dutchguylivingintheuk
Über Member
I really don't care if you answer but you leaving a part out here, the part where we are in the middle of an discussion and when it doesn't go your way you claim you can't read it or something. Still your free choice but considering so is my choice to say something about it, like i did, nothing to do with your gender, arrogance etc. but all with your own behavior
That's correct and i appreciate that, i also go in lengths to try improve or explain my point(s) better, it's just not very motivating to have a certain group of poeple only saying it's incoherent, especially because they happen to generally disagree with me.
Agreed, sounds a bit disturbed to say the least
Yes but it's about the deformation case, i mean we can start a topic about the vile stuff on the internet but i don't think that good for eithers mental health i mean there is a lot of vile stuff, both from Depp fans and Heard fans and anything in between.
The Sun deformation case was diffrent, first off because the Sun is Media second off because the question was different Heard Vs Depp was one simple question, has either Heard or Depp said something to defame one or a other. The result was they both did, Heard a bit more then Depp.
The Sun/press/media is protected by media laws etc. and the question was is the term ''wifebeater'' infame, a attack on Depps reputation etc. It was ruled it wasn't because the freedom of press weighted higher. The same as calling someone who crashed his car 20 times in 3 months a crash dummy in a newspaper most likely also has the same outcome of that person would go to court even if that person can prove all 20 times was not his fault.
It was also ruled that is was in fact about Depp, so not naming Depp did'nt do anything for her in this case. Also worth mentioning that he was in fact not mentioned because her earlier settlement for 8 million you know the 8 million she claimed to have donated, included an promise/condition not to defame eachother in public. Not naming him was not a gesture but a way to get out a certain clause.(Depp didn't sue her for this tough)
The article was a way of Tyring to) asserting her control over Depp back, the same as some abusive men try to abuse new partners etc. because after her million pound settlement i didn't exactly go her way.
The problem is that the ''movement'' assumes the accusing party is always correct. some of the text/things heard said to Depp was something like ''Who's going to believe you Johnny? followed by lots of insults etc. '' We where talking about classical abuse earlier, she was abusing Depp here assuming poeple would believe her earlier helped by the fact #metoo propagates Women always should be believed.
Legally and in most parts of society woman are treated equally, it's those area's with classical power structures that are ruled by old mean where it goes generally wrong, like for example media and music. Legal porn has completely transformed since the 90'' let's say Hugh Hefner area
Sure but you must not forget the case in the uk was against a newspaper, the case in the Us was Depp vs Heard, a big difference. Like always the quality of lawyers matters it shouldn't but it does, Depps team was clearly better then Heards team but that doesn't change the context of the text, the numberours times she was caught lying etc. While Depps text certainly aren't pretty most of hers are downright abusive, and more important, at one point she says ''nobody will beleive you johnny and implies she will try to destroy him with false information, and well over the past years it seems she executed that plan. it just didn't go her way.
I don't know, fact is they both used it to defame each other afterwards and it has now come to an conclusion in court.
I don't say it is it know how you see how weighty i think it is but it is from a reliable source and it points things very clearly out. Youre going past that underreported to fast in my view, because if 1% is more reported the whole 60-65% balance is gone, then the balance changes in terms of women being more emotionally abusive, other things that research(both of them) clearly showed is the big difference in prosecution where as absuive women get away with it more often, even when it involves serious violence. that can't be good, it should be near 100% prosecution rate in both cases in my view.
Sure Depp had a lot of terrible comments, however Heard comments where partly threats which she acted upon, and just like an controlling abusive person after she made a settlement with Depp made to ''close the book'' then came with the famous op-ed article, showing that just as an abusive male who can't stop stalking his ex she as an abusive female couldn't stop trying to damage Depp when the initial 8 millions settlement apparently wasn't doing enough damage.
R.
