The Lawsuits Thread

[MaryS]

meeps - I think that's more it.

I can imagine Heard warning them especially the high profile ones such as Musk and Franco that if she goes down so do they. I think she has recordings of each of them admitting to knowing about this hoax.

[meeps]

On second thought - yikes, what a madam

[Moonbeam]

JM at medium.com has written another insightful article. Not finished reading, but I wanted to post the link.

[Chocolat]

Good points, meeps and MaryS. If Heard was able to publicly smear Johnny's reputation, what's not to let her do the same to her witnesses for leverage? I think she might have more to worry about with Josh, Raquel's ex husband. He's rid of all of them now which leaves him to spill the beans on the whole lot of the co-conspirators. I'm sure Heard's legal team will try to downplay his part with what he saw or heard and may even use the break up with Rocky against him. What we know is that Heard fights dirty and if we can see that, so will each court of law she will have to face.

[Moonbeam]

ForeverYoung - IO is in love with Heard that's why he/she does the things that they do. Well, at least infatuated with her.

[justintime]

Thank you, Moonbeam, for the link to the new article from JM @Medium.com.
I find the hell Johnny has gone through, and frankly continues to experience, overwhelmingly depressing at times. It is helpful to read a well-constructed piece putting the lie to it all.

[Moonbeam]

You are welcome, justintime!

[MaryS]

Citizens of the world. Because a lot of people read this board.

According to reports, the NYT is going to do a hit piece on Johnny with crazy Rachel Abrams at the helm and it's most likely commissioned by Musk.

Remember it's crazy Abrams who was stalking Johnny fans.

Let's see. Yes, reporting at its finest. Hahahahahaha. Who am I kidding? Let's see, the credibility of the NYT has long been diminished.

Maybe Musk should commission crazy *influencer* reebee too or better yet, Heard. Hahahahaha. She did write a piece for the NYT, right?

Bring it on

[MaryS]

It will be interesting to see what reaction these media types will have after Johnny wins the UK court case.

And it's not only the media types.

Oh look, L'Oreal seems to still have abuser Heard onboard.

Hahahahaha. I also say to L'Oreal bring it on

[justintime]

A “hit piece” ? How can the NYT sink so low? Will it be prefaced with a brief bio of Ms. Abrams including mentions of some of her most recent texts - er - work?

Media sources have remained slunk behind the nearest dung heap of silence as shaming revelation after shaming revelation has emerged providing glaring testament to JD’s years-long claim of truth and credibility. For the NYT to find itself panicked to the point of deciding it necessary to traffic with bottom-feeding lowlifes, desperate to ensure they crush JD (and his supporters?) at this juncture, is baffling and tosses the Times into an unenviable, Mafia-like “rag” league all its own. Ugh, the stench...

Having grown up in an era when the NYT was arguably the most respected newspaper in the country, I am stunned by what appears to be a cowardly, reckless, and unjustifiable attack on (what they know to be, but dare not acknowledge) an innocent man, not worthy of the most vile tabloid’s ink. The NYT may, indeed, get all the attention it had hoped - but it will never live it down.

[Moonbeam]

Here is another article from Medium.com, named 'Why Is This NYT Reporter Stalking Johnny Depp's Supporters?'. This is written by Robert Turner.

[Judymac]

Thank you, Moonbeam, for the link to the new article from JM @Medium.com.
I find the hell Johnny has gone through, and frankly continues to experience, overwhelmingly depressing at times. It is helpful to read a well-constructed piece putting the lie to it all.

Please don't be depressed. Johnny is the plaintiff in these cases, he is not defending himself. The Sun and AH are the ones who have to defend themselves. I think he knew exactly what he was getting into. He even told AH that he did not want to go to court, because he knew that it would be ugly. He has good cases and he is going to win. If you look at his Instagram he has been playing the guitar and painting. I really don't think he is as stressed out as people believe.

[justintime]

Here is another article from Medium.com, named 'Why Is This NYT Reporter Stalking Johnny Depp's Supporters?'. This is written by Robert Turner.

I think, see below, this may be the follow-up article Mr. Turner is promising in your post, Moonbeam. I’d posted it in this thread (p. 231), not knowing the article above was written first. They make sense when read together, first yours from May 12, 2020, then this next one (below) from May 14, 2020.

“The NYT Commits More Reporters to Their Depp Vendetta” from Robert Turner at Medium.com.
Very disturbing implications; validates what we think we’ve been seeing wrt the ramped-up and relentless, “truth-less” persecution of JD. Is Mr. Waldman who, apparently, has been a thorn in the NYT’s side for years the real target?
Also, I didn’t know AH wrote an op-Ed in the NYT this past Sunday, according to Mr. Turner (“On Sunday (May 10th?)she was allowed to pen an op-Ed in the NYT. The message is clear. We’re sticking with Amber. Again, the question why?). Did anyone happen to read it?

Judymac: I hope with all my heart you are right. It is articles like the above that are so worrisome.

[MaryS]

I can just see it now that this hoax is going to be made into a movie, right?

Heard's team is tweeting "mutual abuse". They pretend they are innocent bystanders but they are not.
It's especially obvious, it's them when their tweets and accounts disappear.

So, what I am trying to say is Heard still has no defense and other than her team, she still has very few public supporters.

So, she ain't winning in the court of pubic opinion which she set out to do. And she won't win in court.

So, give it up Heard.

[AdeleAgain]

A few random thoughts:

Interesting that whatever the MSM may be doing, there is no issue with JD now amongst the general public. It used to be that when anything was posted on line about Johnny, especially on twitter - while the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of the many, many comments would be supportive, there would be a healthy dose of 'abuser' comments. Now, someone like say Josh Gad who over the weekend posted that he had been educating his daughters with an acting masterclass by showing them Edward Scissorhands, gets nothing but lovely comments.

As you all know it always frustrated me so much that the MSM would report Johnny got loads of hate, but would NEVER admit that he also had more vocal support.

Also I notice now that the twitter accounts with tens and hundreds of thousands of followers tweet supportive things about him.

Now we have the situation where without doubt the tide has turned and there can be few people written about on line that get more negative comments than AH. Even on the heavily edited L'Oreal sites, her few remaining supporters (who you guys think are people close to her anyway??) are out numbered. But no one reports it. Why? I was wondering why the Daily Mail for instance which seems to have no problem running both negative pieces they've done themselves, as well as putting out the PR puff pieces which her team put up (oh exciting, she is standing in her drive), but why they haven't done something about this. It was the DM for instance that wrote the article pointing out that AH rolled her eyes, smirked and ate through her deposition - and that was influential. Then idiot that I am - realised L'Oreal advertise heavily with all the newspapers and magazines. I am not saying this will stop them reporting anti-AH stories but it will probably stop them reporting how much criticism L'Oreal specifically is getting.

Anyway, mad though I am driven that she gets such a free ride, and honestly why are L'Oreal back to putting her on their outputs? - nevertheless take comfort that Johnny gets massive on-line love. Continue to pray that the court case will go ahead in July and whilst there will be some rough moments no doubt, it will hopefully bring a judgement about the truthfulness of what she said and did.

Mutual abuse: this has to be the Sun and her own lawyers throwing her under the bus. She claimed she was terrified of the monster. She claimed she could never question his authority - which is how abusers work. She gave graphic descriptions of how Johnny, with the powers and strength of superman, would beat her. When her own words betray that fact that there is no way on this earth she was the little victim terrified of the monster. And there is also no way a single thing she says can be relied on because she has on multiple occasions lied to authorities and lied under oath.

Come on July.