I know I'm late to the party ( actually I burned my invite if I got sent one ), but there's still something I'm not getting.
Why the F- was Ben Shapiro d- riding this s- show?
I have been reading today how a whole lot of women are concerned that if they do point out abuse ( A British judge did rule that the allegations were "substantially true" ) they can be subject to defamation by just stating they were abused. If I understand correctly the op - ed did NOT mention Depp by name, so the defamation is by assumption / association? Which can be seen as chilling. Also since the idea was to sue over the op - ed piece, since he wasn't able to sue Heard because of a divorce agreement.
Whatever. Now "people" who didn't have a dog in this fight can imagine this as some kind of strike against the "me too" ( which is why I think Shapiro got involved & of course because he's basically a bottom feeding vulture ) movement. Hopefully this ends this car wreck.
1. To try and get clicks for this totally meaningless court case, in an attempt to get clicks on unrelated content. Riding the coat tails of interest.
2. I would assume to make some statement about assumed credibility of accusers. Not an unreasonable discussion but surely in this case only with the intention of making it entirely political.
I’ve seen a number of articles blaming the right for trying to tear apart the me too movement. To some extent this is true. But I would say false allegations do the most damage. The Me Too organization’s involvement providing guidance to Gov. Comey did them absolutely no favors either.
In my judgement, and I did not watch the whole trial it’s very possible there was mutual abuse. That said mutual abuse is very rare. Abuse can take many forms but fundamentally is the harmful control over another person, often persistent. One could argue a differentiation between violence and abuse- it’s not uncommon for the victim to physically lash out at the abuser. It’s also not then uncommon for the abuser to claim they are the victim.
One thing is very clear. Amber Heard is not a credible person and was abusive. She actually had a very easy case- only to prove Depp was once offensive (or to say she was not referencing him in the article which never mentioned his name). Whatever the truth is, she gave little reason to the jury to be believed about anything.
Maybe in 5-10 years she’ll be on dancing with the stars or a celebrity apprentice reboot starring Donald Trump and others washed up from celebrity status.
I think it’s silly when people consider trials like this or Rittenhouse as some sort of landmark case. Every case is different, every jury is different, every judge is different. And this case involves two mentally unwell celebrity millionaires in a situation that’s not applicable no most people. It should be interpreted as nothing more as the lurid media spectacle that it is.
People want to see this as some sort of vindication story for Johnny Depp the celebrity (and it probably is career wise) but for Johnny Depp the person I’m not convinced that he is innocent in all of this. These are two sick people in a toxic relationship.
