So what went on during the past week in the never-ending Depp-Heard soap opera? Well it isn’t ending (yet) because Amber Heard supporters refuse to admit they bet everything on the wrong horse, including their own credibility. That doesn’t mean they haven’t ceased putting what credibility they think they have left in the tank. Take for example Josh Dickey, writing for The Wrap last week, who completely misinterprets the TMZ kitchen cabinet video; as what frustrates so many people who judged the case on the facts, Dickey seems to have just stumbled upon the video for the first time, unaware of the circumstances surrounding it, not understanding what Depp is angry about, that Heard seems to think it is “amusing,” and only cares insofar that she isn’t to blame for his mood—which she insinuates that she frequently causes by starting “arguments,” and that her smirking face shows that she has no fear of him and is taking pleasure in upsetting him.
More to the point, Depp at first didn’t know he was being recorded, and we see he was taking out his frustrations on inanimate objects—not Heard; on the other hand, we listened in those audios that Heard took out her frustrations on him for the pettiest of petty self-involvement, and we hear Depp metaphorically pulling his hair out trying to figure out not just what her “problem” is, but how to “fix” it—because like all serial complainers, Heard’s has a “feeling good about feeling bad” mindset.
No, like so many Heard stans, Dickey apparently didn’t pay any attention to the trial, and is only aware of the trial and the facts surrounding it through the “believe all women” narrative chosen by the mainstream media. And like nearly all MSM “journalists” who have taken Heard’s lies as gospel, the lack of a comments section to “school” people like him on the facts is completely absent, displaying the bullying cowardice we have come to expect from both Heard and her stans.
The Washington Post—in a story behind its paywall so only hardly anyone had access to it—commented on Q scores, which basically measures the popularity and marketability of celebrities and public figures. Depp ranked in the top-10 of men in the positive category (make of that what you will, the writer snidely remarks), while mentioning in passing that Heard was the most “hated” woman measured. Of course, this was blamed on Depp “fans” and how they shaped public opinion. Perhaps the MSM is having a difficult time in believing that its own ability to shape public opinion in cases where there is a clear sense of where the truth lies—while deliberately blind to what most of the rest of the world is seeing—is decidedly limited.
Eve Barlow, meanwhile, may not be Heard’s current squeeze (Heard runs through as many “partners” as Taylor Swift), but that probably has more to do with the fact Heard got tired of boring Israel and Barlow didn’t want to go to Spain. Heard has been silent on social media, probably because she is, well, a cowardly bully, but many believe that she is using Barlow as her personal outlet. In regard to the Q score story, we read something on Barlow’s twitter page that only Heard could have been arrogant (and stupid) enough to approve for public consumption:
Whenever I am trending or on the receiving end of a large scale public attack, Amber says to me – if you’re not pissing people off, what are you doing with your life? It’s a badge of honor.
I wonder what Warner Brothers—or any corporation interested in making money—thinks of that. Proof positive that Heard suffers from narcissism and other mental disturbances. Maybe many Heard supporters (like the Post) know she is a problem for them, but they are afraid that by admitting that she is a liar and an abuser and was motivated by the malicious intent to engage in vindictive actions for the “wrong” done to her ego, this puts a crack into the victim narrative. After all, quite the contrary to what they say publically—that women are not “believed” when they accuse “powerful” men—they are so convinced of their power to destroy another’s person’s life that even the one instance when they fail, it is taken as a dangerous precedent that must be condemned continuously until people “believe.”
They can keep trying, I suppose, until even Heard realizes that as long as Depp maintains a positive public persona (meaning not engaging in anything that is “questionable), she has lost permanently the court of public opinion, and if in fact she is currently living off her “sugar daddy,” that will only confirm the fact that she is a user of people, and has been one her entire life; she doesn’t even qualify as a B-list “celebrity” anymore.
In the meantime, Heard and Depp have released the “assignments of error” for their appeals, basically an initial list of items they think the trial court got “wrong.” The general consensus is that Heard threw all the mud patties in her arsenal against the wall, to see later which ones actually still “stuck,” which might be one or two out of 16. This was nothing but a publicity stunt for Heard’s team, because most of the “points” had already been rejected by the trial judge, but the sheer number of them might fool some people into thinking that there is a “there” there. Her legal team must be listening to what other lawyers are commenting about, and based on what they hear they will likely focus their fleshed-out arguments on what are deemed their “strongest” arguments.
Christopher Melcher, discussing the matter with Andy Signore here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkZsEh32WWU is a well-known celebrity attorney and knows what he is talking about. He has gone against the grain of most observers concerning Depp’s appeal, asserting that contrary to the claim that Adam Waldman was an “independent contractor” working on his own and Depp was not responsible for his allegedly “defamatory” claim about the deliberate “messing-up” of the penthouse, Waldman was essentially an “employee” of Depp and was speaking for him.
Nevertheless, one has to suspect that Waldman did not make the statement in question maliciously, because the first time the police arrived at the penthouse they saw no evidence of a DV incident, and the “evidence” only appeared after the second call; Depp had been absent before the first call, so it is hard to see how he could have created that “mess” that was not seen before by the police.
On the other hand, Melcher was even less impressed by Heard’s claims. He noted that Heard was claiming that her “consistent” statements to other people was “evidence” that she wasn’t lying, yet on cross-examination what we saw were repeated “inconsistent” statements; just because someone repeats a lie many times doesn’t make it “true.” The only “half-point” Melcher was willing to give out of 16 to Heard was concerning Kate James' deposition, in which testimony concerning prior “bad behavior”—such as Heard spitting in James’ face—was not “relevant” and likely to “prejudice” the jurors.
However, Heard’s claim that she had not been able to put in evidence “prior bad behavior” on Depp’s part was false, since her attorney was allowed to sneak in headlines from tabloids concerning such—just like Heard’s team was allowed to ignore a prior ruling and slip in the claim that Heard had spent $6 million of her “own money” on her legal defense, when in fact she hadn’t paid a dime of it out of her own pocket, just like her “donations.”
Overall, according to Melcher, Heard doesn’t have a “shot in hell” of winning her appeal, because this isn’t a retrial, the appeals court’s job isn’t to examine the evidence but to determine if there were any errors made by the judge, and there doesn’t seem to be any that would change the verdict. A couple of other commentators don’t think she has much of chance but are withholding final “judgment” until the actual arguments are released, presumably in November. Most others think that Depp has a better chance of winning his appeal, although Melcher thinks it would have been a better strategy not to have had Waldman’s deposition aired in court at all, because the jury was likely to have questions about why he kept asserting (even legitimate) attorney-client privilege.
Beyond that, what we continue to see is “clickbait” that adds nothing to the conversation, “speculation warnings” of doubtful use and responses to the infuriating ignorance of Heard stans and their attempts to silence the truth by engaging in smear campaigns against the content providers they most fear.
No comments:
Post a Comment