Did Amber Reveal MORE TRUTH and LIES? How Can a HOAX Be Real?!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 сен 2024
- Ambers interview in Interview in #DeppvHeard reveals more possible truths following the trial...
Part 1 Reaction: • UK Barrister REACTION ...
Interview Part 2 Reaction: • UK Barrister REACTION ...
Interview Part 3 • UK Barrister REACTION ...
Watch my UK #johnnydepp trial analysis
Amber Heard INTERVIEW REACTION PART 1:
• UK Barrister REACTION ...
PART 1:
• UK Barrister Analysis:...
Part 2:
• Depp v Heard UK Judgme...
PART 3
• INCIDENT 9 - "THE STAI...
Petition:
www.change.org...
#JohnnyDepp Playlist:
• Johnny Depp v Amber He...
Check out my exclusive content at www.blackbeltb...
Also me: ruclips.net/user/bl...
My wife's cooking: ruclips.net/user/ea...
Address for PAID Formal Advice ONLY: clerks@ShenSmith.com
Disclaimer: Neither this nor any other video, may be taken as legal advice. I accept no liability whatever for any reliance placed upon it, as there is no contract between us and I am not instructed by you.
For formal advice, please contact clerks@ShenSmith.com.
💌 Become a channel member to access stripes and perks!
/ @blackbeltbarrister
MY CAMERA GEAR
🎥 Big Camera amzn.to/3yFFcFf
🎥 Small Camera amzn.to/2RB7ez9
🎙 RODE VIDEOMic Pro+ amzn.to/2QCJURi
Gobe ND Filter amzn.to/2R3eEuA
Neewer Ring Light amzn.to/3aOkLtT
Switch Pod amzn.to/3sZb8yA
JOBY Tripod amzn.to/3dXJYDT
External Media Drive amzn.to/3uxNDOQ And if you like my house and decor:
MY CHAIR:
amzn.to/3mYpPBB
Lamp 1 - amzn.to/3ntbEnm
Lamp 2 - amzn.to/3dXfUZi 🎓 Brilliant contract law book:
amzn.to/2PHC2O1 🎓 Excellent book with an overview of criminal law:
amzn.to/3gTPEAV 🎓 Learn more about trespass and tort law:
amzn.to/32N6TLS
(Affiliate link)
LAW FAQS
• Common Law
CONSUMER LAW PLAYLIST:
• Consumer Law
TREE LAW PLAYLIST:
• Tree Law Miniseries
ROAD TRAFFIC LAW PLAYLIST:
• Road Traffic Law
FAMILY LAW PLAYLIST:
• Family Law
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:
I'm a Barrister of England and Wales.
Videos for educational guidance only, Always seek advice before taking action. Videos on my channel are not legal advice and should not be taken as such. I accept no liability for any reliance placed upon the content of these videos or references, therein.
#blackbeltbarrister #lawyer #barrister
Description contains affiliate links; I will occasionally earn commissions from qualifying purchases or leads generated. Description may contain affiliate or sponsored links, for which we may receive commissions or payment.
Even bigger, her resentment that she actually HAS to make the promised DONATION. In other words, she wanted the halo effect, without giving up her money. She never HAD true donor intent.
True, and as it was written into the divorce agreement she is resentful as she is making out that she was forced to make the donation. It had obviously come up in the divorce proceedings that JD felt he had been set up and she married him for his money and this was here blase way of proving that she did not, so the agreement was made to give the divorce settlement to charity and clear her debts.
she is just fooling everyone....and wanted to believe her....
Virtue signalling, that's all she wanted to do. Wow, I'm very happy she did this interview. She's confirmed how terrible of a human being she is and how manipulative she is. She's done in Hollywood. This is how the world will always remember her, and the best part is Johnny didn't have to do anything to show us who she really is. She killed her own global brand by herself. Unbelievable how she thought this interview would clean her up. #JusticeGotServedForJohnnyDepp
She will never donate the money. She’ll come with some kind of excuse.
Totally agree. She could have just accepted she was a gold digger and she never had to pledge/donate the 7M.
She definitely knows the difference between pledge and donate:
- she never said "pledge" in any public statement, it was always "donated" in the past tense
- she never said "donated" under oath, it was always "pledged" under penalty of perjury
In the UK she did, Judge Nichols even made reference to how nice she was in the judgment, and it was a major factor in his ruling for her.
UK judge is a tool
I think you have the key to this issue: the different tenses.
Donated is past tense
Pledged is a promise to do something in the future
This should have been put to her in the witness box. Make her acknowledge the difference. Ask her to produce the recipe she has for the donations she has made in the past.
@@Songbirdstress Because his ruling in favor of The Sun (the case was not against AH) had nothing to do with his friendship with the owner of The Sun, his son's employment by a sister company, or his son's friendship/partnership with the writer of the piece./sarc.
She understands She chose to tell the world that she gave them the money.
For me, her statement “I shouldn’t have had to donate to money to be believed” means it was purposeful, she pledged it as a part of her show, went and got some press stating unequivocally that she donated it but she actually never had any intention of donating that money. She felt entitled to it. Her meal ticket was gone and she intended to keep every dollar. Her actions shows that. She had 13 months to donate the money before Johnny filed suit, she was never going to donate it and she never will.
No she won't pay it...she's looking for a 'man/woman' to come to her rescue and pay it off for her. She is a social climbing gold-digger! However she has been exposed and I doubt anyone will unless that person is very stupid or has more money than he/she know what to do with. Sad she can't get over herself and think of other humans or at least something to help humanity, not like the disaster she caused for DV victims.
Exactly! She is just a gold digger
Facts
The 13 months is just counting the time since she received the full sum too. The first payment she received was like 6ish years ago and got paid out over time so really she had 6+ years already. She tried saying she stopped JD from donating it directly because "I don't want him to use it as a tax break and if he does donate he has to do it all at once", then later on when called out on why she hasn't donated it in over a year her excuse was exactly that, "It doesn't have a deadline and I still intend to honor it but I was told to pay it over time as one does so I can get tax breaks"
Pretty sure she even used the excuse "I haven't donated it yet because I was waiting to receive it all so I can donate it all at once" before and don't forget the "I can't donate it because he sued me and I spent it all on legal fees" We all make excuses and sometimes they're valid but if they were actually valid excuses you wouldn't be trying to come up with 10 other ones, rather stick to the one that works... Not only that but her legal fees were paid for by her homeowners insurance so that's another load of bs and "my legal fees were $6 mil" is another flat out lie.
Nobody asked her to donate or say she was going to. She got on her soap box and claimed she donated it because she didn't want people saying she was a gold digger. Now she doesn't like people calling her a liar so she will never shut her mouth about these doggone lies she has said about JD either.
This is such a ground-breaking case on so many levels. It's broader than two sparring celebrities. Keep up your broadcasts highlighting the severity of these important issues.
Sorry, for those who have lived it, nothing ground breaking about it. These cases usually have a child involved, a child who witnessed the violence and then later the lying.
@@dcraig7712 the amber heard case is at once the subtle exposure and the brutal takedown of white (female) privilege. a brilliant woman of color fearlessly and uncompromisingly demolished a living icon of the most privileged, pampered and protected demographic in western society in front of the entire world. prior to this trial, something like that was essentially unheard of. it's a very public breach of a social hierarchy that has defined western culture for decades, if not centuries.
The cops and courts need to get a grip on narcissistic behavior, and stop punishing victims further.
@Reva Barendse A great comment. It includes the role of Social Media, the failures of MSM and sheds light on the issue of men as victims of DV. I wonder if it will be studied in Law Schools in the future?
@@phillipaclemons7261 I sincerely hope that law schools, medical schools, social workers and the like do study all types of violence in future so that it’s not stereotyped. Social media must also become more responsible.
AH was a C Grade actress before she got her claws into JD. She used her malevolent charm to con him. Her career was never going to be A List. Latching onto JD’s fame, fortune and star power is what she used to catapult her status. Lying and defaming him now is all she has left to stay relevant. She needs to be ordered to stop talking about him completely.
I thought it was implied in the guilty verdict and the fact she defamed him, that she wouldn't be allowed to talk about him like this anymore. But here we are , 2wks later and she is STILL claiming victim & the op Ed wasn't about him even though she admitted it, she said in recording "I only did this because myself & my friends were being evicted" why that wasn't played in court is beyond me. But ya, she is an ass, she's a "victim" of being a psychopath, that's it.
She latched onto it then went on to totally destroy him. Lunatic
trust me most did not know who she was before this trial , SO SO bad in The Stand , forgettable in Aquaman
She could always go to Vegas and get a job as a stripper. Mind you who'd want to see that or pay?
she had the money her aqua man role and could’ve probably gotten away without donating the money if she had just left him alone, but she just can’t help herself!
I think she's trying to say that being believed should not be dependent on paying a donation, which would be fair comment IF she hadn't lied on oath about making a donation to reinforce her case against Depp. It's deflection, obfuscation...call it what you will, but its designed to cover up the lies told in court.
No one made her make the pledge in the first place. It was her idea, arrest PR move. If you make a pledge and have an once of integrity you'll actually donate the money.
It is about honesty and truth with her character behaviors.
@@katiehettinger7857 if I recall, it was also why she got such a high divorce settlement. Runkle suggests that they ascertain her financial situation. She's not behaving like someone who's poor.
If she hadn't boasted on TV years ago that she HAD donated it, it wouldn't even matter at all.
But it puts a dampener on her credibility when she lies to big up herself, like all Clout Goblins do.
The pledge to charity was part of the divorce settlement its got nothing to do with being believed !!
She did not cooperate because the cops would have seen she was lying if they actually investigated it.
Calling the police was to be a threat to JD. AH (something like): Give me the money or else. I've called the police. Not kidding. I didn't make a report. But if you don't give me the money, I'll take it all the way.
The idea that she doesn't know the difference between pledge and donation is insane! I can't believe she was so arrogant to believe she could say that and people would believe her! But I guess that was the only way she could explain this with out admiting she had lied! LOL Rather act dumb than be seen as a liar!
She knows. She just lies boldly
Nah she knows the difference she was just trying to twist words to suit her needs. She wanted her cake and eat it to
It may be that she can´t tell the difference - she also has difficulty with the subtle difference between ´truth´ and ´lies´😁
She clearly does not know the difference between real life and a movie roll also
She said she was going to "donate" the money on her own for social credit. She definitely knew the difference between pledge and donate. She never signed pledge agreement with the ACLU which is a legally binding contract
We would have moved on, if Amber would accept she lost. It would be wise for her disappear for a while, but no, she insists on trying to rerun the trial in the press. 😒
Absolutely. I don't think she understands just how unconvincing she is
I mean the press is still on her side. To her its entirely possible that she can get evidence suppressed and media support her
Her mind isn’t right.
I think it would be great if those activists still saying she is a victim would finally admit she is a fantasist and it is a hoax.
Somehow she is thinking she can win and get some money ...because she prob will not work for quite a while. Thru it all she thinks she can outsmart the system, the lawyers the judges and any jury
As a trained and experienced legal eagle, you, more than anyone, will know how difficult it is for pathological liars to keep track of all the different lies they spin to try to be believed. It is a simple and effective move to present them with two of their conflicting lies and watch them prepare a convoluted word salad in an attempt to conflate the lies into an explanation that can appear to make it work. All they then do is paint themselves into a smaller corner and any viewer (or juror) can see this.
Must admit I did start to feel sorry for Heard. I did think that social media had overdone it, and it was nice to hear whispers of JD being gracious enough to not go after payment of the judgement. I've done a 180 after these interviews hers and her lawyers. The lies just continue, no expression of regret, no empathy for JD, just selfish attempts at justification which just expose her lies even more. I really hope she has to pay all the money and if criminal charges are appropriate, bring it on!
What about all the backlash JD got on social media when this "exploded" 6 years ago. What about how JD was dropped like a hot potato even before the UK matter went through the courts. I think AH is getting the backlash she deserves, not she doesn't like people knowing what really went on.
I understand JD's reasoning to not take the money but I don't like it.. Get the money and donate it to charity, Heard deserves punishment for what she's done. It's not fair that only the guy ever gets punishsd
💯
Everyone has their limits and at some point we have all gone “hang on a minute”…. okie dokie now, enough is enough!
AH has serious & severe mental health disorders & it’s clear that no one in her life has had or most likely ever will have, any positive influence or effect over her apparent path of self destruction. Having lived through a similar relationship with a narcissist and experiencing DV in my childhood, I absolutely relate to JD’s journey with this woman.
As with him, in the end, despite exhausting & almost losing yourself by loving them, you finally face the hard truths, open all wounds up for scrutiny & choose to fight and reclaim your life back.
JD is a survivor and AH is an abuser. The trial, evidence, testimonies & jury, not social media or MSM or any of our collective opinions will change that truth, ever.
There ain’t nothing’ Ms Heard can do now, that will ever change this “self writer” narrative she has created….sad & pathetic.
Thank fuck JD chose to save himself 🙏 and by doing so, he has done more for humanity, at this time in the world, than he could ever imagine ❤️
I don’t understand how people can feel bad for someone being held accountable through social media. Social media is an online reflection of the general populations opinions. The vast majority of people don’t like liars, and voiced their speech freely. If you don’t want to be decimated on social media as a public figure, don’t blatantly lie, especially about being horrifically sexually assaulted. It’s a real kick in the face to actual SA & DA survivors. Lying so badly is also an insult to most peoples basic intelligence.
You got that right!! She is a psychopath and that is how people fall into the trap.
100% she was deceptive this was crystal clear throughout the case. She doesnt like being challenged about all her lies because this shows how extremely calculating she can be, even if she wasn't being challenged you can still see its all lies.
The exaggerated accounts of violence were her undoing. Had she really experienced that much violence she would have been taken to an emergency room for treatment and in my mind that lost the case for her. Even if Johnny had assaulted her and she blew it out of proportion she would be disbelieved at least in my book.
@Rheumattica
We don't know if that was authentic.
@@normansmith9110 Right! Can one even imagine a vain, actress who is conceited and physically beautiful NOT rushing to the Emergency room with an aledged 'broken nose'?
She's doing the same thing in the interviews as she did on the stand at the trial: she has a convinient explanation for literally everything. Nothing is ever her fault. Even her "we had a horrible marriage" bit was on a general level and diluted her role.
@@normansmith9110 but you also have to wonder, what type of person makes up something like the Australia incident, the trailer park cavity search, being moved by the pelvic bone etc her overacting saved him, regardless whether people believed he was innocent, it's extremely lucky the jury didn't believe her because he would have that hanging over him for life. As it is he won but the MSM is still vilifying him which I don't understand.
This woman is impervious to the worldwide reaction to the court case. Quite surreal actually. She is just maintaining the lie that she was abused and is totally justified in her actions going forward. Can she not be gagged for goodness sake! It’s embarrassing. I’m guessing that she is being granted interviews because this coverage gains money. Hectic!
Great catches!!Freudian slips moments! ..NEVER talk too much!...you'll ALWAYS reveal your true intentions..
The more she talks, the deeper she digs the hole she is already in. She is also making it increasingly harder for the JD team to give her an escape on the verdict and settle on no pay of the compensation in exchange for letting this rest.
AH does not want to let it rest because she is now at the point where her only relevenace is keeping this going, she has nothing else left.
I doubt she will be working as an actor anytime soon. Hollywood and the rest of the film industry are all about popularity.
@@katiehettinger7857 Well they are primarily about acting and the case has shown how bad she is at that.
If one of us peasants had one million, we’d stay poor & last for years !
Exactly
In divorce proceedings, she told Johnny that she didnt want any money from him, but that the lawyers said she HAD to put a number on it. They agreed a donation to two charities of $7m and Johnny tried to pay this direct - his team sent the first $100k. Her team then went mad because Johnny would then get the tax breaks and they insisted on this basis that the money be paid to them, so that they could make the donations (this way Amber would get the tax breaks). If we give Amber the benefit of the doubt, she may at that time have intended to make the donations but found that because she didnt earn $7m per year, she couldnt maximise the tax breaks if she paid all the money in a single year, so she chose to pay it over several years to offset her earnings in those years. This would explain why she made the first payment of $350k. But then at some point, it appears that she changed her mind and decided that she didnt actually need to make the other payments and nobody would ever know. ACLU testified that she would not reply whenever they chased her to agree a payment plan or make the next payment, so the plan was never actually signed - so she didnt even 'pledge' the full payment to the ACLU on paper anywhere.
Then she made claims to everyone that she had made the donations and when Johnny's team in trial motions asked for proof of the payments, she refused to supply any evidence of them and resisted any requests for anything along those lines, so Johnny's team asked to subpoena the charities to ask them for their records, Amber tried to block this request, saying that 'there are less intrusive ways of obtaining the information', but the judge lost patience with them because they were the ones preventing those less intrusive ways by not providing their proof of transactions. So it was only when the charities were asked by the courts to provide the information that they said "she hasnt paid..." and the lie was broken!
She did everything to stop anyone from ever finding out, then concocted this lie about pledges or about not being able to pay because Johnny sued her (13 months AFTER the final divorce payment went to her).
Exactly...the reasoning AH used in the trial 'when buying a house you pay it off' .....yes you pay the bank back because THEY pay the seller Immediately
so she goes on TV and states she donated all the money because "she wanted NOTHING", but she thinks she shouldn't need to donate that money in order to be believed. o-kay.
She's also basically admitting that the announcement to donate the money was an attempt to help her be believed; which shows a base mind-set of manipulation and deception imo
Totally.
Yep.
Omg you're right 😲 the virtuous non gold digging victim of a woman, that refuses even to be called a victim, so much of a victim she is. And she gives up all the money, because all she wants is her freedom, poor thing. Nasty
The implicit resentment in "should not have had to donate that money to be believed" also exposes her assertion in that interview that she "wanted nothing" to be the manipulative lie it was.
@@jagibaba 🤣🤣🤣
Ms Turd is the walking meme gift that keeps giving.
Oh…… and she can’t stop lying.
Another thought....... Asked: Did they just have better lawyers? She answered "Better job of distracting the jury from the real issues" Was that her lawyers intent; to distract the jury from the real issues?
Yes, of course. And she slipped up saying that, didn't she?!! 🤣 I noticed it during the entire hearing. All AH's attorneys talked about was how Johnny Depp drank and did this drug or that drug. Then accused all of JD's witnesses of wanting to "curry favor" or be Super Fans or want 15 minutes of fame. Truly odious and stupid attorneys, hers.
yes, my thoughts too when I heard this. And I guess she means 'SHE as a so-called victim" is the real issue that is being distracted from.
She didn't HAVE to donate/pledge the money full stop. She did not have to ever say what she was going to do with the money. Becides which, there were contradictions in her own testimony.
I really do think your videos are extremely insightful, educational and understandable by the general public. Thank you.
She did have to say she donated it though, it was part of the settlement deal. She was only allowed to have the extra 7mill from Johnny if she donated it. Johnny even began donating the money under her name, but she flipped out when she found out and said she wanted to donate it herself. So she had to lie and say she was donating it. It was the only way she could keep the 7mill. She wasn’t ever personally entitled to it
She did not even have to promise to pay the money. No one was forcing her. Depp did not care what she did with it after he gave it to her.
It is not like there was a clause in the divorce settlement that required her to repay the $7milli I n if she did not donate it within twelve months and provide Depp with proof of the amount donated.
@@BreakofDawn Thank you for that information. I did not know about that stipulation. But I also meant, that in the settlement, she could have not even asked for the money for charity full stop. If she had been fairer and less greedy, (like wanting to have the penthouse, cars etc), she wouldn't have had to try and make a "kind gesture", by saying she wanted that money, from HIM, to give away AT ALL, if that makes sense. I am not an American or a lawyer but I do have to say, I got so frustrated when they kept mentioning the UK trial because, libel/defamation cases are stricter here, but he lost that case because there was no jury, and he was suing a publication tabloid newspaper belonging to the Rupert Murdoch group, whereas in this trial the rules were entirely different, but "conveniently," AH'S TEAM would "forget", to mention that the Uk trial was not against AH, but a newspaper. Ironic perhaps because this trial was different as he was directly suing HER, for writing an article in a newspaper, wheras the Uk trial was about suing the newspaper, based on accusations of violence she made, but she was their as a witness to give testimony, like, her sister, or Dr Hughes etc were doing for her in this case. There is a channel called black belt barrister, who is reacting to her interviews this week, and he does explain and breakdown how the two countries have different procedures and why etc, because of this confusion.
When in one place Heard wants to be credited with not having married Depp for his money as evidenced by her promise to donate the divorce settlement, but in another place she tried to claim she *has* donated the money, redefining the English language when it's found out that she hasn't, and in yet another she tries to twist the issue into her being forced to donate the settlement in order to be believed as if it wasn't her idea in the first place - well, yes, if someone commits to making donations and then doesn't donate and makes excuses about it, that does say something about that persons credibility. Heard is just digging herself an even deeper hole by not being aware or able to accept that people have seen through her trying to have it all ways and contradicting herself. Maybe it's the first time she's really reached a situation where she can't just rewrite the truth again, and she doesn't know how to deal with that.
Also the restraining order was to tie down the apartments so she could stay there and Depp would have to pick up the tab. If she really had the money and didn't need/want his money she would have bolted...to remove herself from the 'danger'.
She also has said ‘she did not want to be seen as a ‘gold digger’! The UK Judge seems to have been swayed by her donating the entire divorce settlement, she “wanted nothing”! I, myself, found that to be pretty powerful; but, finding out (by watching the entire trial) that she did not actually give the charities the money was eye opening! The public would have never known the truth, without the trial. When you talk the talk, you have to walk the walk; Amber should be doing the walk of shame-owning her lies-and then slithering under a rock, for stealing from sick children, paying to be a spokesperson, and trying to defame Johnny Depp, and now the jury, and the Judge! Myself, I not drinking the KoolAid; she needs to be held accountable, financially and criminally, and seek help for her mental health issues, if not for herself, for her daughter!
I can tell you if the police had seen substantial injury the police would have arrested him with or without her pressing charges. It is done in many US municipalities.
She had nothing for a week applied her Bruise Kit and went to court.
I have seen several tutorial videos covering up injuries with make-up. Almost all end up using so much make-up it looks artificial.
Oh and ScAmber I found out you can't put the disguised cover up with foundation as your base. Only a HORRORWOOD make-up technician would know that though.
the stupid thing is she kept the before and after doctored photo too :)
This is true. In DV cases in most states police have to arrest the abuser even if the victim says they don't want to.
I AGREE, I covered mine with so much make-up it looked like spac filler and felt heavy and uncomfortable, so tried to stay home until it healed better so less make-up usage to cover. AH is not onlyba Turd she's full of 💩💯🤢🤮🦘🐨🦘
Plus a week later when she went for the TRO it was a bit red. It would be a darker bruise by then. Surely either makeup or fresh. Not a week old.
@@jayneofspain3322 Even a freshly popped up pimple can have some redness around it. Celebrities are not robots, they get those too, they just get treated right away.
So... just by not treating the pimple, and there you have it.
Clearly the key point here is that she felt that she "had to" go that extra step and "pledge" the money because she sensed or knew that noone believed her and in order to win the trial, she "had to" pledge the money, even though she never had any intention of actually donating/paying the money. This point is further proven, because she never donated anything, conning her boyfriend Elon into making a donation in her name because the money she got from Johnny was "hers" and she was spending it on her lavish lifestyle. She had no rent, because in the settlement, she could live for free in the penthous. She had no transportation expenses, because Johnny was paying for the armoured chauffeured vehical driving her around town, and she had her earnings from Aquaman.
The donation itself wasn't the issue though, her claiming it was is typical gaslighting. She said under oath in the UK trial that she had donated the money and that is partly why she won that trial. The issue for the US trial is that she lied under oath in the UK trial.
The pledge was part of the divorce settlement .
It would be interesting to know how long she stayed in the penthouse after they split up
She allegedly bought her father a house with part of the money.
Audio and a letter prove she hoaxed everything and was ignored by media and news outlets.She blackmails him in it .she should be in prison.
"If it was a hoax I could've followed up with the police." So she slipped up and admitted she's perfectly capable of lying to the authorities, sort of like when she admitted she was perfectly capable of lying to the media to make JB look bad. She's really not as smart as she thinks she is.
Narcissists and psycho's never are, but they think everyone else is stupid.
"If it was a hoax ... I would have got medical evidence"
@Andrew Keifer, and also after saying that she wouldn't know how to post the video to TMZ, ( pleeeeze,anyone can easily find out how ), and also if she wanted to mess with her photos she could have done a better job. And this last statement, also came after she had said she would not know how to do that too. Incredible how she truly believes everyone in that courtroom, and all watching the live stream, would not get all the contradictions in her word salads. So many Freudian slips.
Not smart at all. 🙃
@@aleahaa5912 theyre not smart, they are cunning. One on one a narcissist can make you believe a lot of nonsense.
As I recall in Josh Drew's deposition, he said ( and I believe with images as well in so called property damage) he said he walked the police through one of the penthouses to show them the damage. Of course the police bodycam footage showed this to be false. Therefore, I don't understand the jury awarding her compensation re Mr Waldman. So yes what you have analysed is true also when mixed with Drew's testimony. It was a hoax.
The bodycam footage was taken by the second set of police called in by Rocky. The artfully arranged artwork or photographs on the he floor and bed in still photos were hers.
For sure. The police body cam proved it to be a hoax, but the award I think was a way to get someone over the line. JD knew he smashed up nothing, so knew it was a hoax, but until the police body cam came out it was he said (with his two security) and she said (with all her freeloading hangers on who thought she was going to get the 3 penthouses)
It was invisible evidence
Johnny's lawyer made up a the story about they conspiracy, stayed it as fact rather than as personal belief. He had no way of knowing what people did or didn't do after Johnny left the apartment. The jury seemed focused on the idea it's bad to make up things and pass them off as truth. If you have a theory say it's your theory.
Awarding AH for Waldman’s comment = jury compromise maybe?
Excellent points! You found the logical fallacies in her gaslighting. Also didn’t she herself volunteer to give away the money as a means of proving she wasn’t after the money? When her behavior proved she was after it. Text book narcissist with no clue that many of us can’t bear to watch her because it’s so obvious she’s not telling the truth. Her & lawyer Elaine continuing to talk & emote like this just makes the gaslighting more obvious
What gets me is how she could be on the stand saying "I use 'donate' and 'pledge' synonymously". How the hell has she not been sat down by her lawyers and had it drilled into her skull that they do *not* mean the same thing, and asserting that they do will undermine your credibility? At least be honest, and try "I was a massive idiot amd thought they were synonymous, but have since learned that they are not".
Is it to do with the American education system, that she doesn't know that a pledge is a promise to do something in future ( will give the sick kids the money) and donated means to have given something in the past ( have already paid the sick kids their money). But she knows all about synonyms?
@@shaunvduke No! It has to do the fact that Amber Heard is a Narcissist!
I am sure that there were multiple times she ignored her lawyers - those times she wasn't outright bullying them.
She cannot admit outright failures on her part. It is always someone else's fault.
No she knows she was just trying to twist words that's why she said "I use them synonymously" and not "they are synonyms" by saying that it says yes she knows they technically don't mean the same but to her they do. All in all it just made her look like a weasel or an idiot neither of which are good
Her lawyer Elaine tried selling the same b.s.. Elaine literally said in court the the ACLU and the children's hospital both consider "pledge" and "donation" to mean the same thing. They simply had no better excuse. This wasn't ignorance, they're just lying.
For me, she is actually trying to Gaslight us ALL 😔 Trying to make us ALL her victims. But I for one will not be 👍
When i was growing up, if i got into trouble, my mom would not argue, just let me talk. Eventually the truth will come out, in your defense of yourself. This is what we are seeing here, her defense is bringing out the truth
Love your channel. Thank you for the truth in this case.
She's lied in this statement on two points: 1 - she said she has donated the entirety of the settlement - when in fact she has not donated the money she has pledged it. 2 She did not 'donate' (pledge) to be believed (that she is a victim of DV?). She did not donate the money, and she made that declaration not in relation to the court case - she made that declaration for publicity.
As much as I can’t stand celebrity drama, people need to keep calling AH out. I have a feeling she’s going to keep trying to push her BS for a LONG time, unless JD’s team does something. Her lies will only cause more damage to real victims and that cannot go unchallenged.
I’m hoping she sets herself up for another court case. It’s like when she accidentally said TMZ in the uk trial, or Kate moss in the US. She is just a bit thick 😂.
She is quite thick but thinks she is clever. So darkly funny.
@@manbearpig7521 yep, makes great viewing. Her dog stepped on a bee 😩
The reason she did not file and or Cooperate with the police cause she knew it was a hoax and if she had filed a police complaint and later it found to be false she could be criminally charge for filing a false report this women is not dumb she is some what very Calculated
Agreed! Very, very calculated. Just too big of a liar and showboater to pull it off.
She needs attention at any cost. Proven liar and disgraced individual. Her only claim to fame happened only after her association to Mr.Depp. She need to be cancelled.
At that point, I don't think she was willing to file a false police report, it's also imo why she never pressed charges because if she did it would have been a spot light that would expose her lies.
I can’t imagine that many legal experts on RUclips will analyse the language used as much as you do. (I often wonder if you’ve got a secret PhD in logic!) Great content, sir.
I’m confused.. if the terms of the divorce settlement were that neither party was to speak about what was decided in the settlement, who asked her to pledge or donate the money? It seems to me, based on the talk show interview that she did, she chose to speak about donating the full settlement amount in an attempt to seem selfless..
I actually interpreted her donation comments differently (although the Virginia trial probably makes more sense):
"I shouldn't have had to give away my divorce settlement in the first place to be believed that I'm not a gold digger."
Fair point, actually.
But nobody forced her to say she was going to do it.
Nobody forced her to renege on the promise.
And nobody forced her to lie over and over again about having already done it.
She just never seems to get that the lying is part of the problem, not the solution.
Her best verbal slip was refering in court to her 'bruise kit'
Thank you. Great observation and explanation. Yep she tried to say she never should have had to prove she donated the money. Forgetting she had previously and clearly said she had donated the money in its entirety. Answering questions by not answering them.
Removing any doubt, as if people needed more proof of how committed she is in her lies. What I love most is when she tells a lie that contradicts a lie she told earlier. (Using her words in a similar way), “I am a little confused how their can be both.” Which lie do we believe? The first one or the second one? Hilarity at its best!
She just keeps digging that hole.
I’ve never before had front row seats to a tragedy perpetrated by one cunning, cold, calculating person, determined to destroy another. To me, this is a foreign film.
"I shouldn't have had to have donated the money *in an effort* to be believed... I shouldn't have had to have earmarked the entirety of that," sounds an awful lot like, "Forget that I lied about giving money to sick children and true victims of DV. It has no standing on my credibility and whether or not I lied about everything else."
Unfortunately, Amber, a history of lying repeatedly is going to go against your credibility, whether you think that's justified or not. It's a moot point. In isolation, no, it probably wouldn't have had that much of an impact on her credibility, but coupled with a criminal record of pleading guilty to falsifying a legal document, being arrested for DV on her ex-wife, submitting doctored evidence into court, and very clearly being the main source for TMZ and then working hard to cover it up under oath, it really is an accumulation of evidence to say that we unfortunately can't believe anything she says. If she had an ounce of real proof of the abuse, it would have spoken for itself.
I bet if the jurors are actually watching the interview clips, they probably are thinking they made the right decision.
That's being too nice... She said "I shouldn't have had to donate the money to be believed"... Meaning... She did it only to try & make people believe she was a good person. She didn't give a shit about the charity! It was all about her trying to look like she's a wonderful person. She's Slime!
Did anyone see video of her giving a speech about how great social media is for calling out people doing bad and we are lucky to have this tool for being able to speak out?
Great analysis of her interview
Sharp observation about the hoax vs truth thing!
I think she meant it more as a "I should never have been 'forced' to pledge the money to begin with". Implying that she felt pressured to pledge the money to charity when really she wanted to kept it. And actually did kept it as we now know...
Something NOBODY ever mentions is that among the drugs and chaos and calls to the police, there HAS to be some events where she is on hallucinogens, whilst even her mates dont know it. Nobody wants to talk to the police in that state unless they're the fluffy festival coppers. I think this is one of those occasions.
There was an audio where she claimed it was a negotiation!! That's when she didn't want to get kicked out of the penthouse!!! She then sent a letter to JD and asked for 3 penthouses , car and 50k a month!!! She said if not, she'll do this thing to JD!!!!!! Seriously this woman is evil
Or maybe she only just learnt the actually meaning of donated after the trial, that's why she was using it correctly in the interview, but I too think she knew the meaning of donated already.
Are you serious right now?
You're very kind hearted. I'm a cynic, I think she thought she could make a show of making the pledge, but never make the donation. People would forget about it and the charities wouldn't make a fuss, it's bad PR.
Lol she definitely knew what donating and pledge meant, otherwise there would be no reason why she flipped out when she found out Johnny started donating the 7mil on her behalf and ordered him to hand over the rest
Excellent summation sir. Its great to hear a British barrister's take on this rather than what the MSM wants to feed us. Greatful for the effort you take to put things in layman's terms for us.
She didn't "donate" out of the kindness of her heart. It was a publicity stunt; a virtue signal.
Every time a narcissist says one thing you can count on it meaning another. Amber is like Megan Malarkey they have no shame and lie as easily as they breathe
Soo true .. One would think they where in family.. The scary thing is they keep going on through they have been figure out .. THEY GOT NO SENSE OF HOW DUMB THEY LOOK TO US RANDOS DOWN HERE IN EARTH .. ITS MINDBLOWING TO NORMAL PEOPLE AND THEY JUST DONT CATCH THAT PART AND JUST KEEP DIGGING THEMSELVES EVEN FURTHER DEEPER DOWN AND LOOK EVEN MORE MENTAL ..
Lol!❤😂separated at birth!Jodi Arias was the third EVIL triple
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less. ' 'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things. ' - Lewis Carrol . And of courses, this lead to... Humpty Dumpty had a great fall, All the king's horses and all the king's men, Couldn't put Humpty together again
According to leaked insider documents, in an effort to solve certain financial challenges, AH is claiming copyright on "my dog stepped on a bee" and is filing paperwork to sue the internet for Royalties. Kaching!! The memes must flow ...
She may be able to copyright the phrase, but you can't use a copyright retrospectively. It's played itself out anyway.
AH thinks that the world has forgotten that on a televised talk show, she bragged that she had given the *entire* settlement away *because* she didn't want anything. The interviewer praised AH for setting the gold digger rumors to rest. AH took a victory lap bathing in the approval. The fact that AH refused to have JD make the payments directly to the charities of her choice was key to what ultimately happened.
AH constantly insults everyone's memories & intelligence. Imagine how one would feel if one had been a jury member...
Just because I lied in court should not be a reason to not believe my story. It is all so unfair.
🤣🤣
Absolutely spot on!!! Fantastic video, Thank you
She didn’t follow up with the police because then there would be further evidence of no abuse
Here’s another take: She thinks she had to publicly pledge/donate the $7M divorce settlement so her allegations of abuse would be believed. The “donation” did help bolster her accusations for several years. But now she’s been caught lying so she’s saying she shouldn’t have had to donate the money to be believed. True, but only if she was telling the truth about the abuse.
ETA: She’s distracting from the question which was about “pledge” versus “donate” but she often does this.
Thanks to another youtube commenter on a different video, I am satisfied as to the true explanation for the whole pledged vs donated question. Wealthy people often pay out donations over many years as a way to obtain tax benefits, so she was correct in saying in that context that pledging and donating are the same thing. She could not however explain it in court and in interviews because revealing the tax angle would have undermined her goal of seeming noble and disinterested in Johnny's money.
Excellent point regarding her use of the word “donated” vs “pledged”‼️Her saying “if it was a hoax” shows how she’s having a difficult time supporting her own lies‼️
Well, everyone now understands what JD had to go through with her twisted logic everyday
Just like the jury, I never believed she didn't know the difference between a pledge & a donation. Look at her blink rate when she discussed the call to the police. Of course it was a hoax.
it's a bad thing that AH's name is "Heard" and that we need to have victims heard... I wouldn't want to be associated with AH.. not sure how I can make it better though
"listened to" ? maybe that doesn't convey that the words went deeper than the ears ?
I'm really wondering what this pledged vs donated admission/slip means for the UK trial because it basically shoots down one of the main arguments on which the UK judge relied to deem her credible enough?
she still hasn't donated any money has she?... i thought the only money donated came from elon and johnny?
I’m confused about that as well. She could surely have cleared things up with financial records, but where were they?
She does know the difference but saying she'd donate the divorce money to charities in a TV show seemed a good pr move to her, knowing she wouldn't donate it in the end anyway thinking to get away with it.
I think it’s worse than that. Her so called donation is one of the reasons the judge in the UK said she wasn’t a gold digger. This appears to helped solidify in his mind that she was being honest because she wasn’t keeping the money for herself. So she shouldn’t have had to donate it to be believed in either case in her mind. What does that mean for the UK case being overturned?
"OK, Amber - TAKE FIVE😁"
Wow was almost first
Amber is actually admitting to something more here, though. She's admitting to having pledged all of the divorce settlement ($7M) to charity in order for people to stop calling her a "gold digger." She almost defiantly states in the Danish TV interview, "I wanted nothing," and had to back that up by saying she had actually "donated" all of the money.
Meanwhile, back in the States, she'd only donated $350,000 of the $7M to the charities. Now she's totally trying to backpeddle that pledge, saying she shouldn't have had to do so in order to not be considered a gold digger.
yeah, and she wanted more than $7M after that divorce so I do think she WAS trying to get all she could and keep living her freeloader life. The thing that irks me is, why she even went out of her way to say she didn't want anything? Like, yeah she's a gold digger, but why lie about it....what does she gain out of it? (She clearly is about her image more than anything and she ruined that so i think she's butthurt?) Also, she thinks she doesn't have to donate it to be believable, but what she fails to realize is that her lying about it makes her very uncredible, so what else was she lying about (besides the obvious).
I like these shorter style videos, breaking these topics down, thank you. I don't have time to watch the replays of the 3-5 hours livestreams on other channels covering the same topics.
“Sometimes the complaints will be false”
😂🤣😂🤣
The cops were called for 2 reasons.. (in my estimation) first was to show Johnny she wasn't bluffing with her threat of claiming abuse if he didn't fold to her demands of a range rover, 3 rent free condos and $50,000/month for life. Second was the fact that all she needed was to be able to say to the court regarding her TRO thar police were at her house for an abuse call.. a report wasn't needed or wanted (no injury, no damage) due to what it would say.. she just wanted them to come and due to an abuse call.
"I shouldn't have had to donate it to be believed"-no one SAID that she had to. THAT wasn't a stipulation to being believed. Amber Heard CHOSE to "donate" her settlement--and she made her DONATION "in the media" for the maximum benefit to her reputation. AH claimed the CHLA was HER favorite charity--she had donated her time and money--all LIES--CHLA sent her a letter offering to give her a tour so that she could see what they do--hardly an invitation for someone who purports it her favorite charity. CHLA IS one of Mr. Depp's favorite charities-he has made so many donations that they have seen fit to honor him with awards (2006, CHLA Courage to Care Award-long before Ms. Heard came into his life). Ms. Heard's "donation" did serve a purpose-it fully illustrated that there are no boundaries to her lying. If you can lie about donating millions to sick and dying children-you are capable of lying about anything.
As to not wanting to co-operate with Police, for the DV to be "out" and get Mr. Depp into trouble (bear in mind the co-conspirators made TWO ILLEGAL 911 CALLS)--Amber Heard had absolutely no control over that. If the Police had determined Ms. Heard was a Victim of Domestic Abuse-they would have arrested "Mr. Heard" (that's the name they wrote down). California, like almost ALL States, is "Mandatory Reporting"--ask Josh Brolin--he was arrested for DV despite his wife being desperate for him not to be. Police have control in DV situations because it protects the Victims. IF Amber Heard HAD followed up with the Police, and given a statement, she would NOW be facing charges for giving a false statement to Police.
So, keep accusing Mr. Depp of crimes for which he has been exonerated--we'll have another Defamation Suit, the Judge can issue an Injunction barring Amber Heard from EVER speaking about the case, Ms. Heard can find herself sanctioned--facing financial penalties--in Contempt of Court--all before Australia brings it's Perjury/Subornation of Perjury Charges (and possibly "Glassing" Charges). By then the US and UK may have their OWN Perjury/Subornation of Perjury Charges. I'm hoping California pursues Conspiracy to Commit Extortion--and goes after ALL the co-conspirators...there's no need to have successfully blackmailed someone--the crime is in the Conspiracy.
Thank you. I noticed those sentences she spoke too. " I shouldn’t have had to donate the money to be believed". To me, those words could mean two things. first: " If I had known I was not going to be believed I donated the money, I never would have donated the amount". or " Whether I donated or not has nothing to do with being believed". On the other side, I believe Johnny has tried a million times to understand what she is saying. And it bugged him. It is very exhausting to do this year after year.
She didnt have to say she was going to donate the entire divorce settlement. That was on her. She could have said... nothing at all.
But once she said she donated it, yes she had to have donated it to be believed.
The fact that she doesn't understand you do not get the credit for making the donation without making that donation. Just like everything else, she wants the upside of her statements without the downside pointed out. This only applies to my side even though the evidence shows that my statement applies to both or more towards Johnny in some cases. You can only apply this in my case against him.
I kind of wish Camille had said something along the lines of “a pledge is a promise, a donation is an action”, when Amber said she used the two words synonymously. And ruined her argument over how you don’t pay for a house all at one time. If people have the funds available, they DO pay for a house in full as to not have a larger amount go to a lender/bank for a mortgage. If you have $7m that you allegedly “don’t want”, you donate it in full.
She never once used the word PLEDGE before the trial, she has been saying she DONATED since like 2006 where she went to interviews, and very clearly the interviewers asked "You gave all that money to charity?" and she very plainly said "Yes I'm great like that". It baffles me that criminal charges haven't been pressed against her, perjury charges at the very least for her and all her "witnesses", or just perjury and coercion against Amber for forcing these people to make false statements. The law is not a tool that should be abused by anyone and she doesn't seem to realise the severity of what she has done.
And the childrens hospital LA has sent her a letter and asked wether she would donate the money and never got an answer.
She's rewriting the dictionary 🤣
Amazing 👏
Very good points you make here. Having lived with a manipulative narcissist, I was constantly unravelling their lies. You have a lifetime of work here unravelling Amber's lies, as she has told so many. "I wanted nothing!" (Yeah, right)
Nothing wrong with continuing to cover this case. In fact, I think that they’re interesting and informative. Very well done and enjoyable to watch. Keep going! There’s going to be more stuff to analyze and breakdown in the coming days to weeks.
At one point during the interview she says she never "had to" instigate violence against Johnny (...no one ever "HAS TO") ...but she DIDN'T say she never did!
The way she tried to avoid a clear answer to Camille’s question related to the $7M tell us she was lying…and I’m pretty sure JD won’t see $1 of the money she has to pay…when she used to pay $25/hour her former assistant who worked day or night and weekends while being married to a rich guy, tell me a lot about her relationship with money-)
She PROMISED it. They didn't GET it.
AH is just a mess.
She never intended to donate the money.
Thanks yet again for the great information. 🙏👍
She admitted that Tmz was alerted, she admitted the op ed was about Johnny, and that she did not wanted to be seen as a victim, etc....she's a liar and forgets what she has lied about
There once was a liar named Heard
Who's word wasn't worth a turd
Such obvious lies
With those dead eyes
The world thinks you're absurd
How can you tell when AH is lying? Watch for her lips moving.