Current Johnny Depp - Assault Manager on Set of City of Lies *DARVO

Remove this Banner Ad

Kurve

Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
19,337
43,193
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Brooks was a location manager for Depp's 2018 movie, City of Lies.

Brooks filed a civil complaint against Depp, in which he alleges Depp hit him twice in the ribs and then yelled, "I'll give you $100,000 to punch me right now!" while on the set of the film. Brooks refused.

Damages claimed relate to 10 counts, including assault, emotional distress, wrongful termination and retaliation.

The complaint states that on April 13, 2017, Brooks informed Depp about filming limitations for the Barclay Hotel set of the movie. He alleges Depp then became irate and abused him both verbally and physically. Things got ugly.

According to the suit, permits for the shoot initially allowed for exterior shooting at the hotel until 7 p.m. and inside the hotel until 10 p.m. An extension was granted, and at 10:50 p.m. they were asked to make the current shot the last exterior shot of the night. Brooks said that he was told to instruct Depp of the request, but wanted an on-set LAPD officer to assist him in doing so because he knew Depp “may become upset.”

Before he could enlist the officer’s help, however, Brooks’ suit said that Depp accosted Plaintiff and began attacking him, angrily screaming in his face ‘WHO THE F— ARE YOU? YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TELL ME WHAT TO DO!'”

Brooks claims Depp's breath smelled of alcohol during the incident and that Depp's bodyguards had to restrain him from continuing his assault on Brooks. Brooks also claims he was fired from the film because he did not remain silent about the incident.

Depp commonly uses a DARVO defence (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim Offender)

Depp claims that the film crew member who has accused the star of punching him on the set of “City of Lies” sustained his injuries due to “self defence/defence of others.”

Depp does not admit that the actor or his co-defendants struck location manager Gregg “Rocky” Brooks but argue that Brooks himself “provoked” the actions that resulted in his own injuries.

Depp claims that the acts complained of by Plaintiff were provoked by Plaintiff’s unlawful and wrongful conduct in that Plaintiff willfully and maliciously acted out and conducted his activities in such a manner as to cause, Defendant Depp to fear for his safety, and according to Defendant Depp’s observations, Defendant Brad Furman for his safety.

 

Kurve

Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
19,337
43,193
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #2
Depp is trying to settle, this case should it go forward, will show him up for using the same tactics and patterns of behaviour in a recent court case. His fans might be forced to reconsider their position.

The Pirates of the Caribbean actor previously requested the cast be dismissed after alleging he "feared for his safety" and that of director Brad Furman, arguing the alleged assault was in self-defence and the "defense of others".

In Gregg's legal documents, the crew member slammed the Lone Ranger star over his conduct, alleging he "was intentional and malicious and done for the purpose of causing plaintiff to suffer humiliation."

And he claimed Depp's "intoxication and temper created a hostile, abusive and unsafe work environment," which eventually resulted in him being assaulted by Depp during the filming of the crime thriller when he tried to enforce a permit restriction during a late night of filming.

 

Log in to remove this ad.

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
"Depp commonly used DARVO defence."

Utter Rubbish!!!

Wow Kurve. You clearly haven't listened to the Depp v Heard case and the facts. I happened to have listened to the whole 6 weeks evidence multiple times in fact. DARVO doesn't cut off the tip of your finger when a crush injury impacts that finger as it rests over the edge of a stone benchtop then severing it and taking a chuck out if the edge of that bench from having a vodka bottle thrown at you shattering against your finger. She then ADMITS to in the inadmissible tape recorded in the aftermath. She is diagnosed with BPD and HPD and is an extremely sick individual who lied about virtually everything and fabricated photo evidence and bruises evidence. None of the jury believed her for good reason. It was unanimous. She even admits to the fact that no one, not a judge or jury will listen to his accusation of HER being the abuser because he is a man. "So go ahead Johnny and see" Omg she even used the same picture of broken glass and spilt wine to describe separate events on different dates. She used the same fabricated bruises picture twice and they had been edited and it mysteriously disappeared next day afer the picture. She never had one injury EVER. Depp had multiple injuries Just said she did but when you got to hear who was the aggressor and what transpires it's always her.

Depp was a druggie and alcoholic and admitted to it. He stated he had never hit a woman. Every previous partner supported that bar one who was a disgruntled jilted partner. She said he once threw a bottle but not at her. He had 21 independent witnesses refuting Heards claims and proving her blatant dishonesty. She had herself and her sister. And there was inadmissible evidence to show the sister lied in support. In that incident the sister had told this person she lied and instead AH was bashing him with closed fists. There was even a tape where she was defending bashing him saying because she can't hurt him it's not really punching. He responded ......don't tell me what's it's like to be punched. She is sick and uses DARVO. That's why her accusations that he was an abuser resulted in a $10m defamation damages ...because she lied. By you trying to reverse the result you are victim blaming. It's wrong and the worst thing you can ever do to a victim

Sometimes very occasionally it is the woman who is the abuser and the man as victim. This IS one of those cases.

You obviously read the Guardian. That is just wrong reporting and has an agenda.

As regards Brookes yes he hit the guy in the ribs twice. Yes he was drunk then too. From what I understand the guy was abusing and harrassing a homeless woman on set, stepped in and confronted the guy. Virtually all of those on the set have given declarations to this. Unfortunately it doesn't stop it being assault and that's why it's being sought to be settled. It probably wasn't self defence or defence of others but I have no qualms with him doing what he did. An ex police officer on set will testify that it was an inconsequential incident over as quickly as it arose.
 
Last edited:

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
Let's speak again when you've looked at Depp's complete history and the documentary 'Framing Amber Heard' comes out.

I've listened to ALL the evidence K. ALL. Probably 300 hours if it. I DIDN'T get anything wrong she does interviews still defending herself in the USA. The animosity in the interviewer is tangible. You listen and then come back to me.
 

Kurve

Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
19,337
43,193
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #7
I've listened to ALL the evidence K. ALL. Probably 300 hours if it. I DIDN'T get anything wrong she does interviews still defending herself in the USA. The animosity in the interviewer is tangible. You listen and then come back to me.

What makes you think I haven't? Because I can see something that you and almost everybody else can't?

She's got issues, she's disordered and it's apparent in her language. The UK judge was smart enough to recognise her problems and cut through it but Depp counted on his ability to play the court and work a jury to his advantage.

The High Court Judge in the UK explained his decision in a near 200 page document that was so thorough two judges reviewed it and couldn't find any room for appeal. There were no mistakes. I've read that too and he found 12 of 14 wife beating allegations against Depp to be substantially true.
 

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
What makes you think I haven't? Because I can see something that you and almost everybody else can't?

She's got issues, she's disordered and it's apparent in her language. The UK judge was smart enough to recognise her problems and cut through it but Depp counted on his ability to play the court and work a jury to his advantage.

The High Court Judge in the UK explained his decision in a near 200 page document that was so thorough two judges reviewed it and couldn't find any room for appeal. There were no mistakes. I've read that too and he found 12 of 14 wife beating allegations against Depp to be substantially true.

If you have listened to what I've listened to you would have zero doubt. So that's what tells me you haven't. It's indisputable.

Yes the UK argument is what's used against it. The UK was against the paper and AH was a witness so her testimony wasn't challenged in the way it was in USA. He got wise and he doubled down on everything and there was twice as much evidence. The UK result was in error plain and simple

He believed a woman who is now being called a pathological liar with evidence. She perjured herself there and it's in evidence she did

She also perjured herself in AUst and that's in evidence too

What she did in relation to the divorce settlement amounted to extortion. So much so she was compelled to have them both sign declarations saying it wasn't to avoid legal repercussions.

She even perjured herself multiple times within the USA case.
 
Last edited:

Kurve

Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
19,337
43,193
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #9
If you have listened to what I've listened to you would have zero doubt. So that's what tells me you haven't. It's indisputable.

If you have seen and listened to what I have, you wouldn't be so confident. I haven't suggested Amber towards the latter part of their relationship wasn't just awful and that she never contributed because she was and she did. He created her, as a reaction.

Yes the UK argument is what's used against it. The UK was against the paper and AH was a witness so her testimony wasn't challenged in the way it was in USA.

The US trial allowed for Depp's lawyers to focus on attacking Heard and where he could DARVO her. Like he is with these latest charges. Her lawyers were also outgunned, they were terrible actually. They must have told her to address the jury with her answers and it put her out of sync jerking her head around and the jurors were weirded out by it.

The UK result was in error plain and simple

They're pretty smart over there in the High Court. I'll wait and see if Heard appeals and she should because the jury handed down contradictory findings.

Fun fact, did you know Amber Heard was only two years old when Depp faced his first assault and battery charges?
 

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
If you have seen and listened to what I have, you wouldn't be so confident. I haven't suggested Amber towards the latter part of their relationship wasn't just awful and that she never contributed because she was and she did. He created her, as a reaction.



The US trial allowed for Depp's lawyers to focus on attacking Heard and where he could DARVO her. Like he is with these latest charges. Her lawyers were also outgunned, they were terrible actually. They must have told her to address the jury with her answers and it put her out of sync jerking her head around and the jurors were weirded out by it.



They're pretty smart over there in the High Court. I'll wait and see if Heard appeals and she should because the jury handed down contradictory findings.

Fun fact, did you know Amber Heard was only two years old when Depp faced his first assault and battery charges?

She is appealing. The guy i was following who is excellent called 'the lawyer you know" has suggested that the appeal will fail. Less than a 1% chance and he gives legal reasons for that.

The verdicts weren't actually contradictory. She lost. He lost in one limb which was whether they spilt some wine and roughed up the place to make it look like he had trashed it. The problem was both police officers said there wasn't anything roughed up and wine spilt so JDs solicitors remark on that face value WAS in error. The problem though is that she lost nothing from it so the damages if $2m was erroneous. It's said JD will likely win on his appeal
 

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
If you have seen and listened to what I have, you wouldn't be so confident. I haven't suggested Amber towards the latter part of their relationship wasn't just awful and that she never contributed because she was and she did. He created her, as a reaction.



The US trial allowed for Depp's lawyers to focus on attacking Heard and where he could DARVO her. Like he is with these latest charges. Her lawyers were also outgunned, they were terrible actually. They must have told her to address the jury with her answers and it put her out of sync jerking her head around and the jurors were weirded out by it.



They're pretty smart over there in the High Court. I'll wait and see if Heard appeals and she should because the jury handed down contradictory findings.

Fun fact, did you know Amber Heard was only two years old when Depp faced his first assault and battery charges?

The body language panel who I also follow are unanimous about her pathological lies. They draw attention to the fact that when you shift from emotion you can't do it instantaneously because the emotion must morph. Hers changed emotion and expressions in seconds. They concluded it was all fake and further that she's a narcissist.
 

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
I don't know JDs history. I'm no fan either
when I started looking it was after UK and my attitude was he was an abuser. I now accept that was very wrong. If he has an assault history he has. Likely linked to drugs and alcohol I would imagine.
 

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
DARVO is a tactic used by abusers to make them appear as victims in a situation of DV and intimate partner violence. I don't think the term has relevance to the charges with Brookes which is straight assualt or defence.

In terms of JD v AH one is an abuser and the other a victim both claiming to be victims so one of them is using DARVO. I know who I think is.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kurve

Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
19,337
43,193
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #14
She is appealing. The guy i was following who is excellent called 'the lawyer you know" has suggested that the appeal will fail. Less than a 1% chance and he gives legal reasons for that.

The verdicts weren't actually contradictory. She lost. He lost in one limb which was whether they spilt some wine and roughed up the place to make it look like he had trashed it. The problem was both police officers said there wasn't anything roughed up and wine spilt so JDs solicitors remark on that face value WAS in error. The problem though is that she lost nothing from it so the damages if $2m was erroneous. It's said JD will likely win on his appeal

We'll see, this is far from over imo and Depp had the jump. I don't think he's going to stay ahead of it though and when the analysis is done over time, he might come to regret his exercise in global humiliation.
 

Kurve

Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
19,337
43,193
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #15
I don't know JDs history. I'm no fan either
when I started looking it was after UK and my attitude was he was an abuser. I now accept that was very wrong. If he has an assault history he has. Likely linked to drugs and alcohol I would imagine.

He's the best pirate ever.

Multi millionaire actor/rock star that's turned over $350B in his career, has drug and alcohol issues, history of blackouts, trashes hotel rooms and other people's houses on the regular, assaults crew and journalists, surrounded by loyal yes men with more than enough money to pay his way out of most trouble and hurts his significant other? What's new?

I didn't pay much attention to the UK trial, I just thought 'oh finally something he couldn't pay his way out of'.
 

Kurve

Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
19,337
43,193
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #16
The body language panel who I also follow are unanimous about her pathological lies. They draw attention to the fact that when you shift from emotion you can't do it instantaneously because the emotion must morph. Hers changed emotion and expressions in seconds. They concluded it was all fake and further that she's a narcissist.

The body language panel have a really bad reputation among experts on mental health, DV and trauma response. They don't know what they're talking about on this. Further, they couldn't get the right read on her when she was swerving.
 

Kurve

Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
19,337
43,193
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #17
Anyhow, I have more examples of DARVO in action to put up tomorrow. It might be helpful for someone, some time.
 

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
I must apologize . It was presumptuous of me to suggest and assume that someone seeing what I saw would necessarily have to be convinced of the same 'objective truth'. The phrase I use is one I intentionally use from when I worked closely for a time with a psychologist and the lessons he imparted. He would always put to me that there is no such thing as 'objective or absolute truth' because what we see is always influenced though the lens we see it and must be shades of subjective truth accordingly.
 

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
They trashed the unit in Aust. Pretty clear the major influence for doing so is his drug and alcohol issues. That appears to be a prevalent problem for him. There was an argument. After she cut off his finger he used it. .the bloodied finger to write messages to her about her infidelity on a mirror. When the blood wasn't enough he would dab the tip in paint and use that mixture to continue the messages. Strange drug fuelled behaviour with property damage but no physical abuse from him. She would use lipstick to write messages back to him on same mirror holed up in different parts of the unit. A message about carly Simon her song 'your so vain' as a means to put him down. in the case rather than owning her own behaviors and what she wrote she would instead claim that he used BOTH the blood/ paint mixture and the lipstick to make ALL the messages alone effectively she would claim having an argument with himself on the mirror. Pathological liar. Simply can't help herself. The pattern of behaviour was that an argument would ensue and he would seek to escape to prevent physical altercation. She would pursue him through multiple rooms he would lock and she'd bang down the door. 5 bathrooms and several bedrooms. Her view is that when you have an argument you stay together and slug it out and instead because he would run and hide she would pursue him and harass him that he ran away. Sick. Very sick. He avoided escalation. She would demand he stay so she could hit him and then say because it didn't really hurt him that it wasn't punching. His need to escape her was so pronounced that ultimately whenever they went anywhere they would book two rooms side by side so that in the event she pursued him he could escape to the second unit and hide until things cooled. She hated de-escalation like that because she needed him to stand and slug it out and he refused. These are not the behaviours of an abusive man. They are the behaviours of a man out of his depth wanting to de-escalate.

In court she said that he dragged her on her back through broken glass. There was only one person who got medical treatment of any kind that night JD for the lost finger. she had no marks cuts or anything even though she claimed he dragged her through broken glass. Liar
 

Kurve

Moderator
Dec 27, 2016
19,337
43,193
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #20
They trashed the unit in Aust. Pretty clear the major influence for doing so is his drug and alcohol issues. That appears to be a prevalent problem for him. There was an argument. After she cut off his finger he used it. .the bloodied finger to write messages to her about her infidelity on a mirror. When the blood wasn't enough he would dab the tip in paint and use that mixture to continue the messages. Strange drug fuelled behaviour with property damage but no physical abuse from him. She would use lipstick to write messages back to him on same mirror holed up in different parts of the unit. A message about carly Simon her song 'your so vain' as a means to put him down. in the case rather than owning her own behaviors and what she wrote she would instead claim that he used BOTH the blood/ paint mixture and the lipstick to make ALL the messages alone effectively she would claim having an argument with himself on the mirror. Pathological liar. Simply can't help herself. The pattern of behaviour was that an argument would ensue and he would seek to escape to prevent physical altercation. She would pursue him through multiple rooms he would lock and she'd bang down the door. 5 bathrooms and several bedrooms. Her view is that when you have an argument you stay together and slug it out and instead because he would run and hide she would pursue him and harass him that he ran away. Sick. Very sick. He avoided escalation. She would demand he stay so she could hit him and then say because it didn't really hurt him that it wasn't punching. His need to escape her was so pronounced that ultimately whenever they went anywhere they would book two rooms side by side so that in the event she pursued him he could escape to the second unit and hide until things cooled. She hated de-escalation like that because she needed him to stand and slug it out and he refused. These are not the behaviours of an abusive man. They are the behaviours of a man out of his depth wanting to de-escalate.

In court she said that he dragged her on her back through broken glass. There was only one person who got medical treatment of any kind that night JD for the lost finger. she had no marks cuts or anything even though she claimed he dragged her through broken glass. Liar

We saw Depp's side and the way she was framed, we don't need to do it all again in here. What I saw was a disgusting court spectacle I hope we never see in Australia.

For the record, she didn't cut his finger off. What's really astonishing, has been the willingness to ignore, overlook and find excuses for his revolting behaviour.

:handpointdown:

Brooks filed a civil complaint against Depp, in which he alleges Depp hit him twice in the ribs and then yelled, "I'll give you $100,000 to punch me right now!" while on the set of the film. Brooks refused.

Before he could enlist the officer’s help, however, Brooks’ suit said that Depp accosted Plaintiff and began attacking him, angrily screaming in his face ‘WHO THE F— ARE YOU? YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TELL ME WHAT TO DO!'”
Brooks informed Depp about filming limitations for the Barclay Hotel set of the movie. He alleges Depp then became irate and abused him both verbally and physically.
Depp claims that the film crew member who has accused the star of punching him on the set of “City of Lies” sustained his injuries due to “self defence/defence of others.”
Brooks himself “provoked” the actions that resulted in his own injuries.
Depp claims that the acts complained of by Plaintiff were provoked by Plaintiff’s unlawful and wrongful conduct in that Plaintiff willfully and maliciously acted out and conducted his activities in such a manner as to cause, Defendant Depp to fear for his safety
 

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
You say she hasn't cut his finger off but she admits to having done just that on a tape. No framing....HER words admitting guilt.

I won't discuss Depp V Heard. it's over and unanimously decided.

This thread is about Brookes. I indicated he was drunk and assaulted the guy because he was abusing and harrassing a homeless black woman. Apparently all the witness statements support this apart from Brooks who wants money. Go figure. Is still assault so places Depp at disadvantage
 

Remove this Banner Ad