MichaelRed
Full Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2015
- Messages
- 1,649
Bulletproof defence. Clearly not your view. Just the view of many (2) others.I didn't accuse you of anything, merely said I can see why (many) others do think that.
Bulletproof defence. Clearly not your view. Just the view of many (2) others.I didn't accuse you of anything, merely said I can see why (many) others do think that.
If that's your description of her then we know you're a bit biased in her favour. It's as accurate a description as Trump being a guy who "tells it like it is".I guess there is a certain equivalence between trolling a woman who upset a man found to be a 'wife-beater' legally and the former potus who was impeached and supported far right extremists.
I think Shamans has hacked him or something.If that's your description of her then we know you're a bit biased in her favour. It's as accurate a description as Trump being a guy who "tells it like it is".
I think probably because the balanced people have moved on and acknowledge there's nothing more to be said now that the trial has a resolution.Ive not been massively active in this thread, but been keeping tabs on what is going on. I just want to re-highlight how funny it is that @shamans has vanished after all his claims about being balanced. Carry on.
That is frankly untrue. There have been follow up interviews and talk of book deals etc. that are keeping the story alive.I think probably because the balanced people have moved on and acknowledge there's nothing more to be said now that the trial has a resolution.
It's only people showing their true colours left grinding their axes.
Agreed. It's the same after a transfer or a F1 race for example. There's usually interviews and other developments going on after the transfer has completed or the race has finished which people will obviously talk about. Nothing wrong with that is there?That is frankly untrue. There have been follow up interviews and talk of book deals etc. that are keeping the story alive.
She was found to have defamed him by talking generally about abuse and is now talking openly about her accusations after they were found false, without any litigation privilege leaving her open for further action, potentially.
People are going to want to talk about that.
I daren't care about either of them. They both seemed awful people, albeit Johnny clearly has a certain charm and humour. I just find find the witch-hunt masquerading as a quest for justice for a multimillionaire all weird and distasteful.If that's your description of her then we know you're a bit biased in her favour. It's as accurate a description as Trump being a guy who "tells it like it is".
The race isn't even over in this case, there is an upcoming hearing to enter the judgment and Heard is saying she will appeal.Agreed. It's the same after a transfer or a F1 race for example. There's usually interviews and other developments going on after the transfer has completed or the race has finished which people will obviously talk about. Nothing wrong with that is there?
bet she would dump on your pillow at day 11.If I dated Amber Heard I'd sort her out
Yeah he doesn't deserve justice, he's a multimillionaire!I daren't care about either of them. They both seemed awful people, albeit Johnny clearly has a certain charm and humour. I just find find the witch-hunt masquerading as a quest for justice for a multimillionaire all weird and distasteful.
An allegation that was found to be 'substantially true' by the judge.He wasn't found to be a wife beater legally. The Sun were just found to have had enough justification to make the allegation and print the words, but he wasn't found to be anything. It was still an allegation that would then have to be proven in a court.
Don't try and get rational thought out of Jippy. I said Amber's injuries didn't appear to line up with her descriptions of extreme violence & he responded by accusing me of masturbating whilst fantasizing about beating her up myself.Yeah he doesn't deserve justice, he's a multimillionaire!
What's that got to do with anything?
You seem to have a hate-filled wish for her to lose her freedom, career and solvency that is way beyond some high-minded crusade for justice.Half my life trawling the internet? Ok grandpa, there's a thing called notifications. I do like that you're carrying on with equating wanting the law to be upheld with 'willing bad things to happen' to someone. Very big brain manoeuvre.
He admitted to headbutting her, mate, you're choosing the wrong hill.He wasn't found to be a wife beater legally. The Sun were just found to have had enough justification to make the allegation and print the words, but he wasn't found to be anything. It was still an allegation that would then have to be proven in a court.
As I understand it, Amber Heard would have to put up a bond of the judgement, $10.35m, as well as interest and attorney fees. Most likely, that is money she simply doesn't have, so I would guess that the talk of appeal is mostly a bit of posturing from her side.The race isn't even over in this case, there is an upcoming hearing to enter the judgment and Heard is saying she will appeal.
He admitted to an accidental clash of heads. The jury has spoken & the only ones dying on a hill are those still silly enough to defend her.He admitted to headbutting her, mate, you're choosing the wrong hill.
I think it's at the judge's discretion. If I were the judge and she was acting the way is I would be wanting the bond.As I understand it, Amber Heard would have to put up a bond of the judgement, $10.35m, as well as interest and attorney fees. Most likely, that is money she simply doesn't have, so I would guess that the talk of appeal is mostly a bit of posturing from her side.
It's only people showing their true colours left grinding their axes.
I mean, MichaelRed seems a bit obsessed at this point. I won't comment on his motives, but it's certainly odd.I think the ones with their axes to grind are the ones who occasionally pop in to abuse certain other members and accuse them of being misogynists (amongst other things) to be honest.
It's weird and bizarre and more "vindictive" and "stalkerish" than anyone that's commenting on am ongoing international news story/ trial.
I don't think I'd count it as an obsession.I mean, MichaelRed seems a bit obsessed at this point. I won't comment on his motives, but it's certainly odd.
The mother of all consolation prizes. Lost $10m and got exposed to the entire world as a liar and an awful person, but at least she's pretty.
I don't see what is vindictive or stalkerish about passing judgement on one person's continued obsession with someone he doesn't know and has no relation to, to the point of hoping they commit a crime so they end up in prison .I think the ones with their axes to grind are the ones who occasionally pop in to abuse certain other members and accuse them of being misogynists (amongst other things) to be honest.
It's weird and bizarre and more "vindictive" and "stalkerish" than anyone that's commenting on am ongoing international news story/ trial.
They've already committed several crimes & there's nothing wrong with wanting the law to be upheld if they continue to commit further crimes. I don't know why I bother replying to you since you twist everything to fit your narrative. I don't personally know & I'm not related to Hitler but I'm sure you'll excuse me for calling him a bad person. If anything, not knowing or having a relation to a person is important when commenting on their criminal actions. It may shock you but juries aren't typically made up of friends and family of the defendant.I don't see what is vindictive or stalkerish about passing judgement on one person's continued obsession with someone he doesn't know and has no relation to, to the point of hoping they commit a crime so they end up in prison .
You're not on the jury.They've already committed several crimes & there's nothing wrong with wanting the law to be upheld if they continue to commit further crimes. I don't know why I bother replying to you since you twist everything to fit your narrative. I don't personally know & I'm not related to Hitler but I'm sure you'll excuse me for calling him a bad person. If anything, not knowing or having a relation to a person is important when commenting on their criminal actions. It may shock you but juries aren't typically made up of friends and family of the defendant.
Ah, so the only people that can have an opinion on Amber Heard are her friends, family & the jury. Thanks for clarifying, weird that we have a thread on this topic then since I doubt any of the caf are her friends, family or the jury. It's almost like people are free to discuss what they like.You're not on the jury.
You passed your judgement on him weeks ago and continue to now.I don't see what is vindictive or stalkerish about passing judgement on one person's continued obsession
Thankfully the jury agrees with you, so that argument doesn't really help him.Ah, so the only people that can have an opinion on Amber Heard are her friends, family & the jury. Thanks for clarifying, weird that we have a thread on this topic then since I doubt any of the caf are her friends, family or the jury. It's almost like people are free to discuss what they like.
Don't remember joining any hunt.Yes it's totally normal behaviour to spend half your life trawling the internet for negative stories about a C list celebrity while willing bad things to happen to them. My mistake, don't let me distract you from the hunt!
I guess there is a certain equivalence between trolling a woman who upset a man found to be a 'wife-beater' legally and the former potus who was impeached and supported far right extremists.
I'm not reopening that debate again, but no it wasn't. That isn't what that verdict meant.An allegation that was found to be 'substantially true' by the judge.
She lied under oath about at least five different topics. Off the top of my head, I would say she clearly lied about the incident leading to Depp losing his finger, alerting TMZ, the donations, writing on the mirror, and the trashing of the trailer park. I’m sure there’s more. The silly thing is, she probably didn’t need to lie about most of that, but she is just too much of a narcissist.I don't even care much about Depp other than him being a decent actor. But if anyone think Amber's testimony has weight in it, I'm seriously worry about their cognitive function. This is not even debatable at this point.
The above statement is to uk judge as well.
I believe its 30 days from date of judgement. So about another week if thats that case. She's going to have to come up with a good reason for the appeal though. And that judgement of 2 mill in her favour kinda puts the kibosh on her "jury bias" appeal.When is her deadline for appeal?
ThanksI believe its 30 days from date of judgement. So about another week if thats that case. She's going to have to come up with a good reason for the appeal though. And that judgement of 2 mill in her favour kinda puts the kibosh on her "jury bias" appeal.
At a guess, I'd say people who still support Heard haven't seen much of it, and/ or are more interested in the politics rather than the facts.I don't even care much about Depp other than him being a decent actor. But if anyone think Amber's testimony has weight in it, I'm seriously worry about their cognitive function. This is not even debatable at this point.
The above statement is to uk judge as well.