Lurker > Stalolin

The pics were proven in the trial to be shopped

Your opinion is demonstrably wrong however.
That article is inherently unreliable as it has been deemed that she did not experience abuse, and was an abuser instead.
Let that sink in.

Heard isn't an abuser. Period. Full stop.
That is the consensus of the mental health professional, the jury, various judges, and 80%+ of the witnesses called.

A victim of abuse that lashes out against their abuser is not committing abuse.

You are trying so hard to defend Amber Heard in some bid to feel like you "lieten" and "support women" that you are entirely demeaning and minimalizing an actual victim to hold up the abuser.
Your actions are harmful and you need to self reflect.

You can't ignore all the actual evidence and professional testimony and claim to be rational.
Fuck out of here.

I watched the trial.
Unless this man has also interviewed the various witnesses and had the credentials to back it, I'll believe my own eyes and the professional evaluations presented.
Like a rational and sane human being.

You should probably reevaluate that. He seems to be a lot like the Facebook fool I mentioned, believing things for the sake of believing them, without actually considering evidence and thinking for himself.

And that's fine for you to do so. But he's ultimately subject to his own biases and other influences, just as he claims the jury was. I don't see any reason to elevate his own determinations.

hes a journalist. But yes my bad.

the reason I trust Hobbes is because this kind of thing is exactly his wheelhouse. He used to co host the Youre Wrong About podcast which was largely about maligned women and their treatment in the media.

Ah yes, that's why lawyers post exclusively legal dissertations or dissents. Because your profession dictates how every piece of writing you produce is classified.

The only thing I got out of the article was that the author believes his credibility determination is correct. Which can also be said about the jury, so....

Holy shit, you chose a biased moronic article to try to back yourself up. Have you watched the trial at all, or read much of anything except trash articles like that?

You remind me of someone on my Facebook who was trashing Johnny Depp and supporting Amber simply because of Me too, Believe all Women, etc. This is a uber liberal who gets offended for the sake of others simply for the sake of being offended, it's very cringe. He considers himself well read too.

Amber well deserves the hate she's getting, she's a literal sociopathic snake who takes no responsibility and admits to no faults, instead choosing to direct blame to everyone but herself.

Why are you presenting a blogpost as an article?

Maybe you should read this bit a few more times and just shut the fuck up.

all the evidence pointed towards amber abusing depp. why are you burying your head in the sand? did you even watch the trial?

I dont necessarily agree with this either. There is a lot questionable behaviour by her but all that means is that there are no perfect victims. At worst theyre both abusers I guess.

all the evidence pointed towards amber abusing depp. why are you burying your head in the sand? did you even watch the trial?

Pics that were proven faked, and statements from experts that were openly biased

Correct. They deemed that the accounts of abuse were "probably true" as Depp wasn't successful in debunking them.

Most of her evidence didn't hold up under scrutiny. Despite this, she said she had mountains of much more damning evidence, which raised the question of why she hadn't included any of that as well. It made her look like she was grasping at air.

Added with her being caught lying multiple times, it made it just all the more likely that a lot of her photographic evidence was indeed staged.

That's sexist horseshit. Just because one of them is lying means all of them are lying?

When it came time to actually figure out if abuse had been committed in the recent trial, basically none of Amber's evidence was deemed credible, due to her tampering with photos and multiple witnesses breaking apart her accounts of events. And it was decreed that the newspaper article was indeed published with the intent of defaming him.

Amber Heard did nothing wrong Depp is an abuser

The UK case was about a newspaper being able to run their articles that called Depp a wife-beater, not about proving he was one or that it was done with the intent of defamation.

It basically ended with them going, "Yeah, the newspaper was in their right to publish these things because it sounded likely enough and they weren't just making shit up to attack Johnny," and called it a day.

Defamation is harder to prove in the American court system. The ruling was that the Washington Post article about Depp was defamatory.

Did you misread that post? He asked what Depp did to Turd, not what Turd did to Depp.

what did Depp do?

The best option was to recast TChalla

Well, woke used to be a phrase symbolizing social consciousness and awareness.

Then right-wingers co-opted it and used it as a blanket term for anything involving a non-white/non-straight/non-male character in a leading role and thus destroyed all of the meaning.

When someone is unironically using words like "woke" or "cringe", you know you're dealing with a dunce.

Yeah the increased agility is such a blessing for bows vs other Souls game.

And I'm with you on the rock throw sorcery. It's insane how useful it is. Enemies that dodge attacks usually dodge too early, when the rocks rise out of the ground. And the range on level-ground is long, but if you fire it downhill it seems to have unlimited range, or at least as long as is practical.