Brad Pitt allegedly ‘choked,’ hit ‘frightened’ kids in Angelina Jolie plane

[KarmaPolice 4,716]

20 minutes ago, Anveeroy said:

I don't think they are siding with her, they are more likely questioning the system. You all just kept pointing out because they spoke about the errors of system. This is very sad to see some of you say that you all are bright but lack of basic critical reflection. 

Hm, hm. No. Nope. People accused me of being a rapist supporter simply because I said Johnny had a valid case with strong proofs against Amber who simply was building a castle of lies. None of the people questioned the system per se. They implied that Johnny WAS the abuser and that the system protected him BECAUSE he was GUILTY. THAT is not critical thinking, that's bigotism and witch hunting

[Ivy 10,795]

11 hours ago, KarmaPolice said:

 

No, i believe in "innocent until proven guilty". Amber had no medical document nor medical opinion that could confirm an abuse. The only thing she provided were edited photos (with increased saturation to make it look like bruises) or fake bruises made using make up, made up stories of accidents and so on. She wasn't simply reliable.

If you were to believe JUST words I could put in jail anyone I want 'cause I simply said so? What kind of twisted way of thinking is this?

Not to nitpick or anything but I'm gonna nitpick..

- the photos were edited to make the bruises look worse, not to make bruises that weren't there

- Johnny Depp had also edited photos to make his bruises look worse 

- there was no proof of her making fake bruises with makeup 

[Ivy 10,795]

This custody battle and divorce has been going on forever 

I will not be surprised if this is true, Brad Pitt seems like he's been a mess during the time he was drinking

[LilyLark 9,694]

The fact that court documents were published that showed that Brad had supervised visitation, with CPS, for YEARS after he separated from Angelina...that was very telling. He's a wealthy, yt, powerful man...the kind of man that can afford the best legal team & the kind that has the privilege of being given the benefit of doubt. And with all that, the courts still had him being supervised....

I don't think people realize how unusual that is....it's also telling that the kids are never photographed with him. Sure, maybe they want to be private, but if their Dad was innocent & truly being slandered in the press they would likely go out of their way to be photographed with him as a sign of support. But there's crickets...

[LilyLark 9,694]

1 hour ago, Ivy said:

This custody battle and divorce has been going on forever 

I will not be surprised if this is true, Brad Pitt seems like he's been a mess during the time he was drinking

Yeah, I think he was a serious alcoholic and possibly still is one (he seemed downright drunk on a red carpet for Bullet Train).

Someone pointed out on twitter that his PR, years ago, put out a very strange statement about the plane which said he didn't strike his child in the face (not that he didn't strike his child). Essentially, a very carefully worded statement that didn't lie....but also managed to cloud the truth so he looked better in the press.

All of that lines up with what Angelina is now saying...but to me, the most damning thing was that he had supervised visitation for years and years afterwards despite being the type of man who could afford the best legal team.

[Ivannn 1,026]

11 hours ago, HausOfAntonio said:

Ok so someone whose been in an abusive relationship for years, finally found the courage to leave, worked in themselves for YEARS before being able to talk about ANYTHING regarding the trauma they faced but has no proof of it should just go cry in the corner?  Sorry, I really can’t think like that but I hope you make lots of money as a lawyer!

And what? I should feel guilty If I earn lot of money as a lawyer?

[Economy 43,989]

12 hours ago, HausOfAntonio said:

I agree with you to an extent but I never spoke about legal action. I speaking about our own interpretation of allegations which more often than not, despite how much people want to twist internet discourse that is sympathetic towards victims as a “guilty until proven innocent” scheme, are completely dismissed by the majority of people because of a “lack of proof” that victims aren’t able to provide in the first place. Its very hard to navigate indeed. 

Right. And to some extent I agree with u also regarding the victim treatment but as far as the accused my point goes beyond just legal action

 

When u "cancel" someone u basically hurt their career and their reputation. I'm saying in that regard u shouldn't jump to conclusions either

 

It is possible to give BOTH the benefit of the doubt when u don't know for certain. U don't fully have to take sides all the time when u simply don't know

 

Being emotionally supportive of the victim does not automatically mean u have to hate on the accused simultaneously that's kind of the point in trying to make that some ppl can't seem to grasp (or agree with)

[HausOfAntonio 7,821]

1 hour ago, Economy said:

Right. And to some extent I agree with u also regarding the victim treatment but as far as the accused my point goes beyond just legal action

 

When u "cancel" someone u basically hurt their career and their reputation. I'm saying in that regard u shouldn't jump to conclusions either

 

It is possible to give BOTH the benefit of the doubt when u don't know for certain. U don't fully have to take sides all the time when u simply don't know

 

Being emotionally supportive of the victim does not automatically mean u have to hate on the accused simultaneously that's kind of the point in trying to make that some ppl can't seem to grasp (or agree with)

Yeah idk it depends on your proximity to the victim. My best friend was sexually assaulted by someone from our social circle and she doesn’t have any proof other than her word. I can’t fathom in good conscience giving him the benefit of the doubt in any circumstance and clearly it seems like I’m the only one because he has yet to face any consequence whatsoever for his actions, socially or legally. 

[Economy 43,989]

2 hours ago, HausOfAntonio said:

Yeah idk it depends on your proximity to the victim. My best friend was sexually assaulted by someone from our social circle and she doesn’t have any proof other than her word. I can’t fathom in good conscience giving him the benefit of the doubt in any circumstance and clearly it seems like I’m the only one because he has yet to face any consequence whatsoever for his actions, socially or legally. 

Yeah it's terrible when that happens. But I also find it a little bit if a slippery slope to start projecting personal experiences onto other ppl in which the situation may or may not be the same. It can make u biased based on what u experienced in ur life

 

At the end of the day innocent proven till proven guilty has to be the standard for any sort of consequences. It does unfortunately mean that many ppl get away with crimes when u can't prove it. But I think it's worse to mistakenly put people in jail, or terminate careers (in the case of cancel culture) when they are in fact innocent

 

I'm sure the vast majority of accusations are true. But if even only 1 in 10 or heck even 1 in 20 are false, the innocent ppl are paying a very high price for the sake of trying to prosecute everyone who is in fact guilty

 

Again, not being able to prove a crime and thus not prosecuting someone does not mean u cannot still be supportive of the victim in a number of ways the way I see it. That also includes trying to get justice with an investigation but when it fails to prove it, just taking them seriously enough to investigate is already an act of validation for the victim 

[Suuus 5,632]

12 hours ago, Anveeroy said:

I don't think they are siding with her, they are more likely questioning the system. You all just kept pointing out because they spoke about the errors of system. This is very sad to see some of you say that you all are bright but lack of basic critical reflection. 

Then maybe they should clerifyed that they werent siding with amber

[Suuus 5,632]

12 hours ago, Ivy said:

Not to nitpick or anything but I'm gonna nitpick..

- the photos were edited to make the bruises look worse, not to make bruises that weren't there

- Johnny Depp had also edited photos to make his bruises look worse 

- there was no proof of her making fake bruises with makeup 

Amber used 1 picture as evidence for 2 different events kinda sus if you ask me 

[Suuus 5,632]

On 10/5/2022 at 3:11 AM, Mr Mendes said:

There's solid proof that he lied about many things and attempted to lie even further with completely fabricated evidence that his team was not able to get into the trial. It has also been shown just how much proof Amber had that Johnny's team was able to suppress in the trial. And it's not surprising because everyone refused to believe that actor they grew up watching was capable of doing such things. When the truth is that he has a long history of being a misogynistic rage monster prone to violent outbursts. 

I have said from the very beginning I don't believe Amber to be an innocent party who had no responsibility for anything. But on the same coin, it takes a real fool to believe that Johnny is innocent of any wrong doing when his history and an actual verdict against him in a completely separate trial shows that he is not. 

They're both horrific, they both deserve to have their careers stripped from them, they both deserve to fade into obscurity never to be spoken of again. Both are trash. And yet, as always, a man's gonna completely get away with it in the court of public opinion because people can't let go of their nostalgia. 

He's a monster. An actual monster. And he's got everyone snowed. 

She literaly used one picture as evidence for 2 different events kinda sus if you ask me 

[Suuus 5,632]

On 10/5/2022 at 7:26 PM, Economy said:

Yeah it's terrible when that happens. But I also find it a little bit if a slippery slope to start projecting personal experiences onto other ppl in which the situation may or may not be the same. It can make u biased based on what u experienced in ur life

 

At the end of the day innocent proven till proven guilty has to be the standard for any sort of consequences. It does unfortunately mean that many ppl get away with crimes when u can't prove it. But I think it's worse to mistakenly put people in jail, or terminate careers (in the case of cancel culture) when they are in fact innocent

 

I'm sure the vast majority of accusations are true. But if even only 1 in 10 or heck even 1 in 20 are false, the innocent ppl are paying a very high price for the sake of trying to prosecute everyone who is in fact guilty

 

Again, not being able to prove a crime and thus not prosecuting someone does not mean u cannot still be supportive of the victim in a number of ways the way I see it. That also includes trying to get justice with an investigation but when it fails to prove it, just taking them seriously enough to investigate is already an act of validation for the victim 

I would rather see justice for the victims tho

[Economy 43,989]

2 hours ago, Suuus said:

I would rather see justice for the victims tho

U mean in the context I was refering to as in ud be ok with a few innocent getting legal consequences so that a greater number of guilty would be prosecuted?

[Suuus 5,632]

34 minutes ago, Economy said:

U mean in the context I was refering to as in ud be ok with a few innocent getting legal consequences so that a greater number of guilty would be prosecuted?

No i just want justice for the victims