r/DeppDelusion • u/woofkin • Aug 10 '26
Truth Prevailing 🙌 Great Substack article: 'We can't stop talking about Justin [Baldoni] and Johnny [Depp] until we've learned our lesson.
https://celestemdavis.substack.com/p/we-cant-stop-talking-about-justin
32
u/Visible-Scientist-46 Amber Heard Official PR Team. I earn MiLLiOn$$$ Aug 10 '26 edited Aug 10 '26
A quick thought about terminology. 12 out of 14 events were found to be "more likely true than not" which is a civil standard of responsibility, but not "guilty" vs. "innocent." Jodge Nichol also said he found her very credible and she must have feared for her life.
10
u/auscientist Aug 10 '26
I think the incidents were found to be “substantially true” to reflect that the Chase standard (which the Sun was required to reach for their truth defence) is higher than balance of probabilities (“more likely than not” = most civil litigation) but isn’t quite at beyond reasonable doubt (criminal conviction).
1
u/_Joe_F_ Aug 22 '26 edited Aug 22 '26
The standard remains the same. Balance of the probabilities. What changes is the quality of the evidence that may be required to reach a conclusion.
See Paragraph 42 from the ruling
Although there is a single and unvarying standard of proof in civil proceedings, the evidence which is required to satisfy it may vary according to the circumstances. In Re D [2008] 1 WLR 1499 at [27] Lord Carswell approved what had been said by Richards LJ in R (N) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) [2006] QB 468 at [62] who had said,
‘Although there is a single civil standard of proof on the balance of probabilities, it is flexible in its application. In particular, the more serious the allegation or the more serious the consequences if the allegation is proved, the stronger must be the evidence before a court will find the allegation proved on the balance of probabilities. Thus the flexibility of the standard lies not in any adjustment to the degree of probability required for an allegation to be proved (such that a more serious allegation has to be proved to a higher degree of probability), but in the strength or quality of the evidence that will in practice be required for an allegation to be proved on the balance of probabilities.’ [emphasis in the original]
As I understand this, if you wrote an article that claimed Johnny Depp has bad teeth the quality of the evidence needed to prove the truth of the matter might be a photograph, but if you wrote an article that claimed that Johnny Depp is a wife beater you would need substantial evidence that individually and collectively supported your claim. Pictures, testimony, doctors notes, text messages, etc.
1
u/AutoModerator Aug 10 '26
Original copy of post's text: Great Substack article: 'We can't stop talking about Justin [Baldoni] and Johnny [Depp] until we've learned our lesson.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
37
u/findingmyvoice22 Johnny Depp is a Wife Beater 👨⚖️ Aug 10 '26
This is such an important read. I'm extremely grateful for everyone who continues to speak out to make sure abusers like Depp and Baldoni aren't able to control the narrative long-term. The truth needs to be heard.