Amber Heard V Johnny Depp

Over the last couple of weeks I’ve really delved myself into this trial. It’s been the most guilty pleasure. Like a real life drama playing out.

Anyway I started out quite neutral thinking they both had equal share of the blame but now as this trial has gone on and the more evidence gets bought up it’s unequivocally clear that Johnny Depp is actually nearly entirely innocent and that Amber Heard is a real absolute monster. The lengths that she would go to, even falsifying evidence and now has the real possibility of being charged with perjury. I’m now firmly in the JD camp and hope the verdict goes his way.

Anyway I was wondering what OzBargain might also have thought?

Edit: Depp has won his case! There is some justice in this world. And yes it’s not something more serious like gun control or climate change or whatever but I think this is still important especially for male victims of DV.

I’ll add a poll.

Poll Options

  • 601
    Team Johnny
  • 33
    Team Amber

Comments

    • +1

      "But the real winners are the lawyers."

      Well at least somebody won…. no one else did.

  • +4

    Lying publicly that I have already donated $7 million.

    The best was I use PLEDGE and DONATE synonymously;)

  • +11

    Having been married to a narcissistic ex-wife who abused me physically, mentally and financially. I am glad this is actually public to show how both genders can be the abuser and be the victim. To this day, i still dont get the same level of understanding or even people believing me when i say what happened as opposed to if i was the other gender.

  • The jury will decide

  • Both seem to have done some pretty bad stuff. Not interested enough to go through all the evidence and see 'who started it' but it's clear whatever has happened has been handled poorly by both of them.

    • +1

      So what you're saying is you're willing to condemn 2 people without even bothering to look at the evidence. Think about that.

      I am yet to see anyone who when pushed for 2 years doesn't behave badly at times, so if you can't be bothered to actually look at what happened, perhaps it's best you don't comment? Or better yet, look at what happened THEN form an opinion.

  • +4

    Can you add an option to the poll ‘both are horrible people in relationships who deserve nothing’. Quite frankly they’re both narcissistic arseholes who are using both the courts and media to one up the other.

    2 things have stood out to me
    1. Their therapist said they’re as bad as each other
    2. Depp’s defamation case in the UK was summed up by the judge on one of his text messages ‘no mercy’. People who are the victim would be very unlikely to use wording like that.

    • +1
      1. You picked a single expert witness over the many others that disagreed based on what other than your own bias?
      2. You think that if someone pushed you for years and did you physical and mental harm you're so perfect you would never retaliate even a little bit? Really?
      • -2

        No, I can confidently say that I wouldn’t.

        I picked that expert witness because I didn’t want to write an essay.

        Why can’t Depp supporters see that he can be violent? Her provoking him doesn’t make it Ok.

        Hearing the abhorrent messages he sent his friends was enough of an insight into his character. I really don’t understand why people were applauding and laughing at them.

        Again, to be clear, I think they’re both bad and in it up to their necks.

        • +2

          Dude, it was shown that the woman took a dump in his bed, cut off his fingertip, and falsified evidence. She is on tape bullying him, admitting she hit him, and boasting that no one would believe him. That you think you would be perfectly well behaved in that relationship blows my mind. That thinking is to say the least not clear.

          It is VERY telling that no other woman he has been in a relationship with has said that he was ever violent. Drunk, and drug-addled - yes both of them were. Did they both do horrible things? Absolutely. Should they have been together? NO. But that doesn't mean she wasn't the one primarily responsible for the violence in that relationship. If the roles were reversed and JD was female and AH male, there wouldn't even be a question as to who was the aggressor.

          It's time to start admitting that both genders can be destructive and both genders can be victims, and stop being lazy about assigning blame when there is violence. It's time to realize that reversing the sexism doesn't eliminate it. And it's time to stop being lazy and saying "but they both were bad". If one child pummels the living daylights out of another kid on multiple occasions and that kid hits back once and you say "they're both equally at fault and were both violent" you are part of the problem and have contributed to the bullying. ENOUGH!!!.

          • -2

            @syousef: The doctor legit said it looked like a crush injury, but because it didnt suit the lawyers questioning, he couldn't stick with his answer. So I don't believe that happened.

            There was enough evidence to show the controlling and financially manipulative behaviour Depp exhibits consistently. How many people have ‘freeloaded’ off him in one of his houses on the same street, only to have it ripped from under them when it suited him. These are not generous actions but the actions of someone trying to gain leverage over someone, to assert later when he required control. There was a huge pattern of this that the Depp super fan base choose to ignore.

            He also denied that the assauly following the winona forever tattoo never happened, because why would I do that for just a tattoo. Then in the following sentence does in to say that his tattoo’s are an expression if his life and are incredibly important to him. Which is it?

            You're right, no one has come out. How many NDA’s has he made a people sign over the years? Who's going to want to break that and have to end up in court with someone with pockets like his?

            So now that you've spoken and yelled, I should just be quiet and not respond. Do you see the irony in this?

            Just take a moment to reflect and remember that Weinstein was once a respected public figure.

            • @Flight88: I see. So when the expert can't "stick with his answer", you don't believe the evidence. Must be nice to live in a world where you pick and choose which proven facts you believe.

              I've "spoken and yelled" have I? You bet. As for comparing JD being "respected" like Weinstein, are you typing that with a straight face? Convenient that you've ignored AH's own taped bullying of JD too.

              I'm out. I seriously don't have any confidence you have any interest in actual justice and unfortunately you aren't alone. You just want outcomes in favour of your favourite celebrity. There is no reason whatsoever to discuss this further with you.

              • -3

                @syousef: Pick and choose chosen facts? A fact that a lawyer played on words for, they didn’t prove anything, they bullied the witness. The court allowed lawyers to make statements and mask them as questions.

                ‘Outcomes for my favourite celebrity’ I’m actively campaigning against this. Support for Depp has been nothing but a popularity contest. I don’t like either of them, I’m not a Heard supporter.

                Anyone who can write ‘no mercy’ regarding someone who supposedly abused them, is hardly the victim.
                Leaving a courthouse and blasting the song ‘War’ out of their car is hardly someone to be respected.

                I don’t know why I’m discussing with you. (profanity), you’re not far off saying #notallmen to any complaint.

                • +3

                  @Flight88: I’m not sure a text saying ‘no mercy’ has the equivalence of being punched, having bed defecated or having your finger sliced off.

                  I’m no Johnny Depp fan either but in this case he was the victim. He was the one that experienced the physical assaults.

                  Not sure where we’re supposed to with this.

                • +2

                  @Flight88: What on earth are you on about? Plenty of victims cry "no mercy" given the opportunity.

                  By equating his words with her violent action, and bringing up #notallmen when I did not, you have shown your true colours as a misandrist. That is just as bad as mysogyny. You are NOT making the world a better place.

                  • -3

                    @syousef: You’re a one sided misogynist, that’s why I brought it up.

                    The fact that you can’t even fathom that Depp was abusive is the issue.

                    You’re not making the world a better place. You’re just more of the same male ego bullshit.

                    • +4

                      @Flight88: Ok, sport. You spout nonsense as if you know me, go on about #mentoo when I didn't bring it up and call me a mysogynist while completely ignoring ALL the PROVEN abuse AH perpetrated on JD, and yet you think I am the one that can't fathom abuse? Your view of the world is so far divorced from reality I can only pity you.

                      The facts are what they are: she bullied him, she goaded him, she admitted to hitting him, she told him no one would believe him and she doctored evidence. The only demonstrated physical injury was his finger, and her photos were proven to be faked. One side actually did charity work making appearances with sick kids while the other lied about donating money and then lied about not knowing the difference between giving money and promising it. Nothing you say or do will change any of that. You can call it "male ego" but I'll stick with actually looking at the facts and treating people fairly.

  • +4

    To be honest, it's so sordid, that neither of them comes out *coveted in glory.

    Depp went off the rails when he left Vanessa Paradis, and still seems to be stuck in a mid-life/mid-career crisis. As for Heard, never heard of her until this all blew up, so can't comment.

    I bet they wish neither of them had started this public spat, unless it's to do a film about it later on

    • covered.
  • +1

    Who…

    Cares.

  • +3

    i don't like them, i hope they both lose.

    • +1

      whats not to like?

      One is a drug addicted alcoholic and the other probably has bpd, and may kill herself because of it…..

      Oh….

      • +1

        They are both drug addict and alcoholic. Get your facts straight lol

  • Loved both of them on screen

    Personal life? Sh*t (always) happens!!

  • If Johnny had assaulted her unquestionably she would have collected irreconcilable evidence. Video, audio, selfies, witnesses, 911 calls, national guard, etc etc .
    She seems to have meticulously recorded any possible moment that would portray JD in a negative light.
    Not the greatest fan of JD's usual overacting but loved his work in Deadman (https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0112817/reviews/)

  • Its clear as daylight that this woman is pure evil.
    If Depp doesn't win this case then it'll confirm 2 things:
    1 - There are bigger powers behind this case who don't want him to win as this will weaken the metoo movement
    2 - And it'll confirm that there is no such thing as justice in this day and age, its all BS

  • +5

    Meanwhile, jizzlain maxwell's case is being obscured and hid from sight, with no evidence or further prosecutions as it seems. But i digress, dep seems like the worlds worst husband/druggie but the bed shitter is probably worse and also seems malicious and generally an evil person. But hey, we all love jack sparrow so we have our biases, who knows.

    • Unfortunately that's what happens with criminal cases :( This was civil so an entirely different set of rules apply.

  • -2

    Its always fun watching a drug addicted alcoholic deny intimate partner violence.

    Its fun because he worked for Disney and part of their corporate values is Decency.

    I am #TeamF**kOff

    • +2

      So are you saying it’s ok then to falsify evidence and lie under oath. I don’t know about the US but definitely here in Aus sworn statements are taken very seriously.

      The investigation into AH’s dogs here is still open. If she ever came back here there is the real possibility she would be taken into custody pending the investigation.

      Also all the evidence shows he did not commit any violence whatsoever. He may have had said some ugly words but not once did he ever hit her. But she definitely has hit (not punched apparently) him on multiple occasions. Sooo…. That’s ok cos she’s a woman?

        • +3

          Maybe because of the message it sends? Hey you can blatantly lie under oath and there won’t be any consequences for one. But I admit it’s entertaining and it’s fun, it’s no different to watching a TV series or movie. Anything wrong with that.

          Yes I can name a few things that we might want to care about. E.g
          * The invasion of Ukraine and it’s potential for WW3
          * Climate Change
          * The Genocide in China
          * The Genocide in Yemen
          * The ongoing illegal occupation of Palestinian by Israel
          * The rise of Chinese influence in the pacific
          * Ongoing mass shootings in the US and it’s incapability to do anything about it
          * Cost of living
          * Cost of housing and how it impacts the next generation
          * The corruption amongst political parties and how they can be bought with money and leverage
          * No justice yet brought upon Epstein’s clients
          The ongoing police suspicion upon people of colour
          * The ravaging of poor country’s’ natural resources and then remaining poor

          There is that enough things?

        • +2

          i don't know why would you have this level of nihilism in your life and whether its a conscious decision …

  • +8

    Team johnny just won

    • +3

      And $15 millions. Eat turd, Amber!

      • +1

        13mill. turns out johnys lawyer cost them 2mill lol
        honestly i think johnny dgaf about the money just wanted it all out to clear himself. I will be surprised if amber ever gets laid again.

        • +2

          I think she will look pretty sexy homeless

      • +1

        10.35M, I think there is a cap of 0.35M on one of the item.

        • AH won her defamation case against JD and was awarded $2m. So subtract that from the total.

  • +1

    Not a fan of JD but don't mind watching his PotC movies. Didn't know who Amber Heard is even after I have watched Aquaman 1. LOL.

    Someone has to be lying. That's the most disappointing thing.

    Didn't keep track of the trial and only watch a few clips. One thing that caught my attention is whenever Amber Heard answers a question. She would turn her head to the right to face the Jury to give an answer before turning back for the next question. Is it just me or anyone found that odd?

    • Yeah there’s a whole bunch of TikToks and shorts mimicking that.

    • +1

      as JD's lawyer said, she was giving the the acting performance of her lifetime - giving the jury sad puppy eyes and 'I'm almost crying' face when she gets cross examined.

      • That's another thing I noticed too. Her face must be the saddest face I have ever seen and she held that sad face almost at all time while in court. It's so obvious that she is faking it to influence the jury and viewers.

        • Didn't work

  • +8

    this is a win for all men, against the terrorist organization called the feminism movement

    • +1

      Most feminists were on Johnny's side though. Only the most insane of the cat-hoarding manhaters supported Amber.

  • Don't think I've ever made it past halfway through a Depp movie … and I'm not fussy.

  • +4

    What I don't get is why this was televised. Is it normal in the USA? Seems like it would diminish the process and leave it impossible for people to be impartial

    • +7

      I think this is a big win for televising trials. The more transparency the better. It’s really highlighted the differences on how a case is covered by Social Media vs the MSM. And it shows to the obvious bias the MSM has, still being pro AH when it was blatantly obvious she was not a victim and hoaxed everything.

      If this trial wasn’t televised I guarantee that JD would not have anywhere near the level of public support that he does now. This poll is another reflection of that. If it wasn’t we would have been left with just the MSM to report on the case and as you can see there would have been a bunch spin put on it and thus skewing perception.

    • No it's not common. His legal team were clever, they tracked down the location of the SERVERS that hosted the Op-Ed and found they were in Verginia. Verginia televise their court cases. Johnny said early on he just wanted transparency, didn't expect to actually win as it's very difficult to win a case of this type. So that's why they chose Verginia.
      In a way he got lucky, while there were many key events, a stand-out own goal for Amber, was her boasting why she wrote the op-ed about Johnny. The Op-ed never mentioned Johnny, he had to prove without any doubt it was about him.

      • +3

        She scored so many own goals. Also Virginia is the spelling.

  • +2

    I was disappointed at Johnny for bringing his dogs into Oz, flipping the regulations. However it's seems it was Amber's choices and he was caught up in it because of his wife and defending their choices as a team. So I'm with team Johnny I guess.

    • +2

      Correct, as came out in court Jonny and his manager both told her not to bring the dogs. We all have had to stand behind a dumb decision our partners have made.

  • Gotta love the way he owned those texts about Mullosk. I am a huge fam of Elon, but heck they were funny.

  • +2

    I couldn't take any opinion on this voyeurism seriously because a few years ago I watched "The Trial of Tim Heidecker". There are summaries/highlights if you can't take the four hours of delight.

  • +5

    Was the poop on the bed exhibit number 2?

    • That’s some hot shit wit right there!

  • She had six weeks to prove she was abused and to have all the evidence she claims to have to be tested. But she failed and only won on a single claim made by Depp's lawyer that she had roughed up her own apartment before calling police, a claim I guess that couldn't be disproved. This is a win for women, if even a liar like Heard can get her day in court, then women who have actually been abused can also have their claims tested. Any woman telling the truth about something can't be disproven, as long as she can afford a lawyer who can tell her how to carefully share her truth in a non defamatory way.

    • Previously, a UK court decided that 12 out of 14 of Amber's claims about Depp being abusive were 'substantially true', so this US case should've been a cakewalk for her, right? The UK case had no jury, it was just one judge considering the facts.

      It should've been patently easy for her to just rehash all those evidence she had. But where were these evidence? Something else beside her taking photos of JD asleep/passed out in his own residence/room. If she was this meticulous in taking harmless photos of JD, there would have been a myriad of evidence if there was any truth to those false sexual abuse allegations she made. She would've made it her first priority to have medical experts/witnesses or police to back her claim and not just rely on her own anecdotes. Her lawyers would've made it the centrepiece of their case.

      The next day after an incident where she claimed Johnny broke her nose, headbutted and gave her two black eyes and a busted lip .. she had no injury whatsoever on the James Corden show. Must be some space age makeup that can hide swelling and a broken nose.

      In the end, all they had were appeals to emotion about her 'representing' actual victims of domestic violence ; its quite abhorrent to use victims of DV as a stepping stone for her own nefarious goals.

      IMO its not an unfortunate case of her somehow missing the opportunities to document evidence, there were none to begin with because the events as she claimed did not occur.

  • +4

    Its always been considered "funny" if a girl:

    Keys a guys car

    Throws his clothes out onto the front yard

    Smashes his things

    Slaps him on the face

    etc

    Yass gurl! Go you queen! etc etc

    Hopefully all the media hype around this trial will at least put all the crazy women in their place, after all, they wanted equality for so long.

    • +3

      Repeatedly kicks him in the genitals (Locki series). Can you imagine if a man did that to a woman in a TV series.

    • +2

      One woman a week is murdered in domestic violence in Australia, so keying cars and slapping faces probably isn't the same kind of thing. No excuse for violence in slapping faces though, but in terms of what men can do to women and what women can do to men, I mean in terms of physical limits and strength disparity, the average woman has the raw end of the deal.

      • +1

        Domestic abuse isn't just physical violence, and mental abuse can be just if not more harmful, more difficult to prove … so that strength disparity argument is moot. It'd be wrong to look at it as if one gender is incapable of malice. If you want to talk about raw deal, consider how men often came out second best in family court/divorce proceedings ; and also how many men ended up a suicide instead of choosing to write hashtags.

        If anything, Ms Heard showed just how many different ways she can bait and entrap men for her own gains.

        Nine Australians die every day by suicide. That’s more than double the road toll.
        75% of those who take their own life are male
        Over 65,000 Australians make a suicide attempt each year.
        In 2019, 3,318 Australians took their own life.

        https://www.lifeline.org.au/resources/data-and-statistics/

        • +1

          You have valid points, but it is wrong to use them to diminish the point that one woman a week is murdered in domestic violence. Sure guys can be emotionally abused but they are less likely to get strangled or have their head caved in when they try and walk away from it. And really you've done nothing to show that just as many or more of those male suicides aren't caused by the domestic abuse of another male.

          • +1

            @tonka: The win from the JD case is that false DV accusers are on notice, and false sexual abuse allegation is horrid stuff - I don't need to tell you that it can irreparably destroy a person's whole livelihood and reputation.

            I don't think anyone here has anything negative to say about or to legitimate DV victims' safety and their plight.
            Amber, the media and her hardcore supporters would dearly love to conflate her with the plight of actual DV victims so as to falsely give her legitimacy. AH using the plight of actual DV victims, that's the real crime here.

            • -1

              @payton: To be honest, I don't really care about these celebrity's dramas, I maybe object to being exposed to it. I'm hoping we never hear from either of them again and we can forget that somehow they've managed to diminish our species by dragging the whole of western society into their trashy drama.
              I guess I commented here because it wasn't about Heard or Depp just domestic abuse in general.

          • @tonka: What a sexist comment lol

            • @dji1111111: Sure it's sexist, in that human males are scientifically proven to be generally larger and stronger than females. You may as well accuse nature of being sexist you think my comment is.

        • -2

          I agree with you completely, but am also reminded of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68cQxinPmCQ

        • You dont know the law very well then. Mental abuse is not hard to prove in Australia. Any woman in Australia can take any normal arguments a normal couple may have from time to time and dramatise the effect it had on them, add a few fictional stories of alleged abuse, add a few sprinkle of fear and trauma without a shred of evidence and they can successfully be granted DVO against male in Australia and it's left for the male to defend these allegations at their cost. In other words, guilty until proven innocent. That is the effect the extreme feminism movement has had.

          • -2

            @dji1111111: If that is the case, it's not because of the feminist movement it's because of the douche bags that can't keep their fists to themselves that do need an DVO. If everyone was a good guy there would be no need, feminism has nothing, nothing at all to do with it. If feminism never existed the problem would still exist.

            • @tonka: What a non sense. There are plenty of women out there that abuse the system and do not hesitate lie under affidavit. You are clueless.

              • @dji1111111: Why don't you just blame feminism for that as well as being responsible for domestic violence. That's what I'm objecting to, that somehow you think feminism has caused domestic violence, that DVO's are necessary because of feminism instead of DV. But hey keep trying to prove your point by throwing me some more insults, I'm sure it helps me respect your POV more.

                • +1

                  @tonka: You really are off the rail lol nobody ever said feminism created DVO. Are you that thick?
                  Extreme feminism movement has created a culture and legal system where in an alleged domestic violence dispute, the male is assumed to be the perpetrator without any tangible evidence other than the alleged victim's sworn statement. If you cant comprehend a simple concept like that and go off on an tangent, you cannot be helped

                  • @dji1111111: I can see why your 'normal' arguments scored you a DVO. Are you not capable of a conversation where your main content isn't insults. This is Ozbargain, not Fortnite.

                    • +1

                      @tonka: I think dji11111111 is expressing frustration at why men get short end of the stick when it comes to DV.

                      Why is it when a woman claims the man has committed violence then she is taken at her word whereas when a man claims the woman has committed violence then he needs to provide conclusive proof before any action is taken. Amber Heard was recorded saying exactly this in the trial.

                      Does it not seem unfair to men they are by default deemed the perpetrator. Yes in most cases of DV the man is the perpetrator but most men aren’t don’t commit DV.

                      And it’s this post modern feminism that has alluded to the idea the all women are victims and all men should be held with suspicion. I’ve seen first hand in custody battles where the woman acts with total impunity and displays controlling, manipulative and toxic behaviours (e.g being difficult with care days and times, destroying property, hurling abuse the man’s family etc.) without any repercussions whatsoever whereas the man has had to tread extremely carefully to ensure he has a fighting chance.

                      Is that not unfair at all?

                      • @maxyzee: I agree with the points about DVOs being subject to abuse. I know a woman who has repeatedly weaponised them, I know a guy who has too. But they exist to be misused because of aholes who do bash their partners children and sometimes kill them. Not because of feminism. I am a modern feminist and female , and so are my friends, and I am insulted by your telling me I want to be a victim. We would all love there to be no need for DVOs, we would love it if the cops didn't need to err on the side of caution. People don't make false claims of DV because they are feminists, they do it because they are aholes.

                        • @tonka: You are correct. People don’t make false claims because of feminism but definitely because the are aholes. However it is much easier for one set of aholes to make false claims than the other set of aholes.

                          It is this post modern era of feminism that allows that set aholes to make false claims with impunity and empowers individuals in the future to become aholes if they wish to. What’s stopping these individuals from becoming aholes is their moral compasses, they know it’s wrong to make a false claim. However if they wish to, societal rules and legal regulations will give them the much easier time to become that ahole.

                          Also I’m not sure why you are insulted. At no point did I insinuate that you or your friends were wanting to be victims. What I and a lot of other people have pointed out was as above if women choose to at their discretion are allowed to be victims without as much resistance as apposed to a man having to proclaim his innocence.

        • Mental abuse is real, but how many of those from the 75% is from wife's abuse, and how many men seek out support groups? Females are more likely to reach out and get support, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are less mentally abused.

          Unless we have figures that break things down, can't just say "75% of suicides are men who were mentally abused by their wives.".

      • +1

        One woman a week is murdered in domestic violence in Australia, so keying cars and slapping faces probably isn't the same kind of thing.

        Bit of an odd whataboutism stat to randomly shoehorn into this discussion under the original comment. Of course physical abuse is worse but no one is arguing that here. This isn't the abuse olympics, both forms of abuse are shitty, as is people damaging your property.

        • Disagree, it's valid in context to the last sentence in the comment about women wanting equality.

          • +1

            @tonka: Pretty sure equality in this context is referring to being taken seriously and being treated fairly by our justice system(and to an extent society) with abusers facing consequences for the forms of abuse listed above.

            Women (or men) being killed or fatally injured by their abusive partners is obviously taken seriously by both society and the justice system. Sorry but this just sounds like some Twitter tier mental gymnastics to discredit another form of abuse.

            • @le457: Sorry I don't understand your reference I don't engage in Twitter. But I read the last comment in the persons post as challenging and even a little toxic. So seems fair play for someone to respond.

        • -1

          Well if it was an abuse Olympics and medals were handed out for abuse resulting in death, then men would take home the gold, silver, and bronze medals. Men would also hold all of the world records and would exclusively populate the seeding before the competition.

  • Who cares ? Get a life !

    • +2

      It's too hard, I am ugly too so even more hard. I need this.

  • Johnny Depp absolutely did this to himself by ignoring the advise of the wise absolute teachings of the crazy hot matrix https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pInk1rV2VEg

  • +2

    Highlight for me was when one of the crowd outside the court got interviewed on TV.

    She was trying to sound all impartial and balanced on camera.

    While wearing a pirate hat.

  • +2

    Seems to me that no one has won here. Heard won in the UK, Depp won in the USA. They're tied 1-1.

    Both the pro-Depp and pro-Heard sides have run off and declared their own victories: Depp won in the US court, Heard should have won and is a victim of a terrible man.

    https://www.smh.com.au/culture/celebrity/is-the-amber-heard-...

    CEO of Our Watch Patty Kinnersly shares these concerns, saying: “The silencing of victim-survivors often goes hand-in-hand with their abuse and control.”

    “Now, more than ever, we need to remind victim-survivors that we see them, we hear them and we believe them.”

    It seems that if a woman makes an allegation against a man then it's all over. He's guilty. No way can she be not telling the truth, because, she's a woman and she says she's a victim.

    • +1

      Yes I share your thoughts. However in this case she was never the victim.

      Why public sentiment is so one sided is the fact she claims to be the victim when all evidence and even to some extent her own testimony points otherwise.

    • +3

      “Now, more than ever, we need to remind victim-survivors that we see them, we hear them and we believe them.”

      Ironically, in this case we did see the victim. We did hear the victim, and we did believe him.

      Watching the astroturfed media overdosing on copium has been a real treat though, not gonna lie.

Login or Join to leave a comment