Nah, justice was served

I notice that your comment is still pending while a newer one pro AH is not. I also notice several approved pro AH comments with insults and condescension towards those they disagree with, while yours contains none of that. Maybe they will approve it still, I don’t know.

“.there is always someone who is the primary aggressor” There’s audio of Amber saying she was the one to start the violence. Then the article also says “victims respond with violent resistance or self-defense”. Why is the idea of Amber being a victim who respond with violent resistance believable but not Johnny?

Thank you for saying what I’ve been thinking so much more concisely than I could conjure.

“By that reasoning a woman can never be disbelieved.” - Preciesely. Kylie Cheung, I suggest you stop writing on this topic. You seem to be extremely biased here.

The UK trial was entirely different and Judge Nicol has several conflicts of interest regarding The Sun newspaper. They allowed Heard’s ‘therapist notes’ which are hearsay and at great risk of being falsified documents. They still have not been proven to be bonafide therapist notes and her hand writing is eerily…

I am a progressive feminist, pro choice, leftist, anti Musk, anti Blizzard Activision, anti Cosby, anti blockchain, hate Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas... And I’m going to (fruitlessly) tell you that this echo chamber is off base and disconnected from reality.

Nope. The juror cited many reasons for not finding Heard credible, including dishonesty and altering photographic evidence. You would know that if you bothered to read what the juror actually said, instead of reading a biased second-hand account. You could also take the time to review evidence and testimony presented…

I’m no fan of Depp and I don’t think he’s an innocent sheep. He is overpaid, privileged and he is friends with known abuser Marilyn Manson. However, Amber Heard lied repeatedly on the stand when she didn’t need to. Her lies were credibly disproven by Depp’s team. She didn’t send the money to the charity and never took…

One of the responsibilities of a juror is to assess the credibility of witness testimony. Since conflicting testimony is routine they MUST decide who they believe.

It's obvious she was the primary abuser.

That is a large jump to a conclusion. And it ignores the facts. Her statement about pledge and donated being synonymous, her deposition where she said TMZ was alerted before the TRO filing, as well as numerous people including 4 police officers contradicting her testimony all very likely played in to the fact she…

Not believing lies because they issue from a person born with a vagina is not the same as misogyny. Each of your bad takes continue to get worse, Ms. Cheung. Congratulations.

She lied. Her evidence was non-existent. She lost. Foh with this feminist superiority bullshit and move on with your life. 

Because that’s not what the juror said. Someone changed his statement. Actual quote:

The only misogyny in this case is rooted in the assertion that women cannot have a full spectrum of personality traits, including those that are deviant and socially malignant. This misogyny is compounded when the media nullifies the women who testified to Heard’s instability by suggesting they harbor idealized…

No, Heard lost because she was the abuser, and not the victim. Depp is the one who lost the tip of his finger. Depp is the one with black eyes in photos. Heard even admitted to punching him on tape. The jury got it right!

At this point it just feels like you a deluding yourself. Virtually nobody believed her, including a huge percentage of women (which I’m sure you will explain away as internalised misogyny).

Why was she rude and sarcastic and aggressive when recalling the same events in her divorce deposition? It’s not about her “acting” like a victim it’s that her evidence was tampered with, she repeatedly lied, everyone on the stand bar amber and her sister corroborated what depp had said. The audio corroborated wheat…

Jesus, move on.