Amber Heard Files for Divorce from Johnny Depp

[sore]

What a touching and articulate piece. Thanks for posting.

fashinista-ta, It's still possibly there wasn't any violence involved with Vanessa, though. Some people behave extremely differently in different environments and circumstances. During his time with Vanessa, he was (for the most part) on top of his game career-wise, he was one of the most thought-after movie stars, good-looking, in the best age, and, if not completely sober, at least able to control his addictive personality when it came to public appearances.
It's been going downhill for him in the last few years, and everybody could see it. He was quite obviously drunk at many events. Not saying this to excuse his behavior in any way, but I'm sure his drinking contributed greatly to everything that has allegedly happened.
What I'm trying to say is, many people only become violent when there's something wrong in their lives. And there seems to be a lot of things wrong with Johnny.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

^ i agree. certain situations and/or people can trigger things in someone that others might not.

when johnny depp and vanessa were together, the largely lived in france outside the public spotlight. they raised kids. they holidayed in great places. they worked on their art. they seemed to have a balanced life.

but then pirates happened, he blew up into this caricature and almost started to become that character, they moved to the USA which meant they were much more in the public eye, and then he seemed to have some sort of midlife crisis: young blonde girlfriend, rock band, substance abuse, etc.

and if heard physically abused her former girlfriend, she may have a volatile side that triggered depp's and so on and so forth.

the point is that a person can act differently in different situations and relationships. some people bring out the worst in each other; others bring out the best.

at this point, it's mighty clear that these two need help.

 

[fashionista-ta]

I would certainly agree that this was a volatile and toxic relationship, and no doubt it would be fascinating (and heartbreaking) to know the full spectrum of causes behind that. As is stated so eloquently in the article, though, that doesn't and cannot mean that this violence was Amber's fault--I think that's very important to recognize.

Also, wrt her prior 'domestic violence,' I can only say that the authorities declined to prosecute. Certainly drama seems to follow her, that much is true. Hopefully she will be motivated to change that pattern.

I'm not saying I think someone who could do this would be violent with every partner (though I do think anyone thinking, Oh, he won't do it to me, should have her head examined). I'm saying that I find it hard to believe that someone who lived with him for 14 years would be utterly unaware of any potential for darkness and violence when (IMO) so clearly it is there.

 

[Benn98]

I'm saying that I find it hard to believe that someone who lived with him for 14 years would be utterly unaware of any potential for darkness and violence when (IMO) so clearly it is there.

See, this is my thinking as well. You'll very often hear guys say 'oh I've been happily dating for 5 years, then all of a sudden this girl turned into a waking nightmare'. It's simply isn't possible over such a long period, is it? The reality of course is that at one stage or another, a red flag must've popped up. And depending on how invested you are in the relationship, you'll either choose to ignore/dismiss it, or take it as the warning sign which it is.

If he was a covert abuser I would maaayyybe give Vanessa an all the others the benefit of the doubt, because this type of aggressors can carry on a facade for decades with very few outbursts. But in Johnny's case, it's actually quite overt, and quite possibly systematic in his modus operandi. So at some stage, even though he never lifted his hand on Vanessa and everything seemed hunky dory, there's must've been fit of verbal rage aimed at her or someone else, which may have contained before it could escalate to grand proportions.

 

[LouvreGirl]

I think people act out violently when they feel threatened and insecure. I dated a guy once who would say things like "oh wow, that girl's so hot" about some random woman...he did it all the time and it played on my insecurities (duh!). He was an a**hole - I know that now - but at the time it really confused me. Once we were quite drunk and I slapped him when he made one of those comments. I've never done that before or since. So yeah, I think it is possible for just one relationship to bring that out in a person. In no way am I saying Amber deserved whatever may have happened, just that maybe something in their relationship triggered the violence (if it is all true...of course).

 

[Miss Dalloway]

The way his team is going after Amber is truly agresive, but i simply never doubted her claims, or thought absurd things like some, that she did this herself in order to get money or some other nonsense. And after reading Wright's accounts, so well written, and worded, i truly hope they both can find a place to heal, and move on with their lives. Especially Deep, being around yes people is never good for you!

Here is the piece, not too long, but worth a read:

http://www.refinery29.com/2016/06/113149/domestic-violence-911-call-famous-friend

 

[Not Plain Jane]

so i guess the cop who arrested amber for domestic abuse was slagged in the press by amber's ex-lover for being "homophobic". but now it turns out that the cop is gay and is offended by the press slurs... go figure.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertai...eard-2009-openly-gay-report-article-1.2666985

meanwhile, perez hilton reports that amber tried to get this domestic violence arrest erased from her record "right after she started dating johnny depp."

http://perezhilton.com/2016-06-08-a...-erased-started-dating-johnny-depp/?from=post

true, untrue? i have no idea.

tmz also have another classy article out today called "put up or shut up" - sheesh. what a circus.

 

[fashionista-ta]

An excerpt from the first article linked above ... the first quote is from the arresting officer. van Ree (in case you've been in a cave) is Amber's ex.

“I am so not homophobic or mysoginistic! The arrest was made because an assault occurred (I witnessed it) and the parties were in a domestic relationship. PS...if you got paid, I want a cut,” she wrote.
Leonard’s reaction came after details of the airport arrest surfaced Tuesday amid Heard’s ongoing divorce battle with husband Johnny Depp and claims he physically abused her.
On Wednesday, van Ree blasted the 2009 arrest as a bigoted overreaction.
“Amber was wrongfully accused for an incident that was misinterpreted and over-sensationalized by two individuals in a power position,” van Ree wrote in the statement obtained by the Daily News on Wednesday.
“I recount hints of misogynistic attitudes toward us which later appeared to be homophobic when they found out we were domestic partners and not just ‘friends.’ Charges were quickly dropped and she was released moments later.”
In a partially redacted letter written to Officer Leonard by a prosecutor in October 2009, the prosecutor said not enough evidence existed to “prove beyond a reasonable doubt” that Heard intentionally assaulted van Ree.
“In this case there is no signed statement from (van Ree) indicating that she was offended by (Heard) grabbing her arm (or) that the contact caused pain,” the letter obtained by The News said.
“It was a very minor incident," a source close to Heard told The News earlier this week. “It was not really a big deal and nothing came from it.”
According to TMZ, the commotion broke van Ree’s pendant and made her “extremely upset.”
In her Wednesday statement, Van Ree suggested the incident had been unearthed to divert attention from Heard’s explosive domestic abuse allegations against her husband.
“It’s disheartening that Amber's integrity and story are being questioned yet again,” van Ree said.

PS I sure would love to get a look at the redacted parts of that letter! Maybe it said, Could you maybe be a little less quick on the draw, Barney Fife?

 

[Not Plain Jane]

here's a timeline of their relationships. depp has had a number of altercations, esp with press/about privacy, seemingly. but it's all here:

http://jezebel.com/a-timeline-of-amber-heard-and-johnny-depps-brief-volat-1781116059

Maybe it said, Could you maybe be a little less quick on the draw, Barney Fife?

i don't get what you mean? are you suggesting the arrest against amber was unjustified? the female cop said she witnessed the altercation and it was for real. what's wrong with breaking it up / making an arrest?

 

[MulletProof]

I wonder just how much money TMZ is getting, they're going after her like there's no tomorrow!.. I wasn't even a fan but damn.. in a time where they could be releasing junk from republican supporters in Hollywood (haha), how about just going for a woman that experienced domestic violence...

I understood her former girlfriend was just trying to set the record straight on what they obviously tried to portray as proof of Amber being violent over the years (therefore she brought it upon herself- must've really pushed poor Johnny over the edge). Not going after the cop by any means. I would be curious to know when did the cop retire and how long she's been openly gay as she claims.. and how being gay prevents someone from having homophobic or poor criteria, especially in a position of power. A bit like the good ol' myth that being a certain color automatically prevents you from being racist.. yeah right.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

amber's ex apparently called the cops homophobic and misogynistic so she was indeed going after them, i.e., accusing them of something. whether or not they are or were remains to be seen. it does seem unlikely that an openly gay woman would be homophobic, but who knows.

however, i find it interesting that we can call what amber's ex said setting the record straight but then at the same time shoot down anything vanessa says about her time with depp. i think BOTH of their opinions have to be taken with a grain of salt. that goes for the press on both sides too, imo.

what does hold water is the timeline of events and the more it is fleshed out the more it reveals that depp has always had a temper. the jezebel timeline has much more on him than on heard. but he's pretty much always been a bigger public figure in the public eye so there would be more stories. he's also twice as old.

man, he looks awful in recent photos. it seems totally viable that he is a substance abuser and that it may've been a factor in other abuse.

i like the fact that heard said she would donate $ from the defamation suit to a charity.

 

[MulletProof]

completely different situations.. the ex is talking about an incident she was a part of and that was brought to present time and used as evidence of Amber's character, Vanessa was adding her personal experience to an incident she was not a part of, as evidence too. Amber's ex does not reference her experience to May or Amber's relationship with Johnny Depp.

Re the cop, it might seem unlikely, but we don't know how long she's been out, which is a factor. We also don't know why was she released moments later.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

i am going to ask what will probably be a very unpopular question

but let me preface it with this:

in my opinion, depp has probably been abusive towards heard and to what degree i don't know but it clearly seems to involve physically. his past speaks loudly of a short temper, and his apparent substance abuse suggests there are deeper issues for him that would make him lash out.

that said, is it really the case, as it seems to be on here, that everything heard's friend's or exes have said is erudite, the truth, and setting the record straight, while everything depp's friend's/family/exes have said is low-class, paid for PR, meant to be attacking heard etc.?

is it really SO black (evil depp, low class friends, PR attacker) and white (innocent heard, well written friend statements, good lawyer, good intentions)?

i do wonder if what we're reading and hearing isn't just a little more complicated than we'd like to think...? that there are some grey areas. maybe not. maybe it is as black and white as above. but life tends to be more complicated usually.

still, i maintain what i said about depp above.

it's the press/case around this that i wonder about ...

 

[fashionista-ta]

here's a timeline of their relationships. depp has had a number of altercations, esp with press/about privacy, seemingly. but it's all here:

http://jezebel.com/a-timeline-of-amber-heard-and-johnny-depps-brief-volat-1781116059



i don't get what you mean? are you suggesting the arrest against amber was unjustified? the female cop said she witnessed the altercation and it was for real. what's wrong with breaking it up / making an arrest?

Like all of us, I wasn't there, so I really don't know what was or wasn't justified. I do know that everyone tends to be on high alert at airports. According to the prosecutor's letter, Amber grabbed her girlfriend's arm and there was no evidence she intended to assault her. I take the letter to mean there was zero case there from the get-go.

There have certainly been instances where a police officer demonstrated questionable judgment, or did the opposite of defusing a situation. This could have been one of those instances, but I don't know for sure.

***

It's interesting how similar their exes' statements are, and also striking how much of Depp's violence seems linked to alcohol.

I believe Kate and Winona have had nothing to say so far, is that right?

 

[fashionista-ta]

I have had a similar but different question ... I've noticed some commenters seeming to drive to equalize the two participants here. 'He has this history ... she has this history.' 'He's dysfunctional ... she's dysfunctional.' 'Oh, but she called him fat and old--verbal abuse!!' [Some less sensitive souls might take that as simply a factual statement. Me, I wish I could say I don't read worse insults in the headlines every day from prominent public figures.] And so on ...

IMO, without ascribing angelic characteristics to anyone, there is no equalization of this situation, and there is a perpetrator.

So my question is, why do some people feel the need to attempt to 'balance' or 'equalize' this story?

 

[Not Plain Jane]

i have a friend who is a psychologist and so i asked her if my looking for nuance in this situation is wrong and she said "no, absolutely not. things *are* more complicated than they appear on the surface, always."

and i know you mean me by "some commentators" so let me just say, i am not trying to "equalize" the situation. i have already said i think depp's abusive, and i wasn't the one who said heard is out for money, but i am loath to rush to judgment on paratextual evidence, friends, exes, etc. and that's what i took issue with from the beginning on this thread.

for example, why dismiss heard's apparent grabbing of her ex-girlfriend in 2009 such that a female police officer intervened and pressed charges (suggesting it was the cop's fault? if it was, then why were charges even lain? why wouldn't the ex, right then and there, in the airport, have said "everyhting is fine."?), but then bring up hotel destruction by depp from over 20 years ago? as i said before i do think it suggests they are likely both somewhat dysfunctional. and recognizing that isn't equalizing anything in my view - or wasn't my intent.

imho, you either dismiss both or include both. and that's not about equalizing. it's about getting a full picture.

maybe all that should matter, really, are the 15 months these two were together (or longer if you count pre-marriage), and the rest should be thrown out the window.

then, go from there. just work with that. i think it'll be more straightforward.

but i don't think we should vilify vanessa and then hold amber's ex up as a paragon of virtue, is all.

 

[sore]

^ I agree about the last part. Thing is, their past shouldn't matter. At all. At least not in front of the judge, who is, by definition, responsible for judging the very incident that is on trial. Wether or not Amber has hurt her ex, Johnny was abusive already when he was with Kate etc. should not matter. (Sadly, it probably will.) Even if it turned out Heard was indeed after his money, she could still be a victim of domestic violence. Even if it turned out Depp was abusive in all of his previous relationships, he could still be innocent in this one.

Just my two cents on the gay / homophobic thing: Saying that homosexuals aren't homophobic per se completely misconceives what homophobia (and racism, for that matter) are made of. it's not only some feeling of superiority towards another social / ethnic group, it's a set of rules, assumption and behaviors you ascribe to the members of a group, and ultimately potentially to yourself.
Just one quick example: As a woman, I caught myself more than once moaning about another woman's overachieving (as opposed to ambitious, as you would most likely say if it was a man) behavior and about female 'bitchiness' (as opposed to something like quick wit or repartee). Without realizing or wanting it, I sometimes think in patterns that perpetuate misogynic thinking. Just because they are around me, everyday, all day, and they inevitably lead to unfair (or biased, at the very least) judgement.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

^ great post. all makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[Benn98]

i have a friend who is a psychologist and so i asked her if my looking for nuance in this situation is wrong and she said "no, absolutely not. things *are* more complicated than they appear on the surface, always."

and i know you mean me by "some commentators" so let me just say, i am not trying to "equalize" the situation. i have already said i think depp's abusive, and i wasn't the one who said heard is out for money, but i am loath to rush to judgment on paratextual evidence, friends, exes, etc. and that's what i took issue with from the beginning on this thread.

for example, why dismiss heard's apparent grabbing of her ex-girlfriend in 2009 such that a female police officer intervened and pressed charges (suggesting it was the cop's fault? if it was, then why were charges even lain? why wouldn't the ex, right then and there, in the airport, have said "everyhting is fine."?), but then bring up hotel destruction by depp from over 20 years ago? as i said before i do think it suggests they are likely both somewhat dysfunctional. and recognizing that isn't equalizing anything in my view - or wasn't my intent.

imho, you either dismiss both or include both. and that's not about equalizing. it's about getting a full picture.

maybe all that should matter, really, are the 15 months these two were together (or longer if you count pre-marriage), and the rest should be thrown out the window.

then, go from there. just work with that. i think it'll be more straightforward.

but i don't think we should vilify vanessa and then hold amber's ex up as a paragon of virtue, is all.

Jane, your comment was extremely well put! I suppose in a way, I do get what you mean. I'm inclined to give you lot the benefit of the doubt that, you know, you tend to turn info around before you pass judgement. Of course that is most damaging to the victim, and probably even part of the reason why these cases gets dropped, but I guess you're entitled to that. I also think you are in fact exualising the situation by bringing that charge over here, and that too in a way is justifiable because it shows how you process information. But again, what's the context here? Who is the charge against? Johnny, or Amber? Because digging up dirt on her is actually a form of detraction, well, imo.

When you remove the exes and Johnny's army of rescuers, you are left with Amber's claims and photo's proving the abuse. And then there's the texts. What do you make of that then? It's now been confirmed that those marks were not fradulent nor self-inflicted, and that the texts were authentic. What more, in your opinion, would be required to prove that yes, she was in fact knocked about? Because that's all that matters to me! I'm not at all concerned with 'but she called him fat and old', did he, or did he not lift his hand on her?
I'll say this again, years of victim shaming has made it damn near impossible for a flawed victim to dare her case before a court. And they'll have a field day with Amber, especially now.

Re Vanessa, she's fair game now. She exposed herself to scrutiny the moment she declared herself a witness and ran her mouth. I don't understand why these people don't just say 'sorry, no comment'. Did she fully understood the implications of her comment? That she might be called upon as a character witness to reiterate what she said in front of a court of law? They could do that, can't they? Of course it's absurd, but I've heard of it before.

 

[Mary-Anne]

When you remove the exes and Johnny's army of rescuers, you are left with Amber's claims and photo's proving the abuse. And then there's the texts. What do you make of that then? It's now been confirmed that those marks were not fradulent nor self-inflicted, and that the texts were authentic. What more, in your opinion, would be required to prove that yes, she was in fact knocked about? Because that's all that matters to me! I'm not at all concerned with 'but she called him fat and old', did he, or did he not lift his hand on her?
I'll say this again, years of victim shaming has made it damn near impossible for a flawed victim to dare her case before a court. And they'll have a field day with Amber, especially now.

well said.