making accustions. When the accused has been found "not guitly", that is not the same thing as proving that the accusations were false. It just means that they were not proven to be true.

But yeah it's a very tricky balance.

 

the thing which concerned me most about me too was the 'yeah, we all knew' response. in terms of daily impact i think there has been little. in work places, for example, those in charge are still the same who knew about it and let it go. if impartial help is made available through a new system, that'll be good

 

may i ask your original intentions in starting this thread?

 

I think she’s taken a break from the forum.

 

To answer your question, yes they will be subject to a law suit IF it can be proven that they are making false allegations in order to get back at a former partner. Depp is claiming that he never hit her and that she made false police reports. The officers who testified so far all say that they didn't see any injuries on her and didn't consider her a victim of domestic abuse. There has also been evidence that she coerced Depp into letting her and her friends live rent free in several of his properties or she would publicly file a restraining order against him. He is saying she made all of this up in order to extort him and has provided a lot of evidence that she did just that. To be fair, she hasn't presented her side of the case yet. It's too early to tell what the outcome will be but it doesn't appear that she's not an innocent victim.

 

As far as talent IMO Ed Wood, Donnie Brasco, Gilbert Grape are more my taste. As far as guilt only he and Amber really know the truth. If she really took a dump in bed that is sick but not abuse.

 

Does that sound like something a victim of domestic violence would do? Or is more something like an aggressive bully would?

 

Good stand to take.

But also consider that many things take place between two individuals, where there is no other witness to collaborate.

Likewise, someone may be the only witness to an event where there is no one else to substantiate the account.

Though it might appear to be unfortunate, to speak out in a manner that is likely to cause harm to another individual, where there exists no evidence to substantiate the claim, is basically wrong, reckless and complete irresponsible.

People should clearly understand that engaging in such actions can and often will open you up to a defamation lawsuit.

 

Or when the little head does the thinking...

 

A fair point. If I was speaking the truth though, my conscience would be clear. Not only that, anyone under oath is compelled to tell the truth. But you are not wrong though and the legal ramifications are something to consider.

As I said, it’s a tough balance. We don’t want a society where it’s too easy to get away with abusing people, and we don’t want one where it’s too easy to get away with making false accusations either. I completely get that.

Innocent until proven guilty is time tested. Totally on the same page with that.

 

from the tv show the newsroom. i think it fits well with the current discussion here

 

I said the name of the author and knew I didn't need to read any further.

 

It seems like that's the best system we've got at the moment.
As well , I've seen no one come up with a better system so far.
"Believe all women" is just absolute rubbish that makes a nice sound bite.
We all know, male or female, women who lie.
So we know women are not for some unknown reason, incapable of telling a lie,so to "Believe all women" is complete drivel.
As would "believe all men" .

What we should believe, is the provable facts.
It may not be perfect , but it is impartial.

 

There are also individuals for whom "drama" is an integral part of there everyday lives. These are typically people who refuse to take charge of and shoulder the responsibilities of their everyday lives.

From my observations, these individuals are always the victim. Something is always happening to them. Unfortunately, these individuals are always insistent on sharing their own personal drama with the rest of the world.

 

I don't believe anything that comes from Amber Heard...except for poop.

 

Maybe we need a new nickname for her?

How about Amber T***?

 

any link?