Vanessa and Johnny were together 14 years, had two children, and Johnny CHOSE to give her 150M upon their separation as they weren’t married. There was no legal battle. He wanted to be fair to her.
Meanwhile, his Battle Axe of an ex shouldn’t have been entitled to a dime. Why?
The whole time they were together she was supporting her family and friends at his expense. She moved these friends (and at one point her sister) into his penthouse without caring that they constantly invaded his space and disrespected him. It was to the point where he didn’t even feel comfortable living there.
Let that sink in. Imagine your spouse bringing in their friends to live with you, and mistreat you to the point where you no longer feel comfortable or at peace in your own home. No one should have to hire security detail to be there in case your partner or their friends decide to get physical.
Then she attempted to extort money out of him. She drug his name through the mud with horrendous lies because he failed to comply with expectations beyond what any judge would have agreed to. She cost him far more than their marriage was worth in legal fees, AND all of his earnings prior to their marriage was essentially gone. She KNEW he didn’t have the 100M to give her without selling off assets and real estate. She knew he couldn’t give her what she wanted even if he wanted to. She gave him one full day to be in compliance with her list of demands. She racked up a bill with the winery that was over $100k. She spent his money frivolously the month before their separation even though she knew he had to meet with financial advisors. She treated him like her cash cow, then had the audacity to claim that she was financially independent during their relationship. 🙄
No one should EVER compare Vanessa to that venomous snake.
@MrBarryLewis I'm someone who absolutely hates change, and especially quick change. It's a huge anxiety trigger for me. But I got used to your new style very quickly and started to like the banter you had. It's sad that people can be so mean. Most of them would never say that stuff in person.
You can't post lies and false accusations. It's not that hard to understand. Truth isn't defamation. You can speak the truth how much you want. But lies and false accusations you can't. Don't lie and you'll be fine. Or do you think false accusations are fine?
Claims that women can post whatever they want online about their perpetrator is a misconception. Women often face legal restrictions, silencing their voices + prioritising the rights of rich/powerful men. Legal reforms that empower survivors and ensure justice for all are needed.
@Drtimesup1@David_Challen It was about defamation, lies and false accusations. You can't lie about someone publicly and destroy their reputation. However you can speak the truth. Truth isn't defamation. It's not that hard. Don't lie and you'll be fine.
@CharlesLKuyper She lied though, he never abused her. VA is where the WAPO servers are located, that's where it was published and where the defamation took place. A judge has ruled on this at least once before.
It wasn't that she didn't have enough evidence, she had none, and there was contradictory evidence. And she admitted that the op-ed was about him. She lied and defamed him. Amber Heard has made it more difficult for victims to be believed, not Johnny Depp, blame her, not him.
This is the warning sign I sounded. Whether you think Depp had a case or not, I was worried about this trial because it sets a precedent that if a case does not have enough evidence (which too many domestic violence and sexual assault cases do), that you can be countersued.
@CharlesLKuyper@reading_while It depends on what's in the agreement, and nobody knows that. But we do know that the verdict stands. It's been said hundreds of times by now.
@reading_while Well from what I've heard, this case has made more men come forward already. And how do you propose someone defend themselves from lies and defamation? Why shouldn't anyone have the right to do that? Especially if they're innocent. Oh, and she was the one who countersued..
@reading_while Why would one victim proving his innocence in a court of law have a negative impact on other victims doing the same? Would you have had the same worried if the victim had been the woman?
🔴 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
‘Martin Branning’ – His First Victim
In part three of our special investigation, @TomLatchem and @danevanswrites detail the trauma of a man controlled for 10 years by Martin Branning – the pseudonym of TV presenter Dan Wootton
https://t.co/89O8Wpojsb
@LindaJoy1215@terri0928 She even dressed Bianca just like JD, I saw a picture of them once and for a second though it was JD before realising it was Bianca, I'm sure AH made her dress like that, one way or the other..
@LakotaDi You are inspiring. And such a lovely person too! 😊 Well done! And well done for daring to post pictures aswell, I don't ever do that, I have really low self-confidence so I understand the struggle. 💕
@purpleIake @jemma16176693 @BJGummyLips She inserted herself into a situation that wasn't about her, wasn't directed at her and started filming him. And what does he do when he notice? Walks away. He doesn't threaten her at all, he just walks away. This isn't a gotcha moment, it's the opposite. It exposed her, not him.
@AutistLady For someone who wouldn't hesitate to throw her under the bus if it benefits her. One day, she will finally realise what AH is, but it will probably be too late then..
@AutistLady Because she wants something to trash him with?
It's not, she's just pathetic. No it doesn't. They're just obsessed with him and trying to find fault in everything he does.