Depp v Heard

[George K]

I watched the cross-examination of Heard by Depp's team today.

Wow. This was stuff that, unlike what you see on TV, would play in primetime. Depp's lawyer was slow, focused, and methodical. She was able to point out all of Heard's inconsistencies, her errors, and her omissions.

I have no idea if the jury will buy it, but it was convincing to me.

[Doctor Phibes]

@George-K said in Depp v Heard:

I watched the cross-examination of Heard by Depp's team today.

Wow. This was stuff that, unlike what you see on TV, would play in primetime. Depp's lawyer was slow, focused, and methodical. She was able to point out all of Heard's inconsistencies, her errors, and her omissions.

I have no idea if the jury will buy it, but it was convincing to me.

Pretty much everything I see online seems to be people supporting Depp.

I guess it's only the jury that matters.

[Horace]

@Doctor-Phibes said in Depp v Heard:

@George-K said in Depp v Heard:

I watched the cross-examination of Heard by Depp's team today.

Wow. This was stuff that, unlike what you see on TV, would play in primetime. Depp's lawyer was slow, focused, and methodical. She was able to point out all of Heard's inconsistencies, her errors, and her omissions.

I have no idea if the jury will buy it, but it was convincing to me.

Pretty much everything I see online seems to be people supporting Depp.

I guess it's only the jury that matters.

I suspect the unspoken backlash against the excesses of #MeToo looms large in the minds of many.

[George K]

@Doctor-Phibes said in Depp v Heard:

I guess it's only the jury that matters.

There was an attorney in the gallery. He and other attorneys have been paying attention to the jurors, and he made some interesting observations.

1. When the cross started, "everyone in the jury woke up." The defense's attorney had a rambling, incoherent exposition of unconnected facts. When cross started, everyone started taking notes.

2. During one of the sidebars, Heard kept looking at the jury, and no one would make eye contact with her.

3. When the cross examination started, a thunderstorm had just begun outside, and there was a loud thunderclap. Several jurors smiled.

4. There was an audible gasp from the gallery when it became apparent that Heard never donated the money to charity that she got from Depp. This is evidence that she perjured herself during the trial in Great Britain.

5. The lawyer said that when court was done for the day, Heard's departure from the witness box was faster than a deer that just heard a gunshot. "If I could draw a cartoon, it would be an outline of her, with streaks behind."

It's gonna be a fun morning.

[Horace]

Amber heard less after Johnny punched her ear.

[George K]

I'm binging a lot of the lawyers' streams during and after the day's testimony. Kinda fun, and with time on my hands, why not?

I learned a new term this morning when describing Amber Heard's sister.

RBF

[LuFins Dad]

@George-K said in Depp v Heard:

I'm binging a lot of the lawyers' streams during and after the day's testimony. Kinda fun, and with time on my hands, why not?

I learned a new term this morning when describing Amber Heard's sister.

RBF

And? Definition please?

[George K]

@LuFins-Dad said in Depp v Heard:

And? Definition please?

Wikipedia is your friend.

Resting bitch face, also known as RBF, or bitchy resting face (BRF), is a facial expression that unintentionally appears like a person is angry, annoyed, irritated, or contemptuous, particularly when the individual is relaxed, resting, or not expressing any particular emotion.[1][2] The concept has been studied by psychologists and may have psychological implications related to facial biases, gender stereotypes, human judgement and decision-making.[3][4][5] The concept has also been studied by scientists with information technology.[clarification needed] Using a type of facial recognition system, they found that the phenomenon is real and the condition is as common in males as in females, despite the gendered word bitch that is used to name the concept.[6]

[Horace]

@George-K said in Depp v Heard:

Wikipedia:

The concept has been studied by psychologists

Well then, say no more. Just tell me what to think about this thing, psychologist expert studiers of this phenomenon!

[George K]

The strategy of this has been absolutely fascinating. The judge, who looks like a real hard-ass, has allowed each side 61 hours of testimony. She has said that, using a chess clock, she will cut a witness off mid-sentence once that time expires. As of Friday, the defense has about 8 hours left, and plaintiff (Depp) has....eighteen hours of time. What that means is that, once the 8 hours is done for Heard, Depp's team has more than 10 hours of unopposed testimony during rebuttal which plaintiff cannot cross-examine, etc.

Defense (Heard) has not rested, afaik. They plan to call at least one hostile witness tomorrow, and reportedly, that's going to be Depp. From what I've read they're going to try to show that Depp instructed his attorney to slander Heard.

It's remarkable how, in this day of #metoo, the tide has turned against Heard and pro-Depp. His team has done a good job of showing that it's possible for men to be abused (Heard has said, under oath, that she never struck Depp, but there's audio of her admitting it). In fact, a domestic violence support NGO has come out in support of Depp.

Remarkable case, and the total incompetence of Heard's team has been astonishing. The lead attorney, actually said, during redirect examination of Heard was interrupted by objections, "I'm trying here, your honor."

FFS.

It's been a circus, to be sure, but I've had fun.

[Catseye3]

@George-K said in Depp v Heard:

"Resting bitch face, also known as RBF, or bitchy resting face (BRF), is a facial expression that unintentionally appears like a person is angry, annoyed, irritated, or contemptuous, particularly when the individual is relaxed, resting, or not expressing any particular emotion."

Me, all my life. Not thinking anything in particular, had the RBF. Then when the 20th person man, a stranger, walked by and said heartily, "Smile!" The RBF became a lot less R and a lot more B.

[George K]

@Catseye3 said in Depp v Heard:
Not thinking anything in particular, had the RBF. Then when the 20th person man, a stranger...

A biologist!

Watching this has been a really guilty pleasure for me. The strategies of the two sides has been remarkable, and have shown what good v bad lawyering is.

This trial has caused me to buy moar popcorn, by the way.

[Catseye3]

@George-K said in Depp v Heard:

"Watching this has been a really guilty pleasure for me."

For me it was the OJ trial. Gawd, I was hooked through the gills on that thing, so much so that I actually suffered withdrawal when the verdict came in.

[George K]

@Catseye3 if you're interested in seeing some attorneys' reactions, check out these YouTube channels:

Link to video

Link to video

Link to video

I especially enjoyed the last of these three. Apparently Heard testified that Depp was so violent when he assaulted her that he broke (chipped) the bed upon which he attacked her. This lawyer explains, using simple understanding of wood and how it works, how that's patently impossible. She lied.

Link to video

[Catseye3]

@George-K said in Depp v Heard:

"if you're interested in seeing some attorneys' reactions . . . "

I'd have to review the whole trial, since I didn't watch it the first time around. So, no.

[Aqua Letifer]

We are truly a hypercapitalist, decadent and depraved society.

• There's an extremely nasty, highly personal defamation hearing going on between two celebrities.
• This case is being live-streamed to the public.
• The public is treating it as entertainment.
• The entertainment is interactive. You can make live commentary about the case through YouTube features.
• But it's also monetary. You can also pay to create text ads about Steam releases, crypto and other silly shit in the public chat of the livestream of a court case that the entire nation is using as entertainment.
• You can also buy merch that people have made that depict publicly defined catch phrases that were defined as the case is still active.

Holy fuck what is wrong with us.

That being said, it's funny as shit this woman burned $400 because she doesn't know how to use the interface.

And doubly funny some other asshole spent just as much money just to call her out on it.

[Horace]

@Aqua-Letifer said in Depp v Heard:

We are truly a hypercapitalist, decadent and depraved society.

• There's an extremely nasty, highly personal defamation hearing going on between two celebrities.
• This case is being live-streamed to the public.
• The public is treating it as entertainment.
• The entertainment is interactive. You can make live commentary about the case through YouTube features.
• But it's also monetary. You can also pay to create text ads about Steam releases, crypto and other silly shit in the public chat of the livestream of a court case that the entire nation is using as entertainment.
• You can also buy merch that people have made that depict publicly defined catch phrases that were defined as the case is still active.

Holy fuck what is wrong with us.

That being said, it's funny as shit this woman burned $400 because she doesn't know how to use the interface.

And doubly funny some other asshole spent just as much money just to call her out on it.

Yeah, but 420.

[Aqua Letifer]

I can't tell if that's due to currency conversions or being a fan of sticky icky. Either way what the fuck is wrong with us.

[Horace]

@Aqua-Letifer said in Depp v Heard:

I can't tell if that's due to currency conversions or being a fan of sticky icky. Either way what the fuck is wrong with us.

it's an interesting spectacle. Undeniably, lots of people are learning lots of stuff about the practice of civil law in the courtroom. The two parties are both willing participants. What's not to like?

[Aqua Letifer]

@Horace said in Depp v Heard:

@Aqua-Letifer said in Depp v Heard:

I can't tell if that's due to currency conversions or being a fan of sticky icky. Either way what the fuck is wrong with us.

it's an interesting spectacle. Undeniably, lots of people are learning lots of stuff about the practice of civil law in the courtroom. The two parties are both willing participants. What's not to like?

Profiteering from spectacle.