#metoo

[Snarky Oracle!]

I never knew any of that - like I said, I didn't follow the trial. I was ambivalent about the whole thing but after reading that, I think Heard got off very easy. Depp lost almost everything if I remember correctly.

Not only have those audiotapes not be replayed (that I'm aware of) but Samantha Guthrie did a pretty good interview with Amber shortly after the verdict, and Amber looked pretty darned bad in it. But the interview was quickly edited down to a version that ultimately came off as more neutral. Of course.

 

[Angela Channing]

The views of one person on a single issue doesn't discredit the whole #metoo movement.

However, when Johnny Depp sued a British newspaper for calling him a "wife-beater", the court found that what the paper said was "substantially true". So let's not make out that Johnny Depp is some kind of saint or victim or that Amber Heard was not subjected to violence by Mr Depp. It was the verdict of the court that she was indeed beaten by Johnny Depp.

Johnny Depp loses libel case over Sun 'wife beater' claim

The judge says the Sun's article claiming the actor assaulted Amber Heard was "substantially true".

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

The views of one person on a single issue doesn't discredit the whole #metoo movement.

However, when Johnny Depp sued a British newspaper for calling him a "wife-beater", the court found that what the paper said was "substantially true". So let's not make out that Johnny Depp is some kind of saint or victim or that Amber Heard was not subjected to violence by Mr Depp. It was the verdict of the court that she was indeed beaten by Johnny Depp.

Johnny Depp loses libel case over Sun 'wife beater' claim

The judge says the Sun's article claiming the actor assaulted Amber Heard was "substantially true".

www.bbc.co.uk

This was a miscarriage of justice. Depp sued over the story, and it turned out the judge was related to the guy who wrote it.

 

[Angela Channing]

This was a miscarriage of justice. Depp sued over the story, and it turned out the judge was related to the guy who wrote it.

That simply is not true, and if it was, Johnny Depp's legal team would have gotten the verdict overturned.

 

[Frank Underwood]

It was never just "the views of one person on a single issue" that undermined the #MeToo movement. Sadly, most movements are usually discredited by bad faith actors.

This was a miscarriage of justice. Depp sued over the story, and it turned out the judge was related to the guy who wrote it.

Actually, the judge's son worked for an organization that employed the author of the article. Still, it is an odd coincidence, to say the least.

The allegations were said to have "met the civil standard of proof on the balance of probabilities," but I think it should have to go from "probabilities" to "definitive proof."

 

[Angela Channing]

Actually, the judge's son worked for an organization that employed the author of the article. Still, it is an odd coincidence, to say the least.

The allegations were said to have "met the civil standard of proof on the balance of probabilities," but I think it should have to go from "probabilities" to "definitive proof."

That just not is the case. The judge's son was occasional contributor to TalkRadio he was not employed by them. The Sun is a separate company to TalkRadio. There was no conflict of interest and if there was, Depp's legal team would have secured a mistrial.

It was a civil case, not a criminal case so the level of proof required in the UK is balance of probabilities and on that basis The Sun were able to prove that it was "substantially true" that Mr Depp was a wife beater.

I know you don't like facts but that is the reality of what happened.

That said, The Heard-Depp dispute has nothing to do with #metoo

 

[Frank Underwood]

That just not is the case. The judge's son was occasional contributor to TalkRadio he was not employed by them. The Sun is a separate company to TalkRadio. There was no conflict of interest and if there was, Depp's legal team would have secured a mistrial.

It was a civil case, not a criminal case so the level of proof required in the UK is balance of probabilities and on that basis The Sun were able to prove that it was "substantially true" that Mr Depp was a wife beater.

I know you don't like facts but that is the reality of what happened.

I don't like facts??? That's rich coming from you. Facts are whatever suit your narrative, and everything else gets dismissed as "conspiracy theories."

I always do my best to substantiate what I post. The info I saw said the judge's son worked for TalkRadio, but either way, there was still a connection if he was a contributor.

At the very least, there was an indirect connection between the judge and the author of the article. That can be passed off as a coincidence, so Depp's legal team wouldn't have been able to prove a conflict of interest had occurred. I'm not very familiar with UK law, but even so, I cited the "balance of probabilities" reasoning that The Sun used to claim the allegations were "substantially true." I stuck to the facts, while also stating my opinion when I said "I think it should have to go from "probabilities" to "definitive proof."

That said, The Heard-Depp dispute has nothing to do with #metoo

The problems with #MeToo go far beyond the Heard-Depp dispute. It was hijacked by a bunch of misandrists on a witch hunt, not caring who got hurt in the process.

I know you don't like facts, but that's the reality of what happened.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

A mistrial has been declared in the Lindsay Clancy case. Reportedly, only 1 juror voted to convict, and was smeared as unwilling to follow the instructions of the court because he refused to cut the defendant any slack.

If all this is true, it's amazing. Why did 11 jurors vote otherwise??

More to come, I'm sure.

 

[CeeCee72]

A mistrial has been declared in the Lindsay Clancy case. Reportedly, only 1 juror voted to convict, and was smeared as unwilling to follow the instructions of the court because he refused to cut the defendant any slack.

If all this is true, it's amazing. Why did 11 jurors vote otherwise??

More to come, I'm sure.

And now the defense if appealing to a higher court because they judge wouldn't remove the hold out juror.

I'm absolutely stunned.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

I just saw a fairly objective 20/20 piece on the Clancy case. The defense attorney now says that he "won" the case (even though he didn't want a mistrial).

She'll probably be in a mental institution permanently though, which is good... There was a case in the 1950s where a housewife drowned her three children, was found not-guilty from insanity, she went home, had three more children, and then drowned them again in the very same bathtub.

 

[Frank Underwood]

A mother in Illinois hung her 2-year-old son because she said he was the "anti-Christ." She was also obsessed with the Lindsay Clancy case and messaged her friends about it.

Of course, society will continue to infantilize women and pretend they can do no wrong.

MSN - Mom accused of hanging 'anti-Christ' son, 2, after messaging friends about Lindsay Clancy

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Hell. It's what's for children.

 

[Crimson]

It wasn't that long ago that a mother murdering her children would elicit universal outrage; now, a shocking number of people excuse it. Demons walk among us.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

It wasn't that long ago that a mother murdering her children would elicit universal outrage; now, a shocking number of people excuse it. Demons walk among us.

They're witches. They're witches!!

It seems ironic the Gloria Steinem died within hours of the Clancy verdict.

 

[Crimson]

It seems ironic the Gloria Steinem died within hours of the Clancy verdict.

I've always regarded myself as a leftist and certainly pro-choice. One of the seemingly disingenuous arguments that sometimes came from the right was the slippery slope: if a woman can [murder] her unborn [child], why not a newborn or a toddler? Seemingly absurd, yet here we are. I guess that slope was slippery after all.

 

[Willie Oleson]

One of the seemingly disingenuous arguments that sometimes came from the right was the slippery slope: if a woman can [murder] her unborn [child], why not a newborn or a toddler?

Wow, what an incredibly illogical argument. But even if we'd make it logical than the abortion would prevent the post-birth murder from happening.

The day men can become pregnant is the day I will support the anti-abortion law. See how that pans out.

 

[Frank Underwood]

It's not the fault of men that they can't get pregnant. I understand why they might feel a certain way about abortion since they have a hand in the creation of children. Christian women are also anti-abortion, but since we know women don't have any agency, the patriarchy must be to blame. Men are also unable to "abort" their financial responsibility as easily as a woman can abort a fetus (or their already born children, apparently). Men have even been forced to support children that were proven to not to be their own.

For the record, I've considered myself pro-choice most of my life because I believed most women would be responsible. I've always felt it should mainly be used in cases of rape or when it's medically necessary to save the life of the mother. Other than that, I've felt it should only be an option when the usual birth control measures fail. However, I'm starting to see an increasing number of women talk about having multiple abortions like it's a badge of honor. It's like it went from pro-choice to pro-abortion. Cynthia Nixon even wore a hat that said "make abortions great again," which I found grotesque. I still believe in being pro-choice for the reasons I mentioned, but it's certainly not as black and white to me as it once was. The dismissive line that men "want to control women's bodies" irks me too. Maybe, just maybe, they simply don't want their potential child aborted.

Regardless of how one feels about the issue, it's certainly more complex than a lot of people make it out to be.

 

[CeeCee72]

Personally, I am pro choice. I also believe men should have 24 weeks to decide not to claim or support the child.

But that's just me.

 

[Willie Oleson]

It's not the fault of men that they can't get pregnant.

I mean...yeah, let the violins play.

To quote Channing Carter from The Colbys "I am BARREN!"

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

I mean...yeah, let the violins play.

But, what does that mean exactly?