Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Predator and Prey: Assault, harassment, and other aggressions in the entertainment industry

OtterMommy

By OtterMommy
in Everything Else TV

OtterMommy
Message added by OtterMommy

The guidelines for this thread are in the first post.  Please familiarize yourself with them and check frequently as any changes or additions will be posted there (as well as in an in-thread post).

  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Lady Whistleup
Lady Whistleup

I just find it infuriating that we still want to look for "perfect victims." Victims are never perfect -- they're human. Amber Heard could be a truly shitty human being, and Johnny Depp could have abu

Proclone
Proclone

Exactly.  Heard isn't a perfect victim.  She's probably a deeply unpleasant toxic person, that doesn't hide particularly well...and none of that precludes her from being abused.  If you subscribe

Hiyo
Hiyo

The word "cancel" is like the word "woke", something that has been co-opted in a certain way by certain people for silly culture wars as a distraction from tackling real issues.

Posted Images

Irlandesa

Irlandesa

(edited)
10 hours ago, aradia22 said:

Obviously true, but I don't know if that was even the goal of the participants.

https://www.vulture.com/2022/05/what-is-the-point-of-the-johnny-deppamber-heard-trial.html

Is the person they're interviewing in that article saying Johnny is taking responsibility for his flaws actually believe it or is he asserting that's Johnny's position?  Because he has not done that. I don't know how that guy can make that argument while the actor is on the stand denying addiction issues.

4 hours ago, inkworks said:

This is a great thread.

It is.  And that's why this case is frustrating to me because of court rules, some of the stuff that was introduced in the UK trial isn't getting admitted here.  It might manipulate the verdict but it's not showing the preponderance of evidence implicating Johnny, IMO.

Edited by Irlandesa
  • Love 9
Link to comment
Zella

Zella

7 hours ago, Prairie Rose said:

The ONLY silver lining about the OJ circus was that it happened pre-social media. Even the internet itself wasn't that widely used then. Still, it managed to permeate every pore of our culture. It's really hard to describe to those of you born post-1994 or weren't old enough to remember that time. It was EVERYWHERE.

I was a small child when the OJ stuff happened (like, I was in kindergarten), and I still remember my brother (who couldn't have been more than 6 or 7) seeing a glove my grandmother owned and saying it was an OJ glove. I have no idea what we had seen that connected a glove to OJ, but even at that age, we had picked up on it. 

  • Useful 2
  • Love 3
Link to comment
Annber03

Annber03

2 minutes ago, Zella said:

I was a small child when the OJ stuff happened (like, I was in kindergarten), and I still remember my brother (who couldn't have been more than 6 or 7) seeing a glove my grandmother owned and saying it was an OJ glove. I have no idea what we had seen that connected a glove to OJ, but even at that age, we had picked up on it. 

I was 9, 10 years old when everything happened with the murder and the trial - I have a clear memory of hearing the breaking news of the murders when they happened. And on the day of the verdict, I remember being in gym class, and a teacher who was passing by popped in and told everyone that OJ had been found not guilty. 

  • Love 4
Link to comment
Prairie Rose

Prairie Rose

I was nearly 15 in June 1994 when the double murder occurred and had just turned 16 in October 1995 when he was acquitted. Then the civil trial happened in 1996-97. When ACS had their big miniseries about the criminal trial and ESPN had that 10-part documentary in 2016, a lot of memories came flooding back. If it all happened now, I think the misogyny would be even worse than it was in the 1990s.

  • Love 7
Link to comment
akg

akg

31 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

And on the day of the verdict, I remember being in gym class, and a teacher who was passing by popped in and told everyone that OJ had been found not guilty. 

I was in college and had a french class scheduled for the time the verdict would be announced. All of the students showed up but the professor assumed we'd all be glued to the tv so she stayed home. None of us had really cared so were very confused.

  • Love 3
Link to comment
GaT

GaT

Matthew Morrison Fired from SYTYCD for 'Flirty' Messages That Made Contestant 'Uncomfortable': Source

Quote

A source close to the Fox reality show tells PEOPLE that Morrison, 43, was fired from the series "after he had an inappropriate relationship with a female contestant."

"They didn't have sex, but he reached out to her through flirty direct messages on social media," the source says. "She felt uncomfortable with his line of comments and went to producers, who then got Fox involved. He was fired after they did their own investigation."

Good for her for speaking up. This was his first season as a judge, & he didn't even make it through the season before doing this. Can you imagine what he would be doing if he had been a judge for a while?

  • Useful 1
  • Love 16
Link to comment
Vermicious Knid

Vermicious Knid

Quote

which is compounded because she's a very good actress.

Correction, she is a mediocre actress, but an accomplished liar. No one has mentioned the testimony of the former TMZ producer who pretty much confirmed Amber was the one leaking videos and arranging for paparazzi coverage.
 

Quote

Tremaine worked as a field assignment manager and was in charge of about 20 paparazzi in Los Angeles. When asked who usually tipped off TMZ, he explained, "Oftentimes it would be publicists, managers, agents or B-list celebrities... and lawyers, definitely."

Tremaine testified that he was instructed to dispatch photographers to a Los Angeles courthouse on May 27, 2016 — the day Heard filed for a temporary restraining order from Depp. He said his news producers would not have given him that assignment without verifying the credibility of the source who sent the tip that Heard would be filing a TRO.

"We were trying to capture Amber leaving the courthouse and an alleged bruise on the right side of her face," he told the court. "She was going to sort of stop and turn towards the camera to display the bruise on the right side of her face, the alleged bruise....

On August 12, 2016, Tremaine testified that TMZ received a "video depicting Johnny Depp slamming some cabinets that was captured by Ms. Heard."

"The video was sent in through our email tip line," Tremaine explained. He confirmed TMZ owns the copyright to the video.

"How does TMZ obtain copyright over images and videos?" Vasquez asked.

"The only way to obtain copyright over media would be if we shot it ourselves, if it was sent to the tip line and the source verified it was from the original copyright owner and then either purchased from that person or given to us and then the third option would be if it was directly given to us by the copyright holder like a direct source," Tremaine replied.

Tremaine said TMZ was able to verify the source so quickly, they got the video up in 15 minutes. He also told the jury the video they posted was edited.

"It was much shorter than the video that's been played in this trial," Tremaine testified. "There was a bit at the beginning that was played here in which Ms. Heard is seemingly sort of setting up the camera and getting into position. And then, there's a bit at the end where she's seemingly snickering and looks at the camera. That part was not present in what we received."

When asked if TMZ edited the video, he replied, "No. Not even a little."

At this point I expect a mistrial because I doubt any 12 people are going to agree on this either way.

  • Love 6
Link to comment
Irlandesa

Irlandesa

1 hour ago, GaT said:

Matthew Morrison Fired from SYTYCD for 'Flirty' Messages That Made Contestant 'Uncomfortable': Source

Good for her for speaking up. This was his first season as a judge, & he didn't even make it through the season before doing this. Can you imagine what he would be doing if he had been a judge for a while?

Figured it had to do with getting too friendly, or trying to, with a contestant.  But damn, he did it via social media with all those receipts?  How dumb do you have to be?

  • Love 13
Link to comment
GaT

GaT

2 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

Figured it had to do with getting too friendly, or trying to, with a contestant.  But damn, he did it via social media with all those receipts?  How dumb do you have to be?

He's also married. I wonder how long that will last.

  • Useful 3
  • Love 6
Link to comment
MsTree

MsTree

3 hours ago, Vermicious Knid said:

Correction, she is a mediocre actress, but an accomplished liar.

I am very happy to be corrected...and agree 100%. I was just trying to be nice😈 

  • LOL 2
Link to comment
Vermicious Knid

Vermicious Knid

None of that actually invalidates anything he said on the stand. He described how they receive tips and why they would own the copyright, and that an edited video was provided.
 

Quote

During cross-examination, Heard's lawyer accused Tremaine of seeking his "15-minutes of fame."

"I stand to gain nothing from this. I'm actually putting myself kind of in the target of TMZ, a very litigious organization. And I'm not seeking any 15-minutes here," Tremaine replied. "I could say the same thing about taking Amber Heard as a client, for you."

  • LOL 1
  • Love 4
Link to comment
  • Popular Post
inkworks

inkworks

  • Popular Post
(edited)
6 hours ago, Vermicious Knid said:

Correction, she is a mediocre actress, but an accomplished liar. No one has mentioned the testimony of the former TMZ producer who pretty much confirmed Amber was the one leaking videos and arranging for paparazzi coverage.
 

At this point I expect a mistrial because I doubt any 12 people are going to agree on this either way.

That’s just not true. He has zero evidence of who sent that tape. If he knew it was Amber why didn’t he say so? The answer is because he doesn’t know who sent that tape. He was brought in by JD’s team to imply it was Amber but that doesn’t change the fact that he has zero proof.

I'm frankly flabbergasted at the amount of people who’d rather jump through hoops trying to paint AH as the devil incarnate, rather than admit that JD is an abuser.

Edited by inkworks
  • Useful 3
  • Love 25
Link to comment
Notabug

Notabug

(edited)
1 hour ago, inkworks said:

That’s just not true. He has zero evidence of who sent that tape. If he knew it was Amber why didn’t he say so? The answer is because he doesn’t know who sent that tape. He was brought in by JD’s team to imply it was Amber but that doesn’t change the fact that he has zero proof.

I'm frankly flabbergasted at the amount of people who’d rather jump through hoops trying to paint AH as the devil incarnate, rather than admit that JD is an abuser.

Yes, in the end, his testimony is not pertinent to this particular case.  Sure, it seems likely that AH had the opportunity and motive to send the video to TMZ, but any of us could've guessed that.  It also means nothing as far as the actual facts on trial.  Victims of abuse have often documented events and injuries to collect evidence or prove the abuse.  Nicole Brown Simpson had a safety deposit box full of photos of her bruised and battered face after OJ beat her.   Maybe things could've been different for her if those pics had gone public before she was murdered.

She's an actress, she's been known to seek media attention.  So have half the actresses in Hollywood.  Maybe she's a total famewhore who craves attention good or bad every moment of the day; it doesn't mean she's lying.

Edited by Notabug
  • Useful 4
  • Love 18
Link to comment
SusanM

SusanM

1 hour ago, Notabug said:

So have half the actresses in Hollywood.  Maybe she's a total famewhore who craves attention good or bad every moment of the day; it doesn't mean she's lying.

It also doesn't mean that anything she has said or done has anything to do with Depp's career.  Which is the point of this lawsuit. Well technically the point of this lawsuit.  I agree with others who feel the true purpose was for Depp to torment and taunt Heard and remind her that he's still capable of hurting her.

  • Useful 2
  • Love 20
Link to comment
Hiyo

Hiyo

The OJ trial wasn't just big in the US, it got coverage world wide. Channels like CNN International and BBC World would devote several hours per day to the story.

  • Useful 4
  • Love 3
Link to comment
janie jones

janie jones

A source close to the Fox reality show tells PEOPLE that Morrison, 43, was fired from the series "after he had an inappropriate relationship with a female contestant."

"They didn't have sex, but he reached out to her through flirty direct messages on social media," the source says. "She felt uncomfortable with his line of comments and went to producers, who then got Fox involved. He was fired after they did their own investigation."

I wouldn't call one person sexually harassing another an inappropriate "relationship."

  • Useful 1
  • Love 16
Link to comment
Notabug

Notabug

(edited)
17 minutes ago, janie jones said:

I wouldn't call one person sexually harassing another an inappropriate "relationship."

More of an inappropriate non-relationship.  It doesn't appear that the young lady in question had any interest in Morrison at all.

20 minutes ago, BetterButter said:

It seems they both lost/won, although he got awarded more than she did.

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/johnny-depp-amber-heard-lawsuit-jury-verdict/

He got $15 million of the 50 he wanted while she got $2 million of her 100 million claim.

I guess the jury didn't believe either one of them.  

Edited by Notabug
  • Useful 8
  • Love 3
Link to comment
Jaded

Jaded

The Depp/Heard verdict stuff...

Depp won and the jury awarded him $15 million in his defamation case against Amber. I'm disgusted. He's not even there for the verdicts. His fans were outside the courthouse screaming and yelling as each finding against her was read out. 

His own increasingly troubling behavior over decades was tanking his career before that Op-ed was even published.  She was awarded $2 mil for her defamation charges against him so basically a $2 mil discount in what she owes him. 

It sounds like the most he may actually be able to receive is $350,000 though. Maybe it's the same for her and the money owed to each other with cancel the respective debts out. I'm confused concerning the award limit stuff.

  • Useful 1
  • Love 17
Link to comment
CynicalGirl

CynicalGirl

1 minute ago, Jaded said:

It sounds like the most he may actually be able to receive is $350,000 though. Maybe it's the same for her and the money owed to each other with cancel the respective debts out. I'm confused concerning the award limit stuff.

I think the $350k statutory maximum applies to the punitive damages, not the compensatory damages. So Depp nets $8.3m. There were no punitive damages awarded to Heard.

  • Useful 4
  • Love 5
Link to comment
merylinkid

merylinkid

She won too.   So I am not sure how if he abused her how the OpEd could be defamatory.    But she only got $2 million and he got $15 million.   So he got $13 million.   

This verdict makes no sense.    Heard is going to appeal.   

  • Love 11
Link to comment
badhaggis

badhaggis

(edited)
6 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

She won too.   So I am not sure how if he abused her how the OpEd could be defamatory.    But she only got $2 million and he got $15 million.   So he got $13 million.   

This verdict makes no sense.    Heard is going to appeal.   

I agree. This is a completely confusing mess of a verdict. I hope she does appeal. The verdicts contradict each other...

Edited by badhaggis
clarity
  • Love 10
Link to comment
SusanM

SusanM

1 minute ago, badhaggis said:

I agree. This is a completely confusing mess of a verdict. 

Seconding the agreement.  As someone upthread noted it does seem like the jury thought they were both liars.  Or, alternatively, both were telling the truth?  I guess.

  • Love 7
Link to comment
LegalParrot81

LegalParrot81

(edited)
54 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

She won too.   So I am not sure how if he abused her how the OpEd could be defamatory.    But she only got $2 million and he got $15 million.   So he got $13 million.   

This verdict makes no sense.    Heard is going to appeal.   

Her countersuit wasn't about the OpEd directly, it was for three statements made by one of Depp's attorneys during his representation of Depp.  Her claims were that all three statements were defamatory.  She won on one statement and lost on 2. 

Also, he doesn't get 15mm.  There is a cap on punitive damages, he gets $350,000.  There is no cap on compensatory damages, so his final tally is 10.35mm. 

AH's award was for compensatory damages, so it is the full 2mm. 

Edited by LegalParrot81
  • Useful 13
Link to comment
Irlandesa

Irlandesa

I'm disappointed.   Especially since I know the media is going to ignore the UK verdict which I think was a more thorough look at the evidence. 

I am confused by what the judge did and did not allow in the case.

I hate what this is going to look like to survivors and how little DARVO is understood.   

Disappointed but not surprised. 

  • Useful 1
  • Love 14
Link to comment
ParadoxLost

ParadoxLost

(edited)
2 hours ago, SusanM said:

Seconding the agreement.  As someone upthread noted it does seem like the jury thought they were both liars.  Or, alternatively, both were telling the truth?  I guess.

2 hours ago, badhaggis said:

I agree. This is a completely confusing mess of a verdict. I hope she does appeal. The verdicts contradict each other...

I don't think that its all that contradictory. 

The one thing that went in favor of Heard was a very specific statement recounting very specific events that involved very specific people.

I see the verdict as more along the lines of the jury feeling Heard defamed Depp.  The general statements that didn't go Heard's way were in line with the Depp conclusions.  They believed Depp overall.

But Depp's team didn't prove that Heard made a second attempt to stage a scene at the penthouse after cops left with the guidance/counsel of her lawyer and PR rep.  The jury could even believe 2/3 of that and they would still have to call it false because it says X happened and then Z happened and A and B and C were involved and it wasn't all proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Edited by ParadoxLost
  • Useful 1
  • Love 4
Link to comment
FancyRhubarb

FancyRhubarb

2 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

I'm disappointed.   Especially since I know the media is going to ignore the UK verdict which I think was a more thorough look at the evidence. 

Well, I'm fucking livid. Bloated yet wealthy man who was attractive 20 years ago wins again. I had a brief look at twitter but the fangirls crowing about "this is a win for male victims of domestic violence" made me stabby. I hope she appeals. I don't see that she has much choice. And I really hope that Depp has done so much damage to his career through this trial that indie projects shot in Bulgaria on a budget of 2 million is all he can get. 

  • Love 20
Link to comment
GaT

GaT

3 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

The jury could even believe 2/3 of that and they would still have to call it false because it says X happened and then Z happened and A and B and C were involved and it wasn't all proven beyond reasonable doubt.

This wasn't a criminal trial, it didn't have to be proved "beyond a reasonable doubt".

  • Love 5
Link to comment
FilmTVGeek80

FilmTVGeek80

(edited)
On 5/31/2022 at 1:57 PM, Cinnabon said:

They just “think” she’s lying. Sad. 🤦‍♀️

"They" don't just think she's a liar. She is a liar! She has been caught in so many lies. This is a woman who proudly - and repeatedly - said she had donated (not pledged, donated) all of her divorce settlement to charity. She preened at the praise she recieved. Then, turns out, just a lie. And, it's a lie that she couldn't fulfill her pledge because she kept being sued. This is a woman who even in her final moments of testimony, got up on the stand and claimed that she hadn't been smiling or smirking in court. Uh, hon, there were cameras there (which, of course, you know since your desperate team in the homestetch resorted to accusing every normal person testifying on Johnny's behalf of looking for their 15 minutes of fame because of the cameras.) You were caught often smiling and smirking the same way you were on the TMZ tape.

15 hours ago, Notabug said:

Yes, in the end, his testimony is not pertinent to this particular case.  Sure, it seems likely that AH had the opportunity and motive to send the video to TMZ, but any of us could've guessed that.  It also means nothing as far as the actual facts on trial.  Victims of abuse have often documented events and injuries to collect evidence or prove the abuse.  Nicole Brown Simpson had a safety deposit box full of photos of her bruised and battered face after OJ beat her.   Maybe things could've been different for her if those pics had gone public before she was murdered.

She's an actress, she's been known to seek media attention.  So have half the actresses in Hollywood.  Maybe she's a total famewhore who craves attention good or bad every moment of the day; it doesn't mean she's lying.

Yes, it does mean she's lying because if she did leak it (or knows who did) then she lied on the stand when she said she had nothing to do with it. As is often the case with her, she couldn't stop exaggerating. She couldn't just leave it at "I had nothing to do with it" no, she tried to make herself as this innocent waif who wouldn't possibly know anything about how to even do such a thing. Never mind that most publicists these days have tabloids like TMZ on speed dial and very much know how to leak whatever they want.

It all goes to credibility. She was caught in so many lies that I'm sure a huge part of why she lost. I think one of the most effective things Miss Vasquez did in her closing was drill down on a lot of this case coming down to whether the jury felt like they could trust Heard's word - and I think the jury's decision shows they didn't trust it.

6 hours ago, badhaggis said:

I agree. This is a completely confusing mess of a verdict. I hope she does appeal. The verdicts contradict each other...

It's not contradictory. The jury found in Johnny's favor on all three defamatory statements. They agreed that her sexual abuse and physical abuse allegations were false and that she acted with malice, on the whole. With Amber's one win, they found that a statement Johnny's attorney made was defamatory. It was a very specific statement and accusation. He accused her and her friends of staging the scene when they called the police in the May incident before the marriage ended. They decided that was defamatory, but not any of Waldman's statements referring to her accusations as a hoax. 

Quote

So what else is new? The man wins again, especially in the court of public opinion. Yet another setback for women. I feel gutted.

As a woman, I don't feel like there has been any sort of setback. I think this is a good thing that an abuser and liar got called out for it, despite her gender. As Johnny said in his statement, I hope we can start to go back to innocent until proven guilty and stop letting the social media mob and the news media convict people before any evidence has been presented.

Edited by FilmTVGeek80
  • Useful 1
  • Love 8
Link to comment
Vermicious Knid

Vermicious Knid

I am not a Johnny Depp fan. But I do believe Amber Heard is a liar. My speaking up is about the hypocracy. Johnny does X and Y and is labeled an abuser and monster. Amber does X and Y and it's glossed over or handwaved away. You can't have it both ways. If an action is abusive for one then it's abusive for them both. It was clear she lied right from the beginning when the police report, that has been public for years, directly contradicted everything she claimed. I think they decided in his favor because of three specific things;

1) The video where she's shown setting up the camera and then smirking at it in the end, and egging him on during it.

2) Admitting to hitting him

3) The psychologist who said she had borderline and histrionic personality disorder, and described the actions of a person with those diagnosises that fit her to a T.

Amber's counterclaim was about what a lawyer said, so not surprised she was awarded less.

  • Useful 1
  • Love 9
Link to comment
Guest

Guest

At this point I’m just glad it’s over. Every single aspect of this has just made me sad and that would have been the case regardless of the outcome. Sad over the way victims are talked about. Sad over how misogynists have and will continue to use this case. Sad that our justice system often becomes a circus. Most of that isn’t even about Amber and Johnny but how this will be used in the future and how younger generations are internalizing this crap. To me there are no winners here.

Link to comment
OtterMommy
Message added by OtterMommy

The guidelines for this thread are in the first post.  Please familiarize yourself with them and check frequently as any changes or additions will be posted there (as well as in an in-thread post).

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...