Comments by "Muck006" (@Muck006) on "BlackBeltBarrister" channel.

  1. - "pledge" vs. "donation" - "Amber made donations of 1 million" vs. "Elon and others made donations IN HER NAME" - "Amber has paid 6 million in legal fees" vs. "insurance companies paid 6 million in legal fees" - "I didnt punch you, I hit you" ... - ... ... ... ---->>> You NEED a PRECISE DEFINITION for every word spoken by Amber AND Elaine!
    1200
  2. During her marriage it was JD who "kept her associates", but after it she had to start supporting Whitney and Eve and the Taft woman ... and whoever else OR she would have lost her closest supporters who know her darkest secrets.
    61
  3.  @CatieCarrier  There are doubless more of these REDEFINITIONS of words (it isnt "splitting of hairs", because there is a CLEAR difference between pledge and donation for example!) and I didnt include the TMZ thing on the list because she could have been lying (while having called herself) OR it could have been a "white lie" because her publicist or one of her friends called them. The statements above are all directly referenced to a statement by Amber/Elaine.
    26
  4. The latter.
    23
  5.  @janemartin1579  Not just the justice system ...
    22
  6.  @BlackBeltBarrister  Filing a lawsuit ... and then making a deal would be a better option, because it would act as a signal to anyone else who would like to repeat all those claims about evidence and so on. Journalists are activists these days ... and do anything for their ideology while not caring about profits AND truth.
    14
  7. BELIEVE is a word that should have no place in a court of law ... PROVE is the one that needs to take its place. SADLY - and this is where POLITICS comes into it - "ideologies that run on BELIEF" are dominating our societies ... and thus the arguments in court also change from "I can PROVE IT" to "I can CLAIM IT and you HAVE TO BELIEVE ME".
    12
  8. Everyone but Elaine and "Amber SIMPS" knows that ...
    5
  9. One of the most important things for society is that ... BUREAUCRACIES NEED THE ABILITY ... AND THE WILL ... FOR QUALITY CONTROL, i.e. to WEED OUT THEIR OWN MISTAKES/FLAWS. The british justice system (and the rest of its bureaucracy) does NOT have sufficient willpower for SELF-CRITICISM ... because - as @BlackBeltBarrister keeps telling us - "respect for colleagues of law is A REQUIREMENT", which basically precludes any criticism and makes correctional processes TOO RARE! We - including judges - are all HUMANS and thus MAKE MISTAKES! As a scientist I REQUIRE "criticism" from other scientists, who probably see flaws in my work that I have overlooked ... but in todays world of "science" you are not allowed to criticise anymore!
    4
  10. "Buying a knife with an inscription" isnt a five minute affair though, so her mood could have switched many times from order to delivery ... to actually making the gift. 14:20 Nah ... the issue with Amber's statement is that SHE WAS BELIEVED AND SUFFERED NO CONSEQUENCES AT ALL! NO SCRUTINY OF HER CLAIMS! The lies were only made public (to those who didnt watch the UK trial testimony) in Virginia. 16:15 As the "juror" stated: one of them "knew" that ALCOHOL + [whatever drug used] DOESNT turn you into a violent monster ... but rather A ZOMBIE (like photographed by Amber many times). 20:45 It hurt her ABILITY TO HAVE THE MEDIA LIE FOR HER ... but it is GOOD FOR THE TRUTH!
    4
  11. THE important difference between UK and USA is: Johnny Depp was NOT ALLOWED TO QUESTION AH in the UK! Her CLEAR LIES were accepted as "truth" against common sense and any sense of justice.
    3
  12. You can be pretty sure that he has listened to EVERYTHING ... not everything TUG headlines as "new" ... is actually new.
    3
  13. Authors usually dont get millions ... unless you sell tens of millions of copies. Why would anyone pay Amber that much ... when it is clear that her reputation wont bring such sales? Johnny Depp on the other hand ... could sell millions!
    3
  14. She used a STANDARDISED TEST as the basis for her assessment ... and for Amber's experts it was more "expert OPINION" without any evidence.
    3
  15. The biggest reason for overturning that judgement is that the judge DID NOT TAKE CARE IN VERIFYING THE TRUTH OF STATEMENTS ... he simply "relied upon the signed declaration" ... but that isnt enough. Justice NEEDS quality control ... and if the opposing party isnt allowed to do it the judge needs to take care of it!
    3
  16. Women "cant" r@pe men ... according to the UK definition of the term. That should be all you need to know to see the UK as "effed up". The "2003 Electronic Communications Act" also basically introduced a "right not to be offended" ... which is applied only for "the new aristocracy" ... but never for "the outcasts".
    2
  17. Calling Elon Musk a "boyfriend" ... BOY ... roflmao.
    2
  18. The british "justice" system is DEEPLY FLAWED ... because "a practitioner of law is NOT ALLOWED to CRITICISE another practitioner of law", which prevents any SELF-CLEANSING OF THE SYSTEM. "You guys" need to STOP BEING SO EFFING SMUG about your system and FIX THE FLAWS!
    2
  19.  @Adjudicator1  If the scrutiny is being limited by what "the system allows" it wont be much closure, because a renewed rejection of the appeal will be a blow.
    2
  20. Amber Heard's team went by "expertise on paper" (Dr. Hughes's is long as is that of Dr. Spiegel) and Johnny Depp's team looked for "skill / quality of work".
    2
  21. No ... she should NOT get that chance. She is old enough to know better and needs to be DISBARRED!
    2
  22. "Legal aid" is a BRITISH speciality ... and even that is applied in a VERY BIASED MANNER ... giving it to "guys who are accused of the most horrible thing with children" to the tune of millions, while someone who has been bankrupted by the british state through lawfare and political accusations gets nothing. tl;dr BUREAUCRATS ARENT NEUTRAL ... most certainly not in these days ... and pretending they are is WRONG!
    2
  23. Why is this an EMERGENCY? They had talked for months about it!
    2
  24. If the UK verdict had been allowed into the trial ... they could have attacked the judgement in court, which would have required another two weeks or so.
    2
  25. He was basically "the host at his own home" ... but I dont think he did a lot of talking. "Having him on hand" would be a good idea if Dr. Currie had any immediate questions for clarification ... and in any case ... Dr. Currie was WELL-CHAPERONED, so no improprieties happened! [/sarcasm off]
    2
  26. Sadly ... you will have no idea "before trying it" how the psychiatrist/psychologist actually is, when you need to consult one. a) you wont have "an interview" to find out how they think AND b) you will have "mental problems" and thus your reasoning will probably be impaired. The APA has been including anti-male rhetoric in the textbooks that are used to teach new psychiatrists (like "perpetrator = male form of a word", "victim = female form" and also the reasoning behind it). "The Prim Reaper" has made a series of videos about "the hijacking of modern education" a few years back, going through her textbooks ...
    2
  27. When I first learned to use Photoshop - almost 20 years ago, in a weekend course - one of the tasks was to "correct the brightness of an almost black picture", which turned out to be "a blackbird on a forest floor". Correcting/adjusting the brightness (AND COLOURS!!!) of pictures is EASY and it CAN BE obvious if it is manipulated or not ... like with the "Amber Heard injury pictures" which show a reddish tint and lack blue/yellow colours in them!
    1
  28.  @iamurfriend01  Nice CLAIM you have there ... got any EVIDENCE to back it up? tl;dr Stop using your EMOTION and FEELINGS to make claims about trials. PROVE IT OR SHUT UP ... or else you aren't better than Amber Heard!
    1
  29. There are no unbiased eyes in the UK justice system ... prepare for being disappointed when this attempt for appeal gets rejected rather quickly.
    1
  30. Why do people like you exist? HAVE YOU LEARNED NOTHING FROM AMBER HEARD? Do ... NOT ... make CLAIMS ... based upon YOUR STUPID FEELINGS! PROVE IT OR SHUT UP ... or else get a room with Amber! P.S.: The connections between the judge and Amber / the Sun have been explained already "back then" ... but since you cant be bothered to LOOK FOR IT ... you have to live with my "unflattering language". THE LAW does NOT NEED EMOTIONS and FEELINGS, it needs EVIDENCE!
    1
  31. Dr. Spiegel and Dr. Hughes: ARMCHAIR QUARTERBACK DIAGNOSIS (which is unprofessional) of Johnny Depp Dr. Currie: used a STANDARDISED TEST as the basis for her assessment This was OBVIOUS TO ANYONE who watched the testimonies ... and even Dr. Spiegel's "well you would destroy all expert testimony" argument - even though he had been given the way to do it ... BY TALKING TO THE SUBJECT - was stupid. Dr. Hughes' "hatred of men" was equally made obvious.
    1
  32. You CAN BE "controlled" in an audio recording for a while ... but these recordings are HOURS long. Not many are capable of keeping up that control for that long, especially not when it involves alcohol (which is the "diet" of Amber Heard). Thus these audios are VERY GOOD evidence IMO.
    1
  33.  @aresmars2003  Your logic is BS ... because there are still the newspaper articles that call him a wife beater. So IF he can get a shot at reversing the UK verdict he should take it. An APPEAL isnt the same as a trial, so he wont have to give evidence and his lawyers can do it for him.
    1
  34. IMO Elaine got wind that the Court TV "journalist" is actually a lawyer AND friends with "lawtube". Thus she would have to expect a severe headwind in that interview.
    1
  35.  @MrBillUp  The ENTIRE british bureaucracy is being subverted/CORRUPTED by "a certain ideology" ... and this includes the justice system. When you can have someone go from "being arrested" to "being in prison" in FIVE HOURS (and without any legal defense at hand) for minor charges ... AND the court system does NOT SELF-CORRECT THIS, it is not a sign for "one of the best legal systems in the world. Stop daydreaming! The legal system is also about "the laws" ... and the "2003 Electronic Communications Act" basically introduced a "right not to be offended" for the "animals who are more equal than others", i.e. a new aristocracy! Magistrates are also chosen for their DIVERSE BACKGROUND ... and NOT because they "impartially and logically interpret the law". At least that was how it read in 2020 ... when I researched the "asian gangs" who STILL ARE abusing young girls for about eight months. Today there are even cases where a 15-year-old victim of abuse is being given to the family of her abuser as foster care ... and the legal system ... DOES NOT OBJECT/HELP THAT VICTIM. A certain scottish man was tried for a certain (not too funny) joke ... and they "cleverly" chose the charge in a way to NOT GIVE HIM A JURY TRIAL! So you can "screw" your experience as a juror ... if the system WANTS TO CHEAT ... it WILL CHEAT!
    1
  36. @BlackBeltBarrister What are the rules in Britain concerning ... TRIAL BY COMBAT? Something like "hitting THE JUDGE with a hand in a cast and asking him if it was relevant or not"? There is also "hitting Amber REPEATEDLY (a hand in a cast cant really grapple well, especially not with a missing finger) and checking for the nonexistent (because NO MEDICAL ATTENTION WAS SOUGHT) wounds afterwards. tl;dr british justice IS A JOKE ... and especially a "code of conduct rule" that FORBIDS CRITICISM OF THE SYSTEM will be resulting in a failing system with FLAWS!
    1
  37. I would also advise learning martial arts (except for "flowing ones" like Judo and other "wrestling-like" versions) for the reason of "releasing frustration" in training (hitting anyone isnt even required, because it is about the sudden release of tension) ... which then makes you a lot calmer in daily life.
    1
  38. IMO he should SUE ... and then "make a deal" ... as a "shot across the bow" for anyone else (journalists and feminist activists) who might want to repeat these statements ... which WILL increase if nothing is done.
    1
  39. You can only have "an axe to grind" if you have REASONS for it. Amber Heard is an evil MANIPULATOR ... who PLANNED TO TAKE WHATEVER SHE CAN GET! There are pieces of evidence which suggest that SHE MIGHT EVEN HAVE PLANNED TO KILL JOHNNY DEPP (through the idiot Josh Drew "white knighting poor poor Amber Heard"). The accusations told to her psychiatrists from the start - if they are even actually given to the psychiatrist and not added later on by Amber herself - clearly show that she planned for it FROM THE START. She changed her description from "a magical first year" to "he was violent from the start" (so why marry the guy then???) after all.
    1
  40. There was a certain trial ... where the lawyer representing the accused (I think they were paid for by legal aid) were badgering and intimidating the primary witness - a ~13 year old girl - to "prove her a liar" in the case of CSA against "a gang" of "asians" ... and it was allowed to continue for some while before anyone interrupted this. The reprimand only came much later IIRC (could be wrong), but at least half an hour of really BRUTAL questioning had been endured by the girl. [I think it is clear what kind of case I am talking about ... one of those cases which the british government wants to hush up.] It is roughly 2 years since I read about this during my research resulting in a list of 2000+ articles about that topic ... which isnt even close to "everything", because I only looked at a limited number of cities.
    1
  41. Soo ... when "Voldemort" [Rommy Tommlinson ...] gets arrested for a MINOR BREACH (that usually is worth a fine) his "suspended sentence" gets immediately put into full effect and he is behind prison bars IN FIVE HOURS (while not even having his lawyer present). When Katie Price does something "worthy of a fine" ... her suspended prison sentence is NOT ACTIVATED? Can we all say FEMALE PRIVILEGE now or not?
    1
  42. @BlackBeltBarrister When is it time to "disrespect a judge" and criticise them? How much do they have to do for you to actually consider it?
    1
  43. "Errors of law and procedure"? How can there NOT BE ... with the judge KNOWING THE JOURNALIST WHO WROTE THE ARTICLE? That should NEVER have happened, but isnt surprising ... with how british judges behave like uncriticiseable KINGS. I hopefully dont need to mention "Voldemort" ... who is being constantly pursued by lawfare to economically ruin him. [The wife of the judge AND of Dan Wooton are working in the same charity ... which means the two men will have met!]
    1
  44. No idea what you are referring to with "bee". The story sounds like Amber Heard's psychiatrists ... ONLY BELIEVE ONE SIDE (without ANY evidence ... or were there other kids corroborating his story?) ... the "first story that gets told". This is TERRIBLE and has resulted in loads of false SA accusations in US universities during the Obama years, when the "evidence requirement to prove the case" was "51% PLUS dont question the story of the girl".
    1
  45. The "rule of law" is NOT a "universal concept", because there are PREREQUISITES FOR IT ... like LOGIC and REASONING being the central concepts for "organising society" AND "the law". Take any religiously focused society ... and BELIEF becomes the focus ... turning "fair justice" into "SOCIAL JUSTICE". @Black Belt Barrister Why does the statue of Lady Justice on top of Old Baileys NOT WEAR A BLINDFOLD? Because "your" system does NOT have complete "fair" justice; the blindfold is the SYMBOL to signify that "beggar and prince are treated alike", but all the DEFERENCE which the system shows to itself AND which for example treats "ladies of the night" AUTOMATICALLY as "untrustworthy witnesses" makes it clear that the UK doesnt have "really fair justice" and that there are STILL "some animals that are more equal than others".
    1
  46. Sorry ... but "expert witnesses" and "neutrality" DO NOT MIX ... which is made clear when you see two experts stating the complete opposite AND when you see "experts" - like Dr. Hughes and Dr. Spiegel - make ARMCHAIR QUARTERBACK DIAGNOSIS' of someone they HAVE NEVER TALKED TO! One did it by "believing what Amber told her" and the other by "watching Johnny Depp in movies and interviews", which are both COMPLETELY ILLEGITIMATE! Another example is claiming that #JusticeForJohnnyDepp is an ANTI-AMBER HASHTAG. That is ridiculous ... because it does NOT share the meaning of #burnTheWitch ... The opinions expressed here in the video show the DEFERENTIAL UK ATTITUDE ... which is WRONG! No "expert" should be above criticism, because experts are ALSO HUMANS ... same as judges, barristers, lawyers, ... police, bureaucrats, professors, politicians, ... HUMANS MAKE MISTAKES!
    1
  47. She wasnt busy for 2 years, because the divorce happened in 2016, so - being generous with the time - she got the money in 2017 at the latest ... and was sued in 2019. So she had around TWO YEARS to donate it, because she didnt need it for the UK trial ... due to not being a party of the trial (and the Sun probably paying her costs as a witness).
    1
  48. "Coercive control" is a BAD RULE, because it cant really be proven AND because it takes away the AGENCY/RESPONSIBILITY from the weaker party.
    1
  49. "Team Amber" DID "LIE" ... because they were ordered by the court to hand over their digital evidence LAST YEAR, but THEY ONLY STARTED IN MARCH and sent 50.000 files (MULTIPLES of the same image ... with all the colour corrections) to swamp "team Depp" with useless stuff. They had been ordered to SEND THE ORIGINAL IMAGES AND NOT MANIPULATED ONES, but they sent LOADS of images BUT NOT ALL ORIGINALS (which arent even marked by them).
    1
  50. That alone wont do it, because it is "just" $360K per year ... *6 years = $2 million. Hairstyling probably ate a lot more of that ... and "only wear once" clothes.
    1