Life is about connecting with others and who we let in to help create our happy healthy lives.
When we meet new people, we form first impressions. Their physical appearance might not sit within societal views on beauty, but they may come across as warm, kind and open minded. It is their inner beauty we are assessing.
We then have a series of interactions with them that might change our views. If they are not respectful to us in the way they behave, no matter what the reason, we no longer see them as beautiful.
Whilst we might forgive and forget with friends who we have a long history, a new acquaintance does not afford such flexibility.
Ultimately we have only a certain amount of time, energy and head space. We can start to see signs of toxicity the more we get to know some people. It becomes apparent this is a pattern for them. They aren't aware of it within themselves. In fact, their opinion of themselves is they are completely without blame.
This might be why the Johnny Depp v Amber Heard defamation case is intoxicating. We see it from the outside. Are we trying to learn from it?
It's the cautionary tale to all of us how our fragile lives can become derailed by someone. How drugs, alcohol, money, love and success can all go terribly wrong.
Over time, some people become less prominent in our lives. They say to surround ourselves with the people who lift us up. The reality is that no one is perfect. Every relationship we have is full of ups and downs. It's when the downs become so intense and prolonged, we have to turn away, try to rebalance and find what works best for us.
Relationships - love, friendship, work and family are all messy, but we need them if we want to be happy and healthy.
This morning, I read a summary of the Depp v Heard defamation trial: the entertainment story that has come up in casual conversation and zoom calls for weeks because everyone is aware, if not reading, following or opining on the subject of domestic abuse, dirty laundry, liars, #metoo and every other angle they can consider.
I confess I was a huge Johnny Depp fan as a teen and young adult. He seemed like a true artist in indy roles, but not interested in fanning the flames of stardom, rather shy and just kind of cool but not arrogant. Johnny Depp bought fans pints in the pub, played the guitar with kids who were waiting for their parents on set and he dressed up as a pirate in children's hospitals. Depp rushed his sick child to Great Ormond St. He cared about people.
Furthermore, I must confess I have never been a fan of Heard. I didn't see her appeal or think she was interesting in any way. I saw the Depp-Heard marriage as an older man going through a mid-life crisis. He shouldn't have left Vanessa Paridis and his kids. Just another cliche, I thought. A family man, devoted to his girlfriend and their kids is sexy. Insecure Johnny Depp, chasing youth, getting high and no longer doing any indy films is lame. That was one of the many reasons that ended the appeal of Johnny Depp for me.
Image: Royal Courts of Justice by Mahosadha Ong
Johnny Depp's 2020 UK Libel Court Case (The Sun Newspaper)
Nevertheless, I consumed the 2020 libel court case in London like I was gorging at a buffet. I even bothered with some of the court transcripts to explore some of the finer details of the case. It was a great escape from the horrors of the pandemic and lockdowns.
The Sun newspaper called Depp a "wife beater." The UK judge concluded Heard was to be believed more than Depp as a witness, and ruled against Depp. He concluded the article was "substantially true" and 12 of the 14 alleged incidents of domestic violence occurred.
Libel
What struck me about this case was that a newspaper could make a claim and splash a headline accusing a man of being an abuser, but at trial, the judge considers facts the newspaper did not know at the time.
So I can make a statement today which I know may be false, but so long as in the future, I can prove it is largely true, I am innocent. It means I can take a gamble with someone's reputation. That is troubling for all of us. It provides much greater power to newspapers and sensationalist headlines.
Perhaps that has always been the case with libel. Thirty years ago this might have been fine. The internet was not yet in full swing. We relied on newspapers and magazines only. Judgments weren't made based on limited information and the public didn't have a 2 second attention span.
The law has gone in the wrong direction
I do not believe a newspaper should be allowed headlines or articles based on speculation. We need a higher standard from our media, especially when it comes to someone's reputation. In today's culture of social media, we have too much mud slinging and nastiness. The media cannot contribute to this without sufficient evidence. Otherwise, how can we trust them as a source of information?
Image: Graffiti by Ran Berkovich
What do we believe?
What also struck me in this case was that one witness who had been a friend or makeup artist of Heard, said she had been a victim of domestic violence. She had confided in Heard. Heard's account then used the same story and words of her friend when she told her story. It cast doubt in my mind about Heard's credibility. I realised I did not want to believe Depp was an abuser. However, I also did not want to think Heard could lie about being a victim.
The judge chose to believe Heard more than Depp. I was not in the court room. He was. BUT, he also has his biases too.
Interestingly, it seems this same testimony was not put forward in the US case - either because it was not strong enough evidence, it was considered less credible or it was not admissible.
The London case was Depp v a newspaper. The American case is Depp v Heard. It is a she said - he said case. The only biases and opinion that matters in this case will be the jury's.
Except for the court of public opinion, but I'll write about that later.
The US Defamation Case (Washington Post Open Editorial by Amber Heard)
I've watched snippets of live testimony, read several articles and given more thought to the US case than I actually have time for.
In many ways, I'm writing this blog post to figure out what my verdict is. I don't know what to believe or who to believe. This big beautiful world we live in is full of contradictions, misinformation and confusion. The Depp v Heard trial reflects that.
Abuse
Both Depp and Heard are lying or reflecting on a version of their truth that may not be entirely accurate. The couples' therapist said they both abused each other, though Heard initiated it more. What does abuse mean? Was it physical, verbal or both? If Depp was just physically defending himself because Heard initiated, does that still make him an abuser?
Other than the couple's therapist, Depp's team did not have any other domestic abuse experts. Does that mean Depp wasn't really a victim of domestic abuse? I don't know. It could be for any number of reasons.
Kate Moss' testimony was only 3 minutes. There are legal reasons why some questions could not be asked or why she could not say some things.
Image: by Colin Davis
Fault
In any relationship, both parties are at fault. No one is completely innocent. In a domestic violence case, both can be victims and abusers. Historically the narrative has always been one victim and one abuser.
Where there are drugs, alcohol and mental health issues involved, as is the case with both parties here, recollections may vary.
Heard has video recordings. Depp also sent text messages to friends making some heinous suggestions about Heard. They are abhorrent and shatter the nice guy image he has crafted.
Audio recordings of Depp include him saying to Heard:
"Shut the f*** up ... don't f***** pretend to be authoritative with me. You don't exist."
In a text message, Depp writes "let's drown her before we burn her."
Depp has apologised, dismissing words and actions as humour. It is evidence like this which adversely affects Depp's credibility.
On a Graham Norton show, Depp appeared to be under the influence of something. His behaviour was odd and Dame Judi Dench looked uncomfortable. It bothered me long afterwards and I even googled it to discover according to ladbible, others had also wondered was he drunk or high?
Mid-life crisis?
Whether this was the drugs, Amber Heard, his mid-life crisis, or a combination of all of these and more, who knows, but he seems to be a man who is deeply unhappy.
Depp was a man who preferred his privacy. But now, he has opened himself up to the media circus. Stories about severed fingers and writing with blood on the wall - it sounds like a bad horror story.
Depp says the trial is to defend his name. I suspect it is because he has become accustomed to a lifestyle and seeks the big pay packets from Hollywood. He fell in love with the glory of Pirates of the Carribean.
The reports of wild spending, substance abuse, bad behaviour on set, costing studios money because shooting was delayed, requiring ear pieces because he doesn't learn lines and crazy costly demands for perks do not paint a flattering picture of a humble down-to-earth nice guy.
I felt he became a sell out. Instead of pursuing the art and being an actor, he was a performer churning out movies. He no longer had any interest in indy films. It was just about the money. Sure, enjoy buying islands and flying in private jets, but was everything you used to do - the decent artistic guy, was that all just a lie?
As he grew older, he enjoyed the attention of a young woman, ie Amber Heard. He turned away from Vanessa Paridis and the simple life they built.
Perhaps he blamed Heard for this. Or maybe he has always had an unhealthy relationship with drugs and alcohol. The stable marriage and children with Paridis did not bring out the extremism that Heard did.
Depp is imperfect. Did he throw things and show his temper? Probably. Did he cause bruises to Heard? Possibly.
There's an audio recording where Heard admits to hitting Depp. In another, she mocks any claim Depp might make that he is a victim of domestoc violence.
Did Heard incite Depps behaviour? Probably sometimes. Has she exaggerated anything? Probably. Is she a victim? I don't know.
Depp calls Heard a:
"Gold digging, low level, dime a dozen, mushy, pointless dangling overused flashy fish market. "
Heard after alleged incidents professes love and her text messages suggest she was not abused. This is not necessarily indicative that abuse did not happen. Maybe she is a gold digger. Maybe she has spun some lies and faked photographs. That does not mean Depp is not an abuser. This is a strategy using tropes about a character type we do not like. It influences us to emphathise less with a woman. But also, applying this strategy does not mean Depp is an abuser. His legal defence team is using any and all tools to help their client.
Is Depp an abuser? A jury might conclude he is.
Either way, both Depp and Heard seem like they need alot of help. They are damaged individuals. Any breakup can get ugly. Horrible words and actions are said in the heat of the moment behind closed doors. Violence by men and women can easily happen.
Image: by Brad Lloyd
Happiness and Moving On
Depp's Instagram is about his music and truth. He feels his truth must come out. Music provides him with solace and helps ease his pain. The court case has made him clean up and he doesn't appear to be under the influence of his addictions.
Heard has had a baby and is beginning a new life. Depp needs to move on too. Perhaps this trial will help him to do that.
If I was on the jury, I would not want either of them to win. Both are guilty and both should not receive money from the other. When it comes to the law though, I suspect that Depp may by definition be an abuser so the defamation case may not succeed.
However, like the UK case, this is based on facts now in evidence. The truth is a defence.
Also, Heard's 2018 Washington Post article, which is the subject of this case, is carefully worded. She said I am
"a public figure representing domestic abuse"
Juries aren't predictable. They are driven by emotion, beliefs and bias. Whatever decision by law they should make might not matter if you have one juror who dissents.
Image: by Venti Views
Why does this case matter?
It's not just a divorce case. It's not just entertainment. This isn't a reality tv show.
Celebrities and public relation teams are watching and learning. We will see more court cases where the legal system is used to help someone's brand. It used to be we did not air our dirty linen. Our private lives remained private. This case opens the door even more widely to a culture where we overshare, we let the public scrutinise intimate details of our lives and it encourages the media to do so too, because that's what the public wants.
Real domestic violence victims will fear how they will be treated if they come forward. Any victim, woman or man, after seeing how Amber Heard has been treated, will pause.
Powerful men will feel empowered. The glamour of Hollywood has not gone. The story of David and Goliath remains a myth.
This case makes us ask what we are prepared to accept as physical acts of harm which means a person should be punished. How do we punish them? What evidence do we need to say we do not tolerate you any more? It was clear in the case of Harvey Weinstein. Johnny Depp is not on trial for domestic abuse. The US trial is about reputation and money.
Some men might feel they can speak more about the abuse their females partners inflict. Both genders might have greater insightful and more meaningful conversations about toxicity in partnerships.
We can all learn how to improve. Better relationships are important for our health and happiness. Much of our lives involve people, emotions and mistakes. Whether we can stay together, bring out the best in others, thrive, laugh, build a future we want and need, it also depends on those people we allow in. If we surround ourselves with what harms us - whether that's people, alcohol, drugs or other vices, then that is what will bring us down.
The Depp-Heard trial might help some people in toxic relationships wake up to their behaviour. Some might seek help. Others might end their addictions.
Then there are those that choose not to grow. They will use this to create more unhappiness and it will justify further unhealthy attitudes.
Image: by Felix Mittermeier
Public Opinion
Win
A verdict for Depp could green light Dinsey to put him back into the Pirates franchise. It is the perception that matters. Do I want Depp back in Pirates? Yes. Is he a talented actor? He can be. Does he need to deal with his drug and alcohol problem? Absolutely.
As a woman, I do feel concerned that men might see this as an example women can be mistreated, publicly humiliated and they can get away with it. Do I think Depp is worthy of respect and a hugely successful career? I'm not sure any more. Is this a standard we should apply to entertainers? Maybe. If he hit her a few times under certain circumstances, within a context that anyone might understand, by accident, or otherwise, is that ok? I don't know.
If he wins, the chances he will feel vindicated to return to the downward spiral of drugs and alcohol is highly likely.
He may see himself as a victim, rather than accepting his own mistakes and faults.
Lose
BUT if he loses this case, he will need to rehabilitate his reputation. He will need to clean himself up. Depp will need to fight to make a comeback. Hollywood and the media love a comeback story. We've seen it with so many famous men.
Is Depp doing this case to win? Or is he trying to gain more attention and make himself bankable again. Does he think he can win anyway regardless of the trial verdict?
The media coverage has been more pro Depp. He is a huge money making machine for the entertainment industry. He's an A Lister with worldwide box office takings estimated at $10 billion. He made $55 million from profit participation in Disney's 2010 Alice in Wonderland, which made the corporation $1.03 billion.
Perhaps Depp has stoked the pro-media coverage and thrown his own money at it too, afterall there are suggestions of bots and a coordinated social media strategy to damage Heard.
Amber Heard has not won herself more fans. She may be used to support feminist claims, but her lies have tarnished her. Do we judge women too harshly? Yes. Does she deserve to be unhappy? No. Should she be rewarded for lying? Probably not. But neither does Depp.
I still feel confused and have mixed feelings about this case. Maybe I resent both Heard and Depp for shattering the illusions and the judgments of my youth - that I thought this man was wonderful, worthy of having his posters, more than 10 but less than 40, I don't recall, on my bedroom walls.
What I do know is that both Johnny Depp and Amber Heard need to stop making each other miserable. It's the actions of one which results in the response of the other.
The key takeaway is that drugs and alcohol don't make you happier or healthier. They can destroy your life and everything you have built. Lies do not help you.
The Johnny Depp v Amber Heard defamation case in Fairfax is now with the jury, but public opinion will evolve over time and who knows where we will all end up - happier, healthier, we can only hope so.
There are two problems with Rishi Sunak's cost of living crisis response.
Rishi Sunak's Response To The Cost of Living Crisis
Sunak hasn't taken any action. That is the big fat problem. He says he might do something in the future. For now, it's everyone else's problem.
The narrative in many people's minds is that Rishi is so rich, he just doesn't understand how significant the cost of living crisis is.
It's been widely reported in the press that the chancellor's wife, Akshata Murthy has a 0.91% stake in Infosys, a company founded by her father. Her share of the Indian tech consultancy giant is estimated at more than £400m.
Rishi Sunak's father-in-law, Narayan Murthy, is worth $3.2billion and is referred to as the "Steve Jobs of India".
Rishi Sunak is the man who is saying it would not be responsible to take action now on the cost of living crisis.
Sunak also doesn't see the damage no action will cause the UK and world economy. It's incompetence or callous indifference.
This is also all in the context that his former employer:
"Goldman Sachs said rising oil prices and other impacts from Russia's invasion of Ukraine will reduce U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) this year, and added the probability of a recession in 2023 is now at 20% to 30%."
People are cutting back on extras like Netflix and other entertainment subscription services. Holidays are also being put on the back burner. It causes resentment as the have nots feel the burden more than anyone else.
Market research firm Kantar said 1.51 million cancellations happened in the first quarter of 2022. Media reports suggested Netflix share price was down by 20%.
Women Are Disadvantaged More
Electricity costs are up but increasing benefits and tax cuts excludes and ignores a large demographic - women.
If you're not working eg. a full time carer / mother, not on benefits and not in paid employment, your family is worse off.
To date, women are ignored by the government. Safety, long covid and child care are part of a long list of issues that women face which are way down on the pecking order of government priorities. It does not feel like this is a government that cares about women.
Instead, there are reports of rapists and sexual harassment by MPs. They are defended and supported by a largely male population of men in power.
Self-Employed and New Businesses are Forgotten
If you're not yet making much money, a new business or self-employed person does not qualify for benefits. Nor do tax cuts help them.
These are the people that will build a strong economy and future for this country. Instead, their chances of success are diminished. The government and its policies are another obstacle and threat to their business.
Even a tax cut to businesses doesn't really help, as it favours the companies making large profits. Plus the flow on effects if businesses do pass this to customers takes time.
Ungreat Britain
When you're constantly worrying about bills. If your electricity bill is double what it was. Your grocery bills are feeling overwhelming. There is the constant need to cut costs, save where you can and never indulge, anxiety is high and happiness is low. These all affect your mental and physical health.
This isn't just about people facing the heat or eat option. It is affecting a disproportionate number of people around the country. It weighs on people's minds, even those in good jobs and who are reasonably well paid.
Here are some posts on Nextdoor - a local community forum.
"The price hikes and sky rocketing bills are hard for everyone, but I'm really aware that some people are being forced to choose between necessities like food and heating. I'm especially concerned about older people or those with disabilities, who might be isolated, unaware of who/ how to ask for help and unable to work/ earn more money. Is anyone aware of any local schemes to make sure our especially vulnerable members of the community are supported? I'd like to help, perhaps dropping some food round to a local elderly neighbour or contributing financially to a local campaign. It's heartbreaking and we have to look out for each other x"
People are even calculating the cost of a shower.
"My morning shower just cost 60p. Was curious and now wishing I hadn't checked. There are 6 people in the house which equates to £3.60 a day or £36 every 10 days. General hygiene is now £144 / month for a household of six. If we all shower daily."
Poorer people equals higher crime. The new HM chief inspector of constabulary, Andy Cooke said:
“Whenever you see an increase in the cost of living or whenever you see more people dropping into poverty, I think you’ll invariably see a rise in crime."
None of this is great. It's all bleak.
The Problem
The cost of living crisis is the biggest problem facing Britain and the world today. It is a failure of governments, businesses and the media that they watch us slide into the abyss. The situation is becoming beyond urgent and to the point where any action is too late. Dithering and delay cost lives when coronovirus first hit. What will be the result of Rishi Sunak's can kicking today? It could be worse that the pandemic, the last financial crisis or any war. We're facing a recession or worse ... could we end up in a Great Depression? Is this all because a windfall tax on energy companies is considered "ideologically unconservative"?
