Not hard for me to believe she is lying considering the amount of times she has now been proven to be a liar, even under oath in previous depositions.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Johnny Depp v Amber Heard's defamation trial is underway [UPDATE: Verdict reached. Johnny Depp won.]
- Thread starter WinFonda
- Start date
- Status
Not hard for me to believe she is lying considering the amount of times she has now been proven to be a liar, even under oath in previous depositions.
Sounds like something Konami would put on their chocolate candies brand. Anyone remember Castlevania's "Erotic Violence"?
Consistent with Dr. Curry's diagnoses and criteria for them.
Remember, Amber Heard had a "normal profile" on the MMPI-2 but spiked on all those depression, anxiety, and PTSD inventories.
You don't have such contradictory data unless you're trying to manipulate a profile. If you can look at her performance right now and not see the manipulative behaviors I don't know what to tell you.
You don't have such contradictory data unless you're trying to manipulate a profile. If you can look at her performance right now and not see the manipulative behaviors I don't know what to tell you.
I haven't been following all this very closely, but performative emotional manipulation happens often with deeply wounded and highly dysfunctional people.
On some level, perhaps even conscious, they know they are gaslighting the audience. The ... act, though, is most of their persona. It's what they've practiced and really all they know how to do. It's quite sad and tragic.
It would fit all the available evidence and pattern of demonstrated behavior if Heard was ... performing to convince here, in that sort of way.
Its probably been her pattern of behavior most of her life.
That she's also fits the usual crocodile tears image only has made the behavior easier to get away with, I would venture.
On some level, perhaps even conscious, they know they are gaslighting the audience. The ... act, though, is most of their persona. It's what they've practiced and really all they know how to do. It's quite sad and tragic.
It would fit all the available evidence and pattern of demonstrated behavior if Heard was ... performing to convince here, in that sort of way.
Its probably been her pattern of behavior most of her life.
That she's also fits the usual crocodile tears image only has made the behavior easier to get away with, I would venture.
This doesn't track with the audio. Remember when he tried to leave the relationship on tape and she wouldn't let him go? You would think she'd be jumping up and down with that offer.
I just got to the "I've never seen an adult man cry" bit and... I can't see a tear on her face despite her just "crying".
Do actual waterworks eventually arrive?
EDIT: Holy shit, the Change.org petition is almost at 3.5 million...
Do actual waterworks eventually arrive?
EDIT: Holy shit, the Change.org petition is almost at 3.5 million...
Yeah...this was going through my mind while she was talking about wanting to get away from the arguments. Of course that audio doesn't cover all the situations.
You're right, it doesn't, but she describes only wanting to stay in the relationship after the fight is over and Johnny becomes loving again. If you're in the midst of the argument, then, you'd expect that to be the point when it would be easiest for her to leave.
Yep, not that great of an actress. She is talking a bit more than the lawyers want her to I bet. Lots of long-winded answers trying to paint a picture.
Over-explaining, overly detailed recollection or otherwise extremely detailed/perfect recall and elaborate stories tend to be signs of lying or embellishment.
No, expect few days of this before there is cross. I bet they don't want trials 10 day break start after she has been crossed, so cross most likely is after that break.
Interesting narrative choice...
When she first brought up at the beginning of her testimony that she and Depp had to hide their relationship in the beginning because Depp feared she would be blamed for his divorce, she described as being exciting. (And it kind of rings true. She likely would have been blamed...)
She brings this up again right before they went on break, only she recontextualizes it as being an obvious sign of Depp being an abuser.
I would be really confused by this testimony if I were on the jury.
When she first brought up at the beginning of her testimony that she and Depp had to hide their relationship in the beginning because Depp feared she would be blamed for his divorce, she described as being exciting. (And it kind of rings true. She likely would have been blamed...)
She brings this up again right before they went on break, only she recontextualizes it as being an obvious sign of Depp being an abuser.
I would be really confused by this testimony if I were on the jury.
Ironically, she'd be a pretty good writer. Not an actress, but a writer. She paints a pretty vivid and detailed picture, just like she wrote it perfectly.
But shit doesn't work like that in real life. I'm repeating what other people are saying here. But if you are recalling traumatic memories, or better, when I am recalling traumatic memories, it absolutely does not come out as perfectly structured as it does here. It's fractured, difficult to recall, sometimes incoherent. Heard's just isn't. And Depp's absolutely was.
And frankly, if dr. Hughes tested Heard, and Heard talked this way in the interview but it didn't set off any alarm bells...that doesn't reflect too well on Hughes as a forensic psychologist...
edit: I can't imagine Heard seeing my therapist, acting like that, and my therapist thinking that's a completely believable and authentic way to behave.
But shit doesn't work like that in real life. I'm repeating what other people are saying here. But if you are recalling traumatic memories, or better, when I am recalling traumatic memories, it absolutely does not come out as perfectly structured as it does here. It's fractured, difficult to recall, sometimes incoherent. Heard's just isn't. And Depp's absolutely was.
And frankly, if dr. Hughes tested Heard, and Heard talked this way in the interview but it didn't set off any alarm bells...that doesn't reflect too well on Hughes as a forensic psychologist...
edit: I can't imagine Heard seeing my therapist, acting like that, and my therapist thinking that's a completely believable and authentic way to behave.
Last edited:
She doesn't really have to think about any of this. And that's not a problem on its own, necessarily, though I do think trauma has a tendency to invoke breaks and forgetfulness in ones testimony, but it could be that she just thought long and carefully beforehand about to tell her story. Which is also fine, except, if that is the case, it's weird for that to be associated with emotions as if it's all coming to you in the moment and you're simply relaying horrific history. Either way you slice it, it does feel rehearsed, and the emotional side of it also feels rehearsed. If you're on the jury here, it's not going to be lost on you that both Johnny and Amber are actors, and any invocation of emotions is not in and of itself valuable testimony. On Johnny's side this was easier for the jury to digest I think; he was, arguably, not even emotional about things he *should* have been emotional about. Amber is taking a different approach, even if it's genuine, and I don't know how that plays with a jury in this context.
I'm trying my best to not judge her as "bitch eating crackers" but her face looks annoyed rather than afraid or preoccupied, in this moment she almost smiled
in this entire trial, she looks bored and annoyed
which isn't a crime, if you are innocent I can picture a situation where I would be annoyed for all this trouble but this isn't helping her with the public, that is for sure.
I am so confused.
They show the picture of the bruise on her arm (that's been on the net before).
They ask Heard to describe how she got the bruise. She says in an argument, Johnny grabbed her by the arm (thus, the bruise), but then threw her on the floor and began hitting her repeatedly in the face.
...but you see her face in the photo. There's not a mark on it.
Emily Baker just commented on that on her feed, as well.
They show the picture of the bruise on her arm (that's been on the net before).
They ask Heard to describe how she got the bruise. She says in an argument, Johnny grabbed her by the arm (thus, the bruise), but then threw her on the floor and began hitting her repeatedly in the face.
...but you see her face in the photo. There's not a mark on it.
Emily Baker just commented on that on her feed, as well.
Thats exactly what I was thinking, but I was like maybe im not understanding what she is saying.
He held her down, it left a bruise.
He hit her multiple times in face, her face is fine?
Is the picture from some other day or something like the whole make up to hide bruises thing?
We're all becoming more aware of why little of Heard's story makes sense.
People mistreating animals are bad people.
You want the movie audience to hate a character, make that character hit a dog.
Sounds strange, but she wants the jury to dislike him.
Still, story could be true. Who knows.
Makes no sense whatsoever. Also, it is viable she would have got bruises on her arm if Depp was trying to protect himself from a beating by grabbing her and trying to resist.
You would have to believe that Johnny was in enough of a drunken rage to throw his wife on the ground and hit her in the face repeatedly, but also in control of himself to make sure the beating was gentle enough to not leave such marks.
It honestly does. That picture would be more corroborative of the scenario we hear in the audio (Johnny restraining her while she repeatedly strikes him in the face), than the scenario she just described.
Seriously. I've not been following this case OR the Depp/Heard drama in general too closely. I'm trying really hard to check my biases. But..so much of what she's saying right now makes no sense.
A reminder that Depp's testimony was that he never hit Amber once. Not that he maybe hit her a couple times, or just once, but never. And in all the available evidence we have so far, there is no evidence that he did -- on the contrary, the evidence speaks to him leaving as soon as fights became violent.
No, she alluded to it earlier- had to do with Pirates or some kind of album he was making I believe. There was a music single or something recorded that had Tom Waits and Keith Richards he went to make.
If I'm following the timeline correctly, they're not married yet. All of this was before marriage I think.
But I'm completely lost on the timeline at this point.
- Status