Community Chat

[Alsee]

Not surprising if true. Many abusers are in abusive relationships. It's a life pattern that is hard to heal.

[Blahblahvampemer]

---

@Noel7 wrote:

---

@Venezia wrote:

Doesn't surprise me in the least.  We probably already know who the "violent" one is in this relationship.

---

********************************

Violent?  In the middle of an argument she grabbed her girlfriend's arm.

The charge was dropped.

---

MOST criminal charges are dropped.  It doesn't negate the action or intent.

[SusieQ_2]

Aw, c'mon people. Surely we've all been arrested on charges of domestic violence at one time or another. What, no? 

Just for the record I want to say that I have never, ever, once said that Amber is lying. Neither have I said I believe a word she says. There's just not enough evidence at this time to make that call. But from what I saw, the point of this thread as written by the OP, is that Amber was arrested and booked.

Now, Pearley, you can close the case.

PS  - Waiving hi to Pearley and hoping she doesn't throw a phone at my head!  

[Irshgrl31201]

---

@truffle wrote:

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

---

@truffle wrote:

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

---

@truffle wrote:

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

---

@truffle wrote:

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

---

@truffle wrote:

Let me get this straight.  TMZ and other outlets find dirt on Amber in an isolated one time incident that occurred in 2009 which by my calendar was 7 years ago and you want to state that proves Depp is innocent?  That logic is insane!

---

Almost as insane as saying someone who trashed a hotel room twenty-two years shows that he has a past of violence toward women. 

No, it doesn't prove his innocence but it does show she has a history of what she's accusing him of.

---

One isolated incident is just that, not a "history."  

---

In that case I guess you would say the same about that "one isolated incident" twenty-two years ago not being a history.

---

What incident twenty-two years ago?  I have no idea what you are talking about. 

---

Wasn't your point that one isolated incident is not a history? 

---

Only a very sad person who is a hater would take one isolated incident from seven years ago and site it as "history."

Now, @SusieQ_2 what incident occurred twenty-two years ago that you brought up?

That is the question that remains unanswered.    

---

Now we have a lawyer and a doctor on the thread, lol.

Actually the question was, is something that happened once, twenty-two years ago, a history? According to you it is not (isolated incident) but you don't seem to want to acknowledge that.

---

I see that you are trying to obscure the dialogue.  Fine, you will have to do it without me.  @SusieQ_2

---

I don't think she is trying to obscure the dialogue at all. She was wondering why in Johnnys case of the hotel room trashing this one incident was proof of deeper problems and it Ambers case which wasn't just trashing a hotel room but claims of putting there hands on someone else is not.

[jaxs mom]

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

---

@Pearlee wrote:

"Arrested and booked" does not mean convicted.  She was not convicted of a crime of domestic violence. Case closed.

---

Sorry counselor but there's a difference between allegedly arrested and arrested. In Amber "van Ree's" case it was the second. That her lover did not press charges doesn't change the fact she was arrested and booked. Wasn't that what this thread was about? 

---

Take it up with the Daily Mail article then that the OP cited. That was the source for the phrase allegedly arrested that was quoted by Noel7. 

[truffle]

---

@Irshgrl31201 wrote:

---

@truffle wrote:

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

---

@truffle wrote:

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

---

@truffle wrote:

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

---

@truffle wrote:

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

---

@truffle wrote:

Let me get this straight.  TMZ and other outlets find dirt on Amber in an isolated one time incident that occurred in 2009 which by my calendar was 7 years ago and you want to state that proves Depp is innocent?  That logic is insane!

---

Almost as insane as saying someone who trashed a hotel room twenty-two years shows that he has a past of violence toward women. 

No, it doesn't prove his innocence but it does show she has a history of what she's accusing him of.

---

One isolated incident is just that, not a "history."  

---

In that case I guess you would say the same about that "one isolated incident" twenty-two years ago not being a history.

---

What incident twenty-two years ago?  I have no idea what you are talking about. 

---

Wasn't your point that one isolated incident is not a history? 

---

Only a very sad person who is a hater would take one isolated incident from seven years ago and site it as "history."

Now, @SusieQ_2 what incident occurred twenty-two years ago that you brought up?

That is the question that remains unanswered.    

---

Now we have a lawyer and a doctor on the thread, lol.

Actually the question was, is something that happened once, twenty-two years ago, a history? According to you it is not (isolated incident) but you don't seem to want to acknowledge that.

---

I see that you are trying to obscure the dialogue.  Fine, you will have to do it without me.  @SusieQ_2

---

I don't think she is trying to obscure the dialogue at all. She was wondering why in Johnnys case of the hotel room trashing this one incident was proof of deeper problems and it Ambers case which wasn't just trashing a hotel room but claims of putting there hands on someone else is not.

---

@Irshgrl31201 I was not part of that conversation and for some reason susieQ refuses to tell me about the incident twenty-two years that she conveniently threw into our conversation to use as a smoke screen.  It was not part of the conversation.  

[Venezia]

---

@Noel7 wrote:

---

@Venezia wrote:

Doesn't surprise me in the least.  We probably already know who the "violent" one is in this relationship.

---

********************************

Violent?  In the middle of an argument she grabbed her girlfriend's arm.

The charge was dropped.

---

I put "violent" in quotes because of the reference to it in the charge.

However, we all know we're talking about it in reference to her allegations of abuse against Johnny Depp.  So it seems she has a history; he doesn't.

And charges in DV cases get dropped all the time.  It doesn't mean it didn't happen.  There may have been a good reason she and her former wife/girlfriend split up.

[SusieQ_2]

---

@jaxs mom wrote:

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

---

@Pearlee wrote:

"Arrested and booked" does not mean convicted.  She was not convicted of a crime of domestic violence. Case closed.

---

Sorry counselor but there's a difference between allegedly arrested and arrested. In Amber "van Ree's" case it was the second. That her lover did not press charges doesn't change the fact she was arrested and booked. Wasn't that what this thread was about? 

---

Take it up with the Daily Mail article then that the OP cited. That was the source for the phrase allegedly arrested that was quoted by Noel7. 

---

No thanks, I think I'll pass. When someone has a mug shot and appears in court it is not an alleged arrest. If I'm wrong about that please let me know.

[SusieQ_2]

"I don't think she is trying to obscure the dialogue at all. She was wondering why in Johnnys case of the hotel room trashing this one incident was proof of deeper problems and it Ambers case which wasn't just trashing a hotel room but claims of putting there hands on someone else is not." - Irshgrl31201

@@Irshgrl31201 I was not part of that conversation and for some reason susieQ refuses to tell me about the incident twenty-two years that she conveniently threw into our conversation to use as a smoke screen.  It was not part of the conversation." - truffle

@Irshgrl31201 you are correct. Truffle stated that one incident does not a history make. I asked if that would include an incident that happened twenty-two years ago. Google is available for each of us to use and I am not here to educate her especially since the actual incident was never a point of contention anyway. My point was that if one incident is not a history for one person, it's not a history for another. That's all. 

[Say Nay]

I think some are assuming one of the involved parties (van Ree) dropped the charges.

That is not what happened. I mentioned this earlier in the thread. According to TMZ it was the prosecutor who did not move forward because both parties were residents of CA (the incident happened in Seattle).

From TMZ:

"TMZ has obtained audio of the court hearing, where the prosecutor declined to move forward with the case -- we're told because the women both lived in California. The judge told Amber she was not off the hook ... prosecutors could reconsider and refile within the 2-year statute of limitations..."