Camille Vasquez Catches Amber Heard Using Edited Photo -- A Lawyer Explains
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 кві 2024
- Patreon: / runkleofthebailey
Locals: runkleofthebailey.locals.com/
BTC address: bc1qdqzpz6ny6w35qyl2rnasshjm60jvwcjgllwcay
All comments for information only. Do not take anything as legal advice--if you have a legal issue, contact a lawyer directly so that you can received advice tailored to your situation. All views expressed are solely those of the creator.
The fact that Amber thinks we are all that stupid really speaks to her delusion and arrogance. Its obviously the same photo, and AH obviously needs serious psychological help.
I agree Amber believes she can gaslight us ..
Narcissistic sociopath. She scares the crap out of me.
I have stated every single day of this trial that AH must think we are all morons.
She needs exorcism.
I agree with you. She needs help and she shouldn't be encouraged. if she has BPD there is no medication for it, it will be years of treatment and part of that is taking responsibility for her actions. This isn't helping her.
I’m a graphic designer and I did the same test as you in Photoshop the day this happened. It’s pixel for pixel the same exact photo (after resizing the larger photo down a bit). I even went so far as to take the non-manipulated photo and adjusted the saturation (bump the reds, etc) and I was able to recreate nearly the same effect as she did.
I really hope JD's team is able to bring this up again, because that is crazy.
I am also. If you were doing this, wouldn't you have added swelling to the eye underneath and on top, making the eye look puffy and the opening smaller than the other? I think whoever did this could only change the saturation and didn't know how to do any detail manipulation.
Digital illustrator here. I immediately noticed they were the same photo (her hair wisps are exactly the same in both photos). The more egregious one is the supposed injury in the picture of her hair near her left temple. There are signs of digital manipulation to make it look like there was bruising. Without the original image file to review though, I can't say for certain. But if you look at the hair near the scalp, there are strands that are darkened near the areas where there appears to be bruising.
@@ArtfullyMusingLaura Yep, this is sloppy half-hearted manipulation to try and fabricate evidence by someone who doesn't know how to fully use an editing suite or software. They did the easiest and fastest thing and submitted it.
@@ArtfullyMusingLaura not if you're trying to limit the editing, you really don't want to get caught for that. And she also might not know how to do that since she's not a photographer or graphic designer or anything like that.
"I've never edited a photograph." - that statement coming from any person with social media of any kind, not even counting the fact she's an actor, is so unbelievably stupid it kills her credibility yet again. Even worse than saying she wouldn't know how to send a video to someone.
No, she was counting on other people not knowing there's Wi-Fi on planes.
doesnt know how to post videos and has never edited a photo?
please.
Laughable
But the pledged monies are actually next level... how in the f did she thought she could get away with it.
I was just saying the same when I noticed your comment. Men aren't as guilty in this regard, but any woman that says she's never edited a photo that is under 45 or 50 is a liar.
Well apparently lying in court is not much of a big deal. Amber lied again and again but nothing happened to her because of it. Until now. 😅
Amber is very good at using weesle words to gaslight people.
"I didnt punch you, I hit you, you're not hurt"
"I didnt edit the photo"
Pledge = donation
The producers should pledge her salary
Good specific examples 👍
And she didn’t just say “…I didn’t edit the photo” she said:
“…I’ve never edited a photograph.”
Like a psychopath almost
Narcissist gaslighting ...lock her up..the monster
😂
@@genevievefabius6998 😄😄😄👍
It makes me sick how she has gotten away with this. She flagrantly ignored the court’s order to turn over devices in a timely manner and where’s the metadata?
She worked so hard hiding her lies, it’s really disturbing the lengths she’s taken
Johnny has a Meta data expert tomorrow I can’t wait
It will probably be addressed in the jury instructions. The judge will tell the jury that she didn't turn in all her devices, and they can take that info account when looking at the photos she did turn in. The judge will prob also tell them that this is a sanction on Amber's team because they defied a court order.
@@calliew311 what happens if they get a sanction?
@@OHiYOGiRl That is great news! If you don't mind me asking, where do they post the upcoming witnesses?
I thought the fact she said “I’ve never edited a photo” was absolutely an absurd thing to ask us to believe. Who hasn’t edited a photo on their iPhone??! Not in a bad way, but we’ve all changed, cropped, brightened dim lighting etc. Thanks for all the analysis!
I have edited on an android and I am not extremely tech savvy!
Yeah, I mean that’s 100% perjury! How tf is she getting away with this?!
I noticed those exact words too. Also, she is very ‘image conscious’ so to say she has ‘never’ edited a photo is too far beyond belief. Just like the ‘I wouldn’t know how to send a video’. Is just absurd. She can send johnny copies of the recordings between them so he can listen himself to it, but she doesn’t know how to send a video? Makes no sense at all.
Right, I edit probably 90% of my photos, most of the time it’s just cropping to center a pic, but I also blur background if people I don’t know are in it, I blur faces of children I don’t have expressed permission to post etc.
Exactly. Camille could have pushed AH a bit more at that moment to highlight to the jury that she was blatantly lying about a significant piece of evidence.
I am a photo editor & cannot believe she tried to say these are different 😳 she really believes we are all idiots
I’m a professional photographer and I can tell you without any effort that they are two edits of the same photo. Fly-away Hair strands are in identical positions which is impossible to achieve in photos even a few seconds apart.
Ps - I posted this in the first minute of the video, as I’ve been saying this since the day in the trial they were first shown
I'm surprised we haven't had a professional editor as an expert witness. The metadata should tell the real story, right?
I concur regarding that being the same photo and the identical positioning of the hair strands. With 25+ years of professionally manipulating photos in Photoshop as a graphic designer under my belt, there's no way the hair is exactly in the same place even with a burst of consecutive photos. The color edit took me seconds to duplicate by simply increasing the saturation by 30%.
I'm thinking maybe IOTillet Wright could have edited the pictures, he's a photographer, and he would do anything for AH.
@@littlemissprickles meta data mysteriously missing.
Hopefully this will come up tomorrow in rebuttal. Not over yet.
Does ANYONE believe she’s “… never edited a photograph.”?
Maybe she doesn't use edit and filter synonymously.
I believe much the same as her not smoking weed since she was 18. LOL.
I mean, I’ve taken about 5 selfies in my entire life (not to post on SM, btw 😂), and even *I* know how to and have edited a photo. Her saying “I’ve never edited a photo” is honestly asinine. But she also thinks “pledged” and “donated” mean the same thing. So either she’s a bold-faced, manipulative liar, or she’s not intelligent. I’ll let you take it from there. 😬😉
Right. She might have just pledged the photo.
No. No one.
Amber is so crazy it almost makes her act like a toddler denying he ate the cake with frosting all over his face. Very bad acting, very bad lying. The knife, the pocket knife, the lies just pile up and frankly it is just freaking sad.
Not almost, it is exactly the same! Your analogy summing up AH nailed it! What gets me the most is that experts have given her a "professional diagnosis" which explains & excuses her behavior. One even said that AH didn't choose her personality comparing her to someone having gotten diabetes?
The fact is, no one ever called out that frosting all over AH's face by giving her a mirror forcing her to face her lies, back when she was supposed to learn that her child's fantasy world is not the world everyone else lives in. She should have been guided to grow up like the rest of us had to do. Instead, everyone around her enabled her petulant behavior & continues to do so.
JD is seriously lucky that he got away with his life & mind in tact. Praying that JD's learned this very painful & expensive lesson as not to ever be sucked in again by another such creature.
Heard is pathetic.
I went on her twitter just to see what was going on after the verdict. Her sycophants are out on full force. They are really trying to spin this as a loss for women of ipv. Heard has seriously damaged that cause.
This explains why she’s not in more movies….she’s a horrible actor.
I'm a photographer. I immediately knew it was the same image when they appeared. The giveaway was the hair, lighting and shadow. The stands of hair sticking out never moved. The light source remained the same. You can see the hard light on her forehead and nose. The shadows in both photos indicate there is one light source coming from her above right. Turning on vanity lights would change the the position of the shadow. Light and shadows make or break photography. You need to know your light sources. It was a terrible lie.
As a photographer, literally it’s the same
photo. No new shadows, no new highlights, it’s exactly the same image frame with increased saturation, or at least an overall color correction toward red/orange hues. It’s humanly impossible to take the same photo twice unless you’re a human tripod; which in this case, AH may possibly be just that, a tool.
😂🤣😂
That's what I was thinking, if the difference is in the lights, how come the shadows are the same?
Gold 😂
I don't know about a tripod, but she certainly seems to be a garden tool.
As a human being with two working eyes, they are literally the same :). Doesn't take an expert to notice it.
She said “I’ve never edited a photo before”…….we’ve ALL edited a photo, at some point….this should be pounced on
Look at the list of rebuttal witnesses.
Yea, you've never edited a photo before...this one.
You're 100% right Ian. I'm a photographer and I've taken thousands of portrait shots of people. Even if the subject stays as still as possible, if I move the camera even the tiniest amount the resulting photo will be different, and absolutely will not line up exactly when compared semi-transparent like you have. Literally the only way for this to be possible would be for her to have had the camera/phone on a tripod or solid mount of some kind, stayed as still as possible, used a high-speed burst mode (at least 10 frames per second), while the light was changed/turned on remotely or by someone else. I find the likelihood of that to be very, very low.
It is an edited photo.
To say nothing of the fact that the light and shadow patterns are identical in spite of claims of aberrant light-sources.
And even they were able to do everything you state, adding or removing a light source will alter the shadows and reflections on her face. At best you’d also need one of those modern lamp that change colour, but they don’t change colour instantly…
It’s not even debatable, those two photos are 100% the same photo with a little saturation added.
The reason she didn't follow up with "who did edit these photos" is because she knows that's what the jury will automatically be thinking. If she doesn't follow up they will remain thinking that where if she did Amber would just say nobody. When you assume a conclusion you come to on your own, you're more sure of it than if someone suggest it. It's actuality very smart of her not to follow up
There’s no way the photo was taken later, every strand of hair is in the same place. She must be insane to think she can lie to the world and have everyone believe it 💩
What gets me is how the legal team never picked up on it. It's blindingly obvious
@@ishanr8697 her legal team know she lied 🤥 they have such a hard task defending her, you can tell she’s not been honest with them and it makes their job really hard
The highlight and shadows were in the same places. Even though her claim was it was different light-sources. You know, that thing that can't possibly happen.
Called gas lighting.
I proved this case was over the first week on The Amber Heard Playlist!!
1 million dollar question: can team JD call a digital photo expert witness to expose this lie explicitly? It would show perjury 100%
I honestly think they are finishing up their rebuttal tomorrow, so I didn’t see any photo expert on the list.😔
@@AnnaBellaBeth93 Maybe I'm biased in that I do have some background working with digital imagery, but if the jury has access to both images, I don't understand how anyone could fail to see with one hundred percent certainty that it's the same photo. Every strand of hair, every eyelash, every aspect of her face and posture, and even the highlights on her nose and forehead (which would _certainly_ be different if the lighting had changed), are in the exact same position. While it might certainly help for Johnny's team to draw attention to this, I sincerely hope the jury is smart enough to recognize this without an expert pointing it out.
@@AnnaBellaBeth93 they have the metadata expert , he should be able to testify that they are the same . Maybe Camille was simply getting her to say it wasn’t the same picture so she can get the expert to counter her. Better for an expert to make her out to be a liar than Johnnys lawyer .
There will be an expert.
@@AnnaBellaBeth93 Johnny has a metadata expert expected to testify.
Just to give a little insight, I was a juror here in Ontario and one of the things that was THE most important part of all testimony I heard was if there were any falsehoods given. If there were, I discounted all their testimony because it is not my job to figure out which parts are true and which are false....you took an oath to tell the truth.
Simply discounting testimony might not be sufficient. If they lied about something then the chances are that the exact opposite of what they claimed is actually what happened.
@@Paul-sj5dbnot always, I get what you mean though. But it’s not always that simple where just because A is a lie then B must be true.
A person can lie like Amber did and completely make up stuff, falsify events, or even exaggerate the truth. You can still be lying with just exaggeration and in that case it’s even more to my point of how it’s not always “ahh since you lied saying it didn’t happen then it must’ve happen”.
However I do agree with you both equally as both arguments are understandable. She’s right jurors aren’t there to decipher as you’re supposed to tell the truth however after a lie has been discovered you then could find out the truth based off what they decided to lie about so you’re argument can be right in certain situations but not always.
You make a great point. Jurors shouldn’t be tasked with sifting through testimony after blatant falsehoods have been proven to find out what they may “not” be lying about. As you said they’ve taken an oath to tell the truth so they have no one to blame but themselves if they choose to lie & those lies are then exposed. It’s all about credibility.
In addition to manipulating photos, Heard is by her own admission skilled with makeup. Faking a bruise with makeup is trivially easy, so once she's been proven to lie on one point you have to question everything.
it's much easier to fake a bruise then cover a real one
@@LA-mz1dd Agreed - skin tone is the hardest tone to paint - it gives many artists nightmares.
Her massive slip up when she described what she did with her makeup and how she applied it and accidentally told everyone she used a bruise kit absolutely, she lied under oath and submitted edited photos and denied it. the court will come down hard on her
She even left her bruise kit laying on the coffee table in the “ice cream nod off” photo! I hope and pray that the jury can all agree and that truth prevails here. I also hope that they are all confident in the verdict because I can only imagine how hurt I would be if I was a juror in this case and then come upon all of this evidence that wasn’t permitted after ruling differently :(
It is super easy to accuse a MAN of abuse if you are female l think its so hard for a MAN to stand up and admit that he has been abused
l am a female (we have your number Amber) you are on the Karm train l hope you get a charged
After this trial I don’t even understand why lying under oath matters. She seems like all she does is lie and I haven’t seen anything happen
Is that a separate trial? Does the court system in the USA require a purgery trial to be held?
@@DarisLancaster if she's found she's purgured herself, those will be separate charges. She could also go to jail for it.
It would have to be done as it's own trial. They have to finish this out before any charges for perjury can be pursued. This trial is exclusively for the defamation claims made by JD. After this is over they can comb through this entire trial and gather evidence and do further investigation and put together a case and if they have enough compelling evidence they can take it to trial.
I'm sure someone will put together a case. Hopefully they can put together enough evidence because it seems highly likely based on what we've seen. Unfortunately perjury can be difficult as they have to prove that AH intentionally and knowingly lied while under oath.
l agree with you the Judge has let her DRONE on and on and Elaine OMG dreadful
I love how Camille Vasquez has the incredible ability to show the evidence of truth without actually saying it out loud, letting us draw our own conclusions! She's fantastic imo.
You stole those lines Lolol!
100% Camille is a warrior for truth.
Yes! You worded that perfectly! It's pretty darn cool how she does that!
1,000%!💯💯👍✌️
Yes, Evidence… Not just stories
Amber had a other slip up too. When Camille brought up the photos from the train where J.D obviously had the black eye, Amber quickly retorted that this photo was edited
8 months later this popped up in my recommends again. Still hilarious to me that she tried to pass these 'photos' off as two different photos taken on different days. It's laugh out loud funny that she presented this as evidence in court.
A year later for me.
Runkle has been reviewing the trial transcript.
Being someone who does digital image manipulation... the chances of her having EVERYTHING identical, her hair, her eyes, everything, after moving to turn on the light it's impossible to get an identical image after moving. Her eyelids are in the exact same position. And the shadows haven't changed. Which would change from an overhead light to a light coming from infront of her.
I can't help but think about all those people making stopmotion animation, with specific camera and monitor rigs with transparency layers to match the previous frame.
Amber is quite frankly an unbelievable talent.
Even looking at her flyaway hair and hair near her neck... all exactly in the same position.
Even if someone else turned the light on, she would have move slightly.
Yes! Not only that, but anyone who has ever tired to take a perfect selfie knows that the second photo you take will never be the exact same distance from the camera as the first. You might think it is, but by the time your turn your phone around to look at the photos, one photo will have the subject of the photo much larger (closer to camera), while the subject will be much smaller (further away from the camera) in the other photo. It’s just not possible.
The hair gives everything away.
I've been a professional digital artist working in video games for 27 years now. I live in Photoshop all day long. I have just overlayed these 2 images with one another and I can honestly tell you that they are both the EXACT same image. 100%. One has had it's saturation increased with some added contrast in order to punch that 'bruise' out more - pardon the pun.
It appears she's been lying under oath over and over. Shouldn't there be legal consequences for that?
The same thing occurred with the 2 'incident' photos from May & December. Camille showed the 2 photos on her 2nd cross I believe. They showed the EXACT same wine spill on the floor but they were allegedly from 2 different incidents. No way the wine spilled and left the exact same pattern on a hard surface floor from two completely separate events!
The most egregious photo manipulations are those that were supposedly taken the evening of the May 21 with different hairstyles and different jewelry. It would mean she curled her hair and changed her jewelry after the police left that evening.🙄
I caught that as well ✅
@@c8fear1 yet she met him in her pajamas with her hair all undone. 🤣
@@c8fear1 haha, true! It's going to be GLORIOUS when JD's photo expert testifies tomorrow
Curling hair and changing jewelry is not difficult nor time consuming. It is entirely plausible that she did so, as you suggest.
@@elizabethdunbar7160 🤣
I thought she said "I've never edited a photograph" which would be an even more ridiculous claim.
Exactly
I think she said that too. Makes sense with how she over exaggerates every little thing. She just can’t stop herself from lying.
Yeah. Just like when she said she does not know how to send a video to TMZ
Right lol
The speed with which she snaps back with a lie is astonishing
I can't imagine how a person can lie so.
She lies so much and expect people to believe her words.
Ian, brace the door behind you in case Amber tries to break in and throw a vodka bottle at you. 😱
I've been taking portraits for the last 3 years, and achieving 2 pictures that are exactly the same is a physical impossibility. Even with a tripod, camera on burst shot, and someone else turning a light on between burst shots. If you're on your own, using a phone, then it'll never happen. It absolutely busted my head when I watched this live. It's the clearest case of manipulation I've seen with a photo and was very frustrated that more wasn't made of this.
Yes! Any kid can manipulate a picture better!
It was so obvious that I'm assuming Camille expected the jury to make up their minds themselves. It's much more compelling if the jury decides for themselves that Amber's lying her ass off than if someone tells them she is.
I know I for one didn't need a long ass explanation to know they were the same photo and I doubt the jury does either.
True
If I remember correctly the witness list indicates Depp's team are bringing in a metadata analyst today as an expert witness so they may be waiting for that. I'm not sure if refuting this image would come under metadata though so I might be wrong here.
@@ZeekCannon I agree. If I was on the jury I would be convinced she's faking the whole thing just by her claiming these two images are different photos. And "I never edited a photo" this day and age? Cmon, you didn't put a filter on even ONE pic on insta? Really?
I’ve noticed that when people are lying, they not only avoid direct, unambiguous yes or no answers like the plague, they also tend to be overly emphatic in their denials, (e.g. “Absolutely not,” and “I’ve _never_ edited a photograph.”) This dramatic emphasis also shows up in non-responses like “That’s ridiculous,” or “Who would want that?”
It’s not always a clear indicator, as people who are telling the truth but are afraid people won’t believe them will sometimes overcompensate in a similar way, but in the case of someone being confronted with undeniable proof that they’re lying like AH, it’s very noticeable.
Pretending these were 2 different photos was insulting our intelligence.
I can tell you right now any woman in her right mind would not have Yellow bulbs in a vanity mirror. One would use daylight bulbs for the most natural light. Geez! She lies!!
I thought the same thing.
Oh c'mom! Any teenager can see it is the same photo! All Instagram influencers are more skilled in image modification than Amber. It is pathetic that she thinks she can fool anyone. She thinks she is so smart!
I am not a pro, but I used photoshop for a long time, and when they put those photos next to each other it made it clear. The shadows, the hair, her position... I was sure it was the same picture edited, it's obvious even without testing. But nothing happenned to amber yet for this lie and falsified evidence....
Do you really believe that? Do you think she honestly thinks that picture will fool people? She had 2 options- 1)admit it's been doctored and open that can of worms or 2) lie..lie..lie.
She essentially had 2 bad choices and she chose the least bad option. She's not trying to fool anybody, she's desperate in the moment.
I agreed with Runkle on the wording "No, I never edited a photo." She may as well have put an emphasis on the *I* in that statement because it was so obvious.
Insulting the jury’s intelligence!
Any teenager can also photoshop better
Well spotted Ian, and we all know the Heard team was sanctioned for failing to produce photos for data analysis. 1.5 years and DID NOT COMPLY. Thanks for this.
I would like to make the point: if I just said from the beginning that these are filters of the same picture... honestly, nobody would care. Honestly. It would be weird BUT dismissed. It's the fact she INSISTS that they're different photographs that this is a big deal.
This is Amber's theme. She REFUSES to confront reality, she denies anything she is OBVIOUSLY, demonstrably lying about. It makes her untrustworthy, an unreliable witness, and makes any of her truth worthlessly lost in her crying wolf.
I'd have just said, "In the original photo, the light washed-out the bruise, so I enhanced it." no lying necessary, enhanced photos are used as evidence every day. Amber only thinks in layers of schemes so she cant just tell a simple, believable truth.
@@dbergerac9632 exactly!
She is a pathological lier. Reminds me the woman in the film Gone Girl. Staging and preparing the crime for a long time, recording audios, creating a crime in order to blame him. There are lines and actions that she copies the psycho character of the film.
She is that and probably a few additional diagnosis.
I saw a video recently where they compared scenes in Gone Girl to AH testimony and claims. Spot on
Yeah, the bottle, I think came from that. I really believe she planned it from before they got together. They say that she bought all of his favorite books in first edition and bought his favorite music and learned about it. She studied him and learned exactly what triggered him and lied to her counselor for 3 years and hoaxed 20 photos even just for one incident and it is proven hoaxed.
Amber Heard: Done, Gurl!
@@angiemoore5973 yeah it was
When you're taking a picture of yourself, it's literally impossible to the exact same picture 2 times in a row. If she took the first picture, and then moved in any way to turn the light on, then she could not achieve the exact same image moments later. If you look at the background, there is no difference between the green and white areas of the wall behind her. Not only did she get the exact background correctly, she got the same exact angle and not one piece of her hair is out of place. There's no way in million years, that she or someone else could take the exact same picture, even moments apart from eachother
You couldn't get the same photo in a fraction of a second.
Yeah her hair is exactly the same in both.
We know this, the lawyers know this, the judge knows, the jury know, literally the entire world can see she is lying. She has lost all credibility for the rest of her pathetic life.
There should be meta data inside the file that tells a lot more.
@@mcollins630 Metadata can actually be removed from the image as well. But it should be there - given the terrible manipulation attempt - I'm betting they aren't smart enough to remove the time and date stamp.
As a photographer, I can assure you it is the same picture. You can pose the same but flyaway hairs answer to no one, there is no way it would be in the same position. I think Vasquez could have presented the argument the same way you did by layering the photos and demonstrating to the jury the pictures are the same and then asking her the question again as a ''mercy question'' she would most definitely lie again and play herself. Job done.
Caught red handed lying under oath.
I was an artists model, and it is impossible to get back into the exact same position after taking a break and moving, even after marking the positions of the limbs, etc . You might get close, but no way is the pose ever exactly the same.
And the camera would have to be held in exactly the same spot, too.
So was i. And you're TOTALLY spot on ....its impossible!
Even if you try to memorise your position , direction, and negative space around you , you just can't get it right .
Even with 20 artists around you giving you direction, you still only emd uo with 'pretty close, that'll do. 😂.
Lying about being a victim of abuse is heinous. AH's lawyers insinuating that lawyer-client confidentiality demonstrates guilt, is pretty bad. Submitting edited photographic evidence, claiming it's unedited is pretty bad.
Agreed. The fact that her council didn't compel her to hand it over suggests to me that they knew it was altered. Makes me wonder how many lawyers shield their clients in this manner
"I've NEVER edited a photo"
Um, 2022?!? Okay!!!?!
@@bakerfresh as a model, it’s doubtable! But I thought it was “*I* didn’t edit that photo” or something.
@@RG001100 Now..she could be responding to those, but she more strangely said, "No, I've never edited a photo."
I totally agree, except........ Amber's legal teams job is to defend her, whether she is guilty or not. However, if they KNEW the photos were edited and knowingly submitted false evidence. That is another thing. Whether they knew would have to be proven. With that said.........I wonder, how could they NOT know. The two pictures are clearly the exact same picture, but with some light editing. In my mind, that should have led them to think all of the pictures needed to be checked. Since there is no real metadata on any of the photographic evidence, I'd think it was pretty clear all of the photos were/are even more sketchy than they appear (which is pretty sketchy). I'm not sure I would have touched it with a 50 foot pole. But then, I don't really need my 15 minutes of fame. eeek! lol
Wonder if we can pressure the Attorney General of Virginia to investigate her for perjury. Digital crime is going to become common if they don't send a message.
It's interesting that when Amber was asked if she "testified" that the only difference between the two photos was that the light was on her answer was, "It appears to be." Shouldn't it just be, "yes"?
Lmao it’s literally the SAME PHOTO!!! Just look at the hair, what a liar she is
I'm an IPV survivor. It's been 30+ years. DV laws were in their infancy. I supported AH at the start of the trial. Myself and every other survivor who experienced the level of violence she described in Australia? No. Absolutley a full on no. Photos of everything but her "injuries". Yet JD produces evidence of the injuries we would expect. Had she truly been sexually assaulted by a "broken bottle"? Would explain his wound. But no. She claims he severed it smashing a phone. She infuriates me.
I am sorry you went through that. I am a survivor as well and I agree 100%
3 time survivor, I stated from beginning to my family she was abused as a child, which her sister Whitney testified to. There are certain things you do and do not do, your goal is to not poke the bear, which she clearly belittled him, antagonisd him, told him repeatedly to fight back and not walk away. She stated she hit him. A slap, a punch, a kick are all hits. She took her being abused as a child out on her husband. She stated she did not want his money, she's right, she wanted to hit him where it hurt the most, his reputation. The photos are another issue, she takes them, but none are as important as her bloody feet, or the marks on her neck. These two statements got me, held hostage for 3 days, yet never asked security to leave, never asked manager Tara for help, and then took 2 pills to go to sleep after he allegedly told her he would kill her. She is so full of.... ugh, she has spit on every survivor of abuse.
❤️
@@debzazulia4441 Exactly. I do believe some of what she is saying is true. But the physical? No.There are so many dynamics to this issue. This trial has only scratched the surface.
@@NRJIID He is also from a child abuse background, being it was his mother, he would shrink and try to get away, stands to reason when Amber would scream at him, he would try to get away, flashbacks would probably surface for him. The only part I believe is the yelling and screaming on both parties.
That photo was the same photo, but different filters. It was the exact same photo. You can tell just by looking at it that those two photos are the exact same.
Even her saying she has never edited a photo in her life seems completely unbelieveable.
Professional photographer here! I saw these images and did the same thing. I stacked them in photoshop, and they are exactly the same. I can take a burst of photos at 1/1000th of a second, and two images taken less than a second apart will usually not stack as well as this - micro camera movement/ shake is almost impossible to avoid.
It's so obvious that it's the same photo that it's almost insulting that someone may think we'd believe they're different photos.
Also, just for fun. Take the less saturated picture, increase the saturation slider a bit and.... you get the other picture. They literally just increased the saturation. It's amazing how lazy the manipulation is.
This shows how broken our system is..preventing the jury from considering and viewing for them self is an injustice. The rebuttal witness was not allowed to give his expert assessment is so wrong.
There was reason
What reason?
Someone needs to make a counter tallying up the total amount of times Amber lied and perjured herself under oath from the ENTIRE trial.....which leads me to a legal question; since she lied SO many times, does each one count as its own charge or what? how does that work? Thanks for all your hard work and sacrifice!
Of course she didn't edit the photos. She had someone else do it. Plausible deniability.
On another note: maybe she did give other photos, faked, and her lawyers refuse to use them because they can tell or know they are fake.
The problem is that she testified to another light source. Since the shadows match up, she would knowingly be lying here. Even if she had "somebody else" do it, she claimed under oath to things that could not have happened.
she didnt even try to make her admit it. just show the pics and let her keep on lying. AH damaged herself instead by insisting as people watched her in disbelief. and i think she even thought it was a win for her. like "yay, she didnt get me to admit anything"
The o es she submitted but they won't use? Lol. Smart team. No we won't actively throw a nail board in front of this car. Lol (carcrash)
she wasn't ask if she edited the photos. she asked isn't it true that these are the same photos. to which she replied no, one was when the vanity lights were on
@@adityajain1278 Not true. Camille did ask her if she edited and changed the saturation of the photos. 1:20
Even to the naked eye, anyone can see that they are the EXACT SAME photograph. She would not be able to remain that still when someone else changed the lighting. Also, if the person who changed the lighting moved back to take a second photo, they would not be able to take the photo in the exact same position. I'm sure an expert in photography could prove they are the same in the exact same way that Runkle has just done. Her lawyers really aren't checking the evidence are they?
Not a single strand of hair out of place.
No. We are all dummies and AH is the smartest person in the world. Complete sarcasm btw.
She didn’t “touch” it. Someone else did.
Not just that. Even putting the identical position aside, her claim was they were two different light-sources, and anyone who took high-school art class could tell you that's not the case.
So is she/are they (lawyers) that stupid to show both pictures or did they had to show also the unedited pic?
We miss you at the trial! You are the best. Thank you for all you did.
"I've NEVER edited a photo."
-Like never did drugs...okay some drugs
-Never hit Johnny..okay that once. (Caught in audio several times admitting hitting, but semantically saying it wasn't a punch.
No criminal record...okay criminal record...abuse. drugs.
OMG!!! I want to open my bedroom window and scream into the night, "THE LIGHT SOURCE IS THE SAME IN BOTH PHOTOS!!!". Look at where the light source is coming from. Look at her forehead. You can't switch lights, AND maintain the same light/shadow with the light coming from a different source that's in a different location, with 2 different colored bulbs. That's in addition to all the other BS you called her out on. Great video, I just couldn't stop thinking about that one thing, so I came back to get it out.
Years ago, my mom suffered DV. She was beat so badly( along with attempted strangulation) that her eyes were swollen shut. Her bruises progressed thru so many shades of purple, green and yellow. Bruises are not some cute pink blush.
Heard ( whom I had never heard of at all until this trial) is doing a disservice to the abused. I want what is fair. What I believe is fair is for her NOT to be a public spokesperson for any products, nor organizations and to no longer work in the film industry. She needs long term serious therapy and then needs to seriously apologize to all she has harmed. Additionally someone needs to be a guardian angel for that baby she has.
I am sorry to hear what your mom’s been through.
I agree with you 100% about AH’s punishment
@@090403created TY
This kinda explains why her own team was working so hard to discredit HER OWN evidence. 🤨
So glad you've done this. It was so obvious and I was thinking can't they just overlay it to check. How disgusting that this has been admitted to court. Just as bad that the English courts didnt question her 'evidence'. I'm English 🤦♀️.
Finally JD is getting his chance to voice his side.
The small hair strands, static, background, pose, literally EVERYTHING is the same. She is not smart to think people actually believe this BS
Not just that, what people without knowledge of lighting don't realise is that turning lights in front will DRAMATICALLY change the shadows on her face and hotspots. It'll also make the background darker as the face will get brighter light because it's closer to the source than the background.
Rest as you said. She has openly lied. Even if she gets away with it, I hope studios and directors see this and realise that she's a liar and not work with her.
@@akashmakkar7187 I 100% agree with you. I think Johnny got what he wanted regardless and that's the truth is out and I think he feels better knowing he stood up. Most men don't because people always side with the women. Men get abused too and he just proved that!
Wow... I mean, we already knew it, but I'm surprised she's that bold to lie while being broadcasted live to the world on many platforms.
she didnt even try to make her admit it. just show the pics and let her keep on lying. AH damaged herself instead by insisting as people watched her in disbelief. and i think she even thought it was a win for her. like "yay, she didnt get me to admit anything"
She probably doesn't think the jury would realize how light works
She thinks she's smarter than everyone else.
Camille is my hero ❤️ she is NOT believing the lies. My mom always told me when I was little “the truth will set you free” and it’s so true. If you always tell the truth your soul isn’t bogged down and your head isn’t full of lies you have to keep up with
Wow Ian you make the legal process so interesting I can’t help watching and especially from a fire arms perspective. in New Zealand we have a very similar legal system inherited from the Brits. Fascinating stuff. Please keep producing!
She has comited perjury multiple times. Her experts too have come to tell any lie she's like with no basis.
I have heard that people rarely get charged with perjury, and after seeing her get away with all this, what's the point then if there's no incentive to being honest on the court.
I would also like to know what responsibility falls on her legal team for submitting manipulated or duplicate photos into evidence. Is this considered an ethical violation? Are lawyers expected to vet or authenticate the evidence their client provides? Obviously not everyone has the luxury of defending a client that’s innocent, but I feel like supporting straight-up lies with obviously false evidence goes several steps beyond pointing out instances of reasonable doubt or presenting their client in the most favorable light.
@@anondecepticon
IIRC from Nick Rekieta's stream, the worst that Heards lawyers will get hit with is likely a sizable fine and a substantial number of hours in required ethics training. This trial, from what I understand, isn't bad enough that they would risk disbarment
@@willpestka2745 That's to bad the should have to pay. Even my 8 year grandson would have seen that the pictures were the same
Everything she accused Johnny of was straight up projection. The claim that everyone who spoke for him is biased and lying while her witnesses were all telling the truth is a joke. Especially since we saw how poorly her witnesses testified.
Most of the lawyer reactor/commentators I've watched have said that perjury is very seldom prosecuted and most people don't get in trouble for it. How can that be? If there's no legitimate consequence to lying under oath, what good is the oath at all?
@K STEELE finally someone saying out loud a question I’ve been asking myself for a while now. Not just with this case but with any case. People sit under oath and just lie without a worry in the world. Why is this ok? You’re exactly right what good is the oath and it almost makes me feel like what good is court if people can lie, knowingly lie and not a thing happen to them. If the judicial system would make a believer out of someone about lying in court then I bet the lies was be cut way back. Wouldn’t stop the lies but I bet it would cut way back if there were actually consequences for it.
I sat in court and watch a State Patrol officer blatantly lie. No repercussions. That's not how I was brought up. It goes against everything I believe in.
Right ..!!! That's ligit the whole basis of this case. Bizarre
Deterrence, similar to most gun owners who open carry their firearms.
It’s bizarre. The whole system is based on honour but all the sociopaths have ascended to the top and have no honour. Then we have rules to prevent accusations of lying and don’t punish those who do lie.
That is awesome to hear. I wondered what lawyers did if they didn't trust their clients. The lawyers with morals that is. Great show.
The way her eyes are, in the pic, made me think it’s the same photo.
Awesome job Runkle!
And thank you for all the work you’ve been putting into this trial!
Missed you Runkle!
I'm surprised AH's team hasn't been held accountable by the judge for these pics and also the wine bottle on the ground photos...
I hope that she is held accountable as an example to others.
@@ediewall6360 exactly! She's not special, as much as she'd like to think she is, she needs to be punished for her multiple perjuries and falsification of proof... This is clownery and outright disrespectful to everyone especially the judge and jury
Maybe Camille is setting things up for a purjury charge, just in case anyone wants to pursue that. I think someone should. At first I didn't think it was worth it, but after seeing more of Ms. Heard, it's clear she is an utterly incorrigible liar and perjurer. She is an insult to the court!
Amber is doing exactly what Jussie Smollett did, though. Corrupt Chicago Machine got a call from Obama and dropped the charges, which led to a special prosecutor being appointed. In this case, there is a victim here to press charges, unlike in the Smollett case. I see something worse than perjury charges coming for Amber Heard & Company in this case.
I've been watching Emily Baker, it's really hard to catch her in perjury
I watch Emily, too. I just get the feeling things could possibly change regarding a perjury charge. Just a hunch, what do i know..🙃
It’s more important to damage her credibility.
@@cherylj7460 That's already been accomplished
Totaly true...you can never make the exactly same pose
She knew they were edited, but admitting that even ONE photo COULD have been edited opens the door to the possibility of ALL their photos being compromised. So she answered in a way that absolves her of any involvement.
When are they going to charge her with perjury? It's not just on one occasion, she has lied over and over and over again.
It's my understanding that they don't usually bring perjury charges in civil court. Also, that judge is extremely lazy. I don't think she's interested in this case at all.
when a liar says "I" didn't do something, they are often correct, they had someone doing it for them, in their stead. SO they could honestly say they did not do it. But it is a slippery elly sneaky dirty play on words.
Darn right. If she had a friend do it, she could pass a lie detector by saying "I didn't do it."
Didn't they also prove that both pics had the exact same time stamp? That would make it impossible for it to be two separate pics.
This was the moment I was 100% against her. Every strand of hair is in the same place, no way you move, get the light and turn back in the exact same spot
I thought it was a simple as this: She claims the lighting is different. The lighting isn't different. Her claim is false.
The shadows don't move or change in size. The highlights don't move or change in size. The lighting is exactly the same coming from the exact same source so it isn't lighting. If it's not lighting, it's editing.
As someone whose shot and edited photos professionally. Without having them in my possession I can still say very confidently that they are the same.
I have been a model for several years now, both in photography and live modelling for artists. I would say I am pretty good at holding poses for a long time, and yet when you look at the multiple frames a photographer would have taken at rapid speed there are always subtle differences. That is without me changing position, or moving around. There is no way she would have been able to create an identical photo such as this when she went to switch on lights and then got back into position. These are 100% edited.
Their expert testified that they were taken at the exact same hour, minute, and second. She definitely photoshopped it. It's impossible to turn a light on be in the EXACT same position with every single hair in place. It's clearly bogus. She lied under oath many times, this being just one of them. Spot on.
And this is part of why I've been on JD's side for many years. AH's evidence by itself doesn't stand to scrutiny. Especially when you compare it to the crazy stories she tells.
Her exact words were "I've never edited a photograph". Something I find hard to believe. Never added a filter? Never adjusted saturation?
Yeah, that struck me as an overcorrection. Which is a hallmark of a person caught in a lie.
@@astralminstrel she uses the old "I wouldn't even know how to do that" line a LOT when she's caught out.
Doesn't mean she did it herself, could have been someone else that did it for her. I personally never edited a photograph (as far as I remember)
Didn't a certain Joshua Drew testify if he found a photoshopped picture his testimony would be very different? Hmmm~ 🤔
Even I’ve done light filter editing for pics taken that turn out too dark
Her lawyers should be held to account for submitting these as evidence, this picture and the spilled wine one, which they submitted as proof of two separate incidents. They either fabricated evidence or agreed to submit evidence they knew was false.
Coming here after watching the witness testimony today. The defence got nailed and the cross examination was a flop because it opened the door for the witness to spill the beans on redirect.
Simply put, the shadows in the photo would change if a new light source were added - never mind that here eyes are exactly the same, never mind that the wisps of hair would be the same, her testimony makes it impossible. Given that this is material to the testimony, this is something that deserves to be pursued. In the interest of justice, criminal charges should be sought.
she didnt even try to make her admit it. just show the pics and let her keep on lying. AH damaged herself instead by insisting as people watched her in disbelief. and i think she even thought it was a win for her. like "yay, she didnt get me to admit anything"
I think the problem will be that there is no metadata, so you have no proof that the photo was altered other than expert testimony. Metadata would include the date and time stamps for the file. I think I saw a witness that will testify about metadata; I'm thinking it's about the lack of it. So we shall see, maybe tomorrow.
Not a photoshop expert, plated with it yes... but shadows from another light source would change a photo
@@ArtfullyMusingLaura interesting the Metadata is missing. How convenient
Not impossible, but so implausible that it's not credible.
I’m a graphic designer. You can definitely tell they are the same photo if the pixels of the two photos match. The best place to look is in the hair strands. These do look like the same image, one has had the saturation increased. People can do all sorts of things in photoshop to alter photos that are almost impossible for the average person to spot. This is probably why she didn’t hand over the metadata.
With a brighter light on, the highlights would be bigger and they are the same size in each photo. That's why they are clearly edited.
Right? Like I could use lightroom and tinker with some presets and edit an image… 🤣 all she would have had to do is adjust the saturation of certain colours and adjust midtone,highlights and shadow colour tones. Would get the same effect.
The same photos convinced the judge in the uk. Perhaps that is why Camille did not push it further? It is so obvious that they are the same photo, but the judge in uk was convinced somehow. Amber and her lawyers thought it would be the same breeze as in uk. Very sad! Poor JD .
You are a Gift to the World. After 6 weeks I hope justice wins and the Liar is exposed! I't's so great that you have a whole group of new friends that love you!
I worked as a CPS investigator. We had to take pictures of injuries with an old camara that couldn't be changed. The courts would never accept a picture from a phone.
For a criminal case, but for a civil case, she got away with it twice now. There were well over 20 hoaxed photos just for one incident in the UK. And for the US trial, Johnny offered to pay for the photos to be processed for metadata, but she sent 58,000 photos months after the photos were supposed to be to that expert and the photos were in the wrong format on old software and sent in excel.
There's no way that she could sit in exactly the same position from one photo to the other. She is a liar 100%! Many of us have known that from the moment she accused JD. She thinks her "weasel wording" will get her out of any possible repurcussions for perjury.
She's NEVER edited a photograph. Ever lol
I hope LAPD files criminal charges against Turd for false reporting and lying under oath.
They HAVE to bring this to the jury right? It’s tangible proof of her lying
It would be a great thing to show the jury in a visible way that she committed perjury.
It was mentioned in court but I hope the jury remembers/reminded of it and they can do their own test.
Depp would have to find some type of specialist to do this type of test in court.. even though it would be as simple as handing them both photos in paper form and letting them look
People keep screaming in comments that an expert needs to come in and explain the photo being manipulated. But why bother? It’s obvious to anyone who looks at it. Just mention in closing that the photo looks like a manipulated copy and let the jurors make up their mind.
It could have been her lawyer, an aide, or a "filter" on the iphone for all we know... technically not proof of anything other than an edit was done.
I’m sure we can trust the jurors to pick this out and see it for what it is. She‘s perjuring herself.
If you watch the first 1st minute and 40 secs of the video, it shows that Depp's lawyer brought it up during court, in front of everyone, including the jury.
You, and Emily, are my favorites. You are so humble, just an ordinary guy who happens to be a lawyer. Keep up the great work ♥️
Legal minds is also very good . Just saying ☺️
@@sweatshirts623 Thank you I'll have a look
@@sandrad4099 I'm sorry this is legal mindset not minds :)
Runkle, get this to the lawyers! They might not have realized this.
I think it's going to become necessary for courts to have photo and video experts on staff to look over every photo and video that comes into evidence to check for editing.
👁👁 I found the EXPERT WITNESS re DIGITAL-PHOTOS, Fascinating. His testimony covered EXACT & PRECISE techniques used in the manipulation of digital images.
He was great in pin-pointing that “Evidence photos” were fake/had.been manipulated‼️
• The 💩turd perjured herself •
‘
The info was above my knowledge and experience, of on-paper photography (yet it was oddly understandable.)