Depp v Heard: Trial By Social Media?
#AmberHeardIsAnAbuser; #AmberIsALiar; #AmberTurd – these are just some of the hashtags circling the Twittersphere in recent weeks in response to the ongoing case of Depp v Heard. Despite the harrowing accounts of abuse from both sides and the gravity of such allegations, the internet has seemingly reached a consensus, deciding upon a cynical and cavalier dismissal of Amber Heard’s alleged victimhood. The countless memes, SNL parodies and TikTok impressions instead suggest that we have completely lost track of the severity of such allegations, raising concerns regarding the misinformation of abuse and suppression of victimhood in a post-Me-Too world.
It is undeniable that the narrative of this trial has been substantially shaped and, to a certain extent, distorted by social media. Accusations of domestic abuse can be traced back to 2016 wherein Heard first publicly accused Johnny Depp in the aftermath of filing for divorce. Following this, she successfully filed for a restraining order against him. Depp’s team were prompt in issuing a statement claiming the falsity of Heard’s allegations, stating that she was “attempting to secure a premature financial resolution by alleging abuse”. It is important to note, however, that these allegations only began to gain traction after the Harvey Weinstein scandal was unveiled in 2017 – the public was presented with the harsh reality that powerful men within Hollywood had the capacity to abuse women and get away with it, evading all consequences. Depp therefore fell into this category, as a powerful man in Hollywood, and people began to take Heard’s accusations more seriously. It was in this context that Heard wrote her op-ed in 2018, published in The Washington Post headlined “I spoke up against sexual violence — and faced our culture’s wrath. That has to change,”. Despite not being explicitly referred to by name, Heard labelling herself as a “public figure representing domestic abuse” insinuated her tumultuous relationship with Depp. Three months following this, in 2019, Depp filed a $50 million defamation lawsuit against Heard who then countersued for $100 million in 2021. The public response to Depp v Heard has highlighted an evident bias in favour of Depp.
This overwhelming anti-Heard sentiment, however, is striking in light of the 2018 case in which Depp sued the Sun Newspaper for libel and the London High Court found allegations that he was a “wife beater” to be “substantially true”. Why is it that the public continues to believe Depp’s innocence when 14 instances of abuse were substantiated, with the judge accepting that Depp put Heard “in fear of her life”? Whilst it is evident that Depp v Heard is a case of mutual abuse, the extensive catalogue of evidence against both parties is not something that can be simply overlooked. However, public perceptions have distorted this case into a largely one-sided relationship of abuse. The highly publicised nature of this case has damaging effects with regard to victims, particularly abused women, speaking out about their experiences – acting as a deterrent from them coming forward if they believe they will be mocked and belittled for telling their story. From the hairstyles she wears to her mannerisms when she speaks, Heard is systematically ridiculed online, with her every move being subject to scrutiny. This can be interpreted as a form of harassment and the treatment of Heard throughout the course of this trial has been equated to that of a “modern-day witch trial” (Vogue, 2022).
It seems that society is consumed by the need to paint one singular party as the ‘villain’ and the other as the ‘victim’. There is a distinct inability from a public standpoint to accept the ambiguities of this case – the fact that compelling evidence of abuse and violence exists on both sides of the relationship has been altogether disregarded. Depp’s public image as a beloved, three-time Oscar nominee inevitably acts in his favour as people are less willing to paint him in a negative light and instead grasp at straws to prove his innocence and depict him as the ‘hero’. In reality, a tidy antagonist-protagonist narrative in cases of domestic abuse is unrealistic and often impossible to achieve.
Depp v Heard is ultimately a ‘trial by social media’, threatening the legitimacy of the judicial system by highlighting that we live in a world where people turn to social media as an indicator of the truth, irrespective of the decision of the court. The vilification and online harassment of Amber Heard throughout the course of this trial has illustrated how the flow of information online can be weaponised into creating a damaging, misinformed consensus. Put simply, allegations of sexual assault and domestic abuse should not be fodder for entertainment and social media content, regardless of whether such allegations have been substantiated.