The defamation lawsuit between Amber Heard and Johnny Depp in the United States and its television broadcast will have a “potentially catastrophic” impact for victims of domestic violence, say women’s advocacy organizations.
• Read also: Amber Heard ‘absolutely can’t’ pay Johnny Depp $10.4 million
• Read also: Johnny Depp wins libel suit once morest ex-wife Amber Heard
• Read also: Standing ovation for Johnny Depp in England
The six weeks of proceedings in court in Fairfax, near Washington, turned into a great unpacking on the private life of the couple of Hollywood stars who accused each other of violence.
Jurors ruled in favor of the “Pirate of the Caribbean” on Wednesday and awarded him just over $10 million in damages, ruling that the 36-year-old actress had defamed her ex-husband by presenting himself as “a personality representing domestic violence” in a column published in 2018, even if Johnny Depp was not mentioned.
Judge Penney Azcarate decided to allow the hearings to be broadcast on television for this highly publicized case, despite the opposition of Amber Heard’s lawyers.
AFP
For Michele Dauber, a law professor at Stanford University and an activist once morest sexual assault on campus, it is “the worst decision made by a court in decades for victims” which shows “a deep misunderstanding of sexual violence from the judge”.
According to her, Amber Heard had to “describe her alleged rape in raw detail on television. It is shocking and it should offend all women and victims, whether they agree with the verdict or not.”
The last time a rape victim was forced to testify publicly was in 1983, she said.
“There is no public interest in this case that might possibly outweigh the harm caused,” said Michelle Dauber, saying that now “every victim will think twice before coming forward and asking for a restraining order. or tell anyone regarding the abuse she suffered.
“Women can be hurt, even killed, because they don’t call for help. This case was a complete disaster. It is potentially catastrophic,” she concludes.
The trial has fascinated a global audience unaccustomed to watching allegations of marital sexual assault and that — regardless of opinions on the verdict — is a problem, also warns Ruth Glenn, president of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV).
“I don’t think our society yet understands the dynamics of domestic violence,” she told AFP.
This crucial context was not sufficiently discussed during the court proceedings, she believes, saying that for her there is “no doubt” regarding the types of abuse that were revealed at trial.
“We have to make sure that the people present understand this. But as long as we don’t do that, don’t show this stuff on TV,” she warns.
The insulting messages received by Michele Dauber for commenting on the lawsuit on Twitter also illustrate, according to her, the growing opposition to women’s rights in the United States, in the context of threats to the right to abortion by the Court supreme.
Public opinion supported Johnny Depp while his accuser was the subject of “openly misogynistic” insults and jeers on social networks, she believes.
AFP
Amber Heard suffered “metaphorically the ordeal of tar and feathers”, says Michele Dauber, while the judgment was hailed by the American right.
The case also raises the question of the future of the #MeToo movement, a hashtag born in 2017 to encourage women to denounce the perpetrators of harassment and sexual assault.
“It’s impossible not to see this as a backlash for #MeToo, women have gone too far. Ladies, we listened to you and convicted a few men. Don’t be too greedy,” wrote a user on Reddit.
But Tarana Burke, founder of #MeToo, assures on Twitter that “this movement is completely ALIVE”, calling for a focus on the courage of millions of women who have spoken out once morest violence rather than on legal battles, won or lost.
Ruth Glenn wants to see in the lawsuit a “reminder of the work that we still have to do”. “It’s a perfect example of a case that influences a culture,” she explains.
