The full text judgment is long. I got through a substantial and material portion of it before I rage quit.

(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻)

In a nutshell, time after time after time after time, the judge placed enormous weight on anything negative about Depp, and went out of his way to make light of anything negative about Heard. He failed to provide a reason for this inconsistency, which he would be conventionally required to give.

He repeatedly took Heard on her word alone, and was repeatedly wilfully blind to credible evidence in refusing to believe anything Depp said.

When the recordings were referenced (heard visiting Depp during TRO and "youre not punched" and others) the judge dismissed them entirely because the events didn't happen in a courtroom environment where questions asked were controlled by a judge and the meaning of them is clear to. He dismissed these recordings, and admissions (including the ones Amber recorded secretly) out of hand AFTER going through Heards DV history, and depps absence of DV history.

And just a few fucking paragraphs previously this same maliciously corrupt stain in the judiciary ruled the "wino forever"/dirty carpet incident to be true/ruled that it definitely happened purely on the basis of Heard saying it happened and Depp being a bit drunk.

Ive never seen such a disgusting and contemptuous abandonment of justice from the judiciary. Repeatedly inconsistent rulings with ones given just a few sentences before/after. This judge reached his decision first then crudely, and poorly, constructed the reasons after the fact to try and justify his pre-determined decision.

Im appalled that there has been no judicial review of this decision.

I sincerely mean it, with no hyperbole intended, when I say that the decision reads like a judge in a movie script, who's been bribed with a big sack of money with a "$" sign on it (£).

Whats the limitation in the UK for seeking judicial review of a decision? Can non parties make the request? Because I'm ticked off after reading that excuse of a judgment.