Just personally, I can’t judge that sort of thing too harshly. I’m pretty sure if I suddenly had 500 million dollars and was entirely surrounded by people who were devoting 100% of their time and energy into stroking my ego, I’d burn through it at least as fast, if not faster. Wealth and fame are poison to an emotionally healthy mind.
On the one hand, absolutely. On the other hand, $10,000 or more on wine a month makes me want to hoist my own black flag, or turn full Robespierre, or something. Visceral reaction.
A normal person, no. But Depp…not normal.
Been a few years but there was a suit where Depp was suing his business manager because of his financial situation, and the manager counter suing says he had been trying for a long time to curb Depp’s maniacal spending habits. such as his having 30 grand a month in French wine flown in.
According to TMG, Depp spent more than $75 million to buy and furnish 14 residences, including an entire village in France. Depp is now[ trying to unload the town], which features a church, a restaurant and several houses, [for $63 million].
Which nothing whatsoever to do with him being right or wrong in this trial, just that he cannot seem to manage his money very well.
You don’t need to cut someone’s throat for spending $30,000 a month on wine. Their liver will do it for you. Same for their bank account, really - we need more millionaires like Johnny Depp, because they’re really bad at staying millionaires. We need more wastrels and fewer Sacklers.
Agreed. It’s not like a doctor or a lawyer trying to get their professional reputation, or their license to practice restored. He only needs to win the public opinion verdict to get back to work, and he may have done so already.
He’s not drinking it most of it. He’s a collector filling up an impressive wine cellar.
Or, y’know, more 90% tax brackets and fewer multimillionaires. But at this point I’m an angry old man ranting at late-stage capitalism, so I’ll back off the hijack.
Apparently he has a net worth in excess of $100 million despite having squandered several times that amount in recent years. Somebody who could waste that kind of money can certainly waste the rest of it but right now he doesn’t seem to be poor.
I knew a couple who won a bit over a million dollars in a lottery and lived like they’d won a billion. He bought a classic car right off the bat. He didn’t want the car sitting out, so he hired a contractor to build a garage. Thing is they were renting their house.
I was at a party at their place where they had a gallon ziplock bag of cocaine on the coffee table.
Their landlord found out about the garage and evicted them (they were month to month). I lost track of them for awhile, but eventually they were arrested after she broke/entered her parents’ home to steal a coin collection after they’d run out of money. The coins were rare enough that a coin dealer recognized some from a police report.
Was it a multi-unit place or single dwelling? I would think, if this was soon enough after winning, though I’m assuming it wasn’t, as soon as eviction was on the table, it would have made more sense to buy the house rather than lose the garage.
It was a small two bedroom home in a very nice location, owned by a guy not interested in selling. He only became aware of the garage due to the wild parties. Landlord lived about an hour drive away.
More on the ACLU and Heard:
It’s better to be smart than lucky.
I work with a lady who is so happy that she got pulled off Aquaman 2, though is it because they felt she’s guilty or just because of all of the controversy? She also says that this is “a reason not to believe all women” which is 
in my book. She’s a solid Depp fan, so…
Does that mean “don’t believe any women” or “don’t believe some women”? It’s a perfectly good reason not to believe some women, and not at all a reason not to believe all women. And if she means don’t believe any women then she must believe she is lying.
She means “don’t believe some women”-I persoanlly believe but verify (as in I’ll check on what their particular situation is) all women, which seems the best course.
It’s still a ridiculous straw man though. In the years since #MeToo has gathered momentum, I don’t recall anyone being condemned on the unsupported accusation of a single person. It’s always multiple victims coming forward with similar stories.
She believes that because Heard has apparently been untruthful during this whole affair (I haven’t been paying close attention) she shouldn’t be believed about what Depp has done.
I’d be happy if it meant that it was cancelled altogether, but that’s just because the first one (and most DC properties) was so terrible.
First,
But as far as “believe women”, I feel the opposite. I think it shows that if a woman is lying, then their story will fall apart.
It is so much easier for me, I don’t believe anybody without confirmation, men and women are equally capable of deceit. In this case I don’t see much to carry over into most real world situations, very few people are as rich and spoiled as those two.