Johnny Depp-Amber Heard court verdict: seven-person jury finds in favour of Depp, awards $15 million

[Rana]

Depp has won in the Court of Public Opinion. That was his real aim from this trial, to be able to tell his story out there in full public force and to rehabilitate his image.

But what is the point of Amber is proven not guilty by the Jury? The wife beater tag will not go away if he loses this case, and no one will want to associate with him until that tag is gone.

Amber will lose roles from now on even if she wins but that’s hardly a loss to the world of entertainment. Depp not getting work with the big studious even though he is still able to work as a lead actor is a major loss.

 

[MenInG]

After six weeks of conflicting and often intense testimony, lawyers for both Johnny Depp and Amber Heard got a final chance to put their arguments to jurors.

Concluding their cases with very different speeches, ultimately both said their clients want the same thing - to get their lives back.

Depp and Heard were together for about four years in total, married for just 15 months, but their messy break-up means their lives have been intertwined for much longer.

Addressing the jury for a final time, Depp's lawyer Camille Vasquez said Heard had "ruined his life by falsely telling the world she was a survivor of domestic abuse". She said Heard was the abuser in the courtroom, not Depp.

Ben Chew, another of Depp's lawyers, said: "This case for Mr Depp has never been about money. It is about Mr Depp's reputation and freeing him from the prison in which he has lived for the last six years."

However, Heard's lawyers said it was Depp who ruined her life by launching a smear campaign against her when she divorced him and publicly accused him of abuse in 2016.

"In Mr Depp's world, you don't leave Mr Depp," said Heard's lawyer, Ben Rottenborn. "If you do, he will start a campaign of global humiliation against you."

Elaine Bredehoft, also representing Heard, told the jury: "We're asking you to finally hold this man responsible. He has never accepted responsibility for anything in his life."

Throughought the trial, jurors have seen several photos of Heard with marks and bruises on her face, with some showing mild redness, others more severe bruising.

Her lawyers have said the jury only needs to believe Depp assaulted her once to find in favour of Heard.

However, Ms Vasquez told them: "You either believe all of it, or none of it. Either she is a victim of ugly, horrible abuse, or she is a woman who is willing to say absolutely anything."

But Mr Rottenborn said nitpicking over Heard's evidence of abuse ignores the fact there is overwhelming evidence on her behalf and sends a dangerous message to victims of domestic violence.

"If you didn't take pictures, it didn't happen," he said. "If you did take pictures, they're fake. If you didn't tell your friends, they're lying. If you did tell your friends, they're part of the hoax."

He told jurors Depp's lawyers were "trying to trick you into thinking Amber has to be perfect to win".

SKY

 

[MenInG]

Johnny Depp-Amber Heard Trial: No verdict returned by jury Friday; deliberations set to resume Tuesday

 

[MenInG]

The Johnny Depp vs Amber Heard $100million libel case is so complicated, that the verdict sheet has 42 questions the jury must answer before the deliver a verdict, DailyMail.com can reveal.

The document was released by the court in Fairfax, Virginia and shows that there are 24 questions for Depp's claims and 18 for Heard's counterclaim.

A verdict form is used to formalize the jury's decision on the case.

Spanning eight pages, it means the jury has to decide on dozens of matters before reaching their verdict.

There is also a section where they will have to decide on the damages for Depp and Heard - and any punitive damages.

The case is now being deliberated by the jury after six weeks of graphic and raw evidence about Depp and Heard's stormy four year relationship and 15 month marriage.

Depp is seeking $50m from Heard for allegedly defaming him with an op-ed in the Washington Post in 2018 which claimed she was a survivor of domestic abuse.

According to the Pirates of the Caribbean star, even though it didn't mention him by name it was obviously about him.

Heard countersued for $100m claiming that Depp's lawyer Adam Waldman defamed her by claiming her allegations were an 'abuse hoax'.

The verdict sheet, called a 'Special Verdict Form' asks the jury eight questions about each of the three statements at issue in Heard's op-ed.

They were that Heard 'spoke up against sexual violence - and faced our culture's wrath. That has to change'.

One of the statements jurors were asked to discern if inflammatory, made by Heard in a Washington Post piece that alleged she was abused by Depp

The second statement is: 'Two years ago, I became a public figure representing domestic abuse and I felt the full force of our culture's wrath for women who speak out'.

The third is: 'I had the rare vantage point of seeing in real time how institutions protect men accused of abuse'.

In each case the jury has to 'find that Mr. Depp has proven all the elements of defamation'.

If the answer is no, then they can move on to the next statement.

But if they answer yes then the jury has to confirm all the necessary elements of defamation: that the statement as published by Heard, it was about Depp, that it was false, has a defamatory implication, that it was 'designed and intended by Heard' and that it 'conveyed a defamatory implication' to someone who saw it other than Depp.

The final question for each statement in the op-ed is whether it was proven by 'clear and convincing evidence' that Heard acted with 'actual malice'.

The test is to show that the statements in question were made knowing they were false, the threshold for defamation.

For Heard's claims against Depp, the jury has to answer six questions for each of the three statements at issue made by Waldman, Depp's lawyer, to the media in 2020.

They were that Heard used 'fake sexual violence allegations as both a sword and a shield,' that the claims were an 'ambush, a hoax' and that Heard and her friends faked a crime scene, and that the allegations were an 'abuse hoax'.

In each case the jury has to answer whether Heard has proven all the elements of defamation.

If yes then the jury has to go through each of the necessary elements: did Waldman make the statements while acting as an agent for Depp, was the statement about Heard, was it seen by someone other than Head and was it false.

'There is an abuser in this courtroom but it's not Mr. Depp. There's a victim of abuse in this court but it's not Miss Heard,' Vaquez said Friday. 'Miss Heard is in fact the abuser and Mr. Depp is the abused.' Jurors will likely deliver a verdict in the complex libel case this week

The jury also has to find that Waldman acted with 'actual malice.'

For both Depp and Heard's claims the jury has to enter an amount for damages and punitive damages.

Both sides are asking for at least $350,000 in punitive damages, plus legal fees and court costs.

While Depp has not disclosed how much he has spent on attorneys, Heard told the court she has blown $6m on legal fees, though that number may have included a previous trial in London in 2020 which covered similar allegations.

During closing arguments on Friday Depp's lawyer Camille Vasquez described Heard as a 'deeply troubled person'.

She said: 'There is an abuser in this courtroom but it's not Mr. Depp. There's a victim of abuse in this court but it's not Miss Heard.

'Miss Heard is in fact the abuser and Mr Depp is the abused.'

Heard's lawyer Benjamin Rottenborn urged the jury not to become an 'accomplice' in sending a message to survivors of abuse that they have to be perfect.

He said that abusive texts shown to the jury were a 'window into the soul of America's favorite pirate', referring to Depp's role as Captain Jack Sparrow.

Depp was pictured smiling and waving to fans when he left the courthouse while Amber Heard was seen hugging her lawyer as jurors began deliberations Friday.

He left and shook hands with police officers before appeasing the large crowd of fans outside who were armed with banners and cameras.

Heard's legal team had told the jury in closing arguments to 'think about the message' Johnny Depp and his legal team are sending Heard and 'by extension every victim of domestic violence.'

Taking the floor Friday, Heard's lawyer Benjamin Rottenborn said, 'If you didn't take pictures it didn't' happen. If you did take pictures they're fake. If you didn't tell your friends they're lying. If you did tell your friends they're part of the hoax.'

'Failure to seek medical attention meant you were not injured,' Rottenborn said. 'If you do seek medical treatment then you're crazy and if you do everything to help your spouse rid himself of drugs and drink then 'you're a nag.'

Rottenborn continued, 'And if you decide enough is enough and you have to leave to save yourself you're a gold digger. That's the message Mr. Depp is asking you to send.

He said that in Johnny Depp's 'world' you don't leave him, and if you do 'he will start campaign of global humiliation against you.

'He will do everything he can to destroy your life, to destroy your career. That's what they're trying to get you to be an accomplice to.'

'Mr. Depp cannot and will not take responsibility for his own actions.'

Jurors are set to resume deliberations Tuesday, with a verdict in the coming days imminent.

Daily Mail

 

[MenInG]

Decision expected around 8pm UK time

Following six weeks of evidence and roughly 13 hours of deliberation jurors have reached a decision.

It is expected to be read out at 8pm UK time.

The jury says it has reached a verdict in Johnny Depp's $50m libel lawsuit against his ex-wife Amber Heard, who testified that Depp physically and sexually assaulted her on multiple occasions.

The jury has also reached a verdict regarding a $100m counterclaim Heard filed against Depp.

Heard said she was defamed when Depp’s lawyer called her abuse allegations a hoax.

SKY

 

[MenInG]

and....


Some confusion in the courtroom...

The jury has been sent back out again over an apparent administrative error.

 

[James]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Johnny Depp has won his defamation case against ex-wife Amber Heard, who he sued over claims of domestic abuse<a href="https://t.co/CVttyeVT3o">https://t.co/CVttyeVT3o</a></p>— BBC Breaking News (@BBCBreaking) <a href="https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1532080536478527489?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 1, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[James]

A resounding win for Johnny Depp.

He is awarded $15 million in damages.

 

[Savak]

I wonder if this is a bad reflection of the UK Judicial System, they ruled against him but a US Court has found him innocent of the abuse allegations.

 

[Technics 1210]

I wonder if this is a bad reflection of the UK Judicial System, they ruled against him but a US Court has found him innocent of the abuse allegations.

Slightly different case. Depp was suing a newspaper (The Sun), and the list of evidence/witnessed was not as comprehensive as in the latest case.

 

[James]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Mr Depp was awarded damages totalling around £12million <br><br>Read more: <a href="https://t.co/XbgmnENNU4">https://t.co/XbgmnENNU4</a></p>— GB News (@GBNEWS) <a href="https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1532083546029969408?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 1, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[James]

<b>Heard: 'I am heartbroken'</b>

Amber Heard has released a statement:

“The disappointment I feel today is beyond words. I'm heartbroken that the mountain of evidence still was not enough to stand up to the disproportionate power, influence, and sway of my ex-husband.

I’m even more disappointed with what this verdict means for other women. It is a setback. It sets back the clock to a time when a woman who spoke up and spoke out could be publicly shamed and humiliated. It sets back the idea that violence against women is to be taken seriously.

I believe Johnny’s attorneys succeeded in getting the jury to overlook the key issue of Freedom of Speech and ignore evidence that was so conclusive that we won in the UK.

I’m sad I lost this case. But I am sadder still that I seem to have lost a right I thought I had as an American – to speak freely and openly”.

 

[James]

<b>BBC BREAKING NEWS</b>

Heard awarded $2m in damages

The jury has found that Johnny Depp defamed Amber Heard - but it was through his attorney, Adam Waldman, and only in one of three counts.

She was awarded $2m in compensatory damages and nothing in punitive damages.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I wonder if this is a bad reflection of the UK Judicial System, they ruled against him but a US Court has found him innocent of the abuse allegations.

Yes it is. She gamed us and she won. Everyone who knew the whole story knew she'd used our courts to distort the truth.

 

[Stewie]

Yes it is. She gamed us and she won. Everyone who knew the whole story knew she'd used our courts to distort the truth.

yes.. she is a liar and a manipulator!

 

[James]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Statement from <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/JohnnyDepp?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#JohnnyDepp</a> on winning his defamation lawsuit against his ex-wife, <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AmberHeard?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AmberHeard</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetwork?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@LawCrimeNetwork</a> <a href="https://t.co/LcC42KgPIE">pic.twitter.com/LcC42KgPIE</a></p>— Angenette Levy (@Angenette5) <a href="https://twitter.com/Angenette5/status/1532086934016864256?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 1, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Technics 1210]

<b>Heard: 'I am heartbroken'</b>

Amber Heard has released a statement:

“The disappointment I feel today is beyond words. I'm heartbroken that the mountain of evidence still was not enough to stand up to the disproportionate power, influence, and sway of my ex-husband.

I’m even more disappointed with what this verdict means for other women. It is a setback. It sets back the clock to a time when a woman who spoke up and spoke out could be publicly shamed and humiliated. It sets back the idea that violence against women is to be taken seriously.

I believe Johnny’s attorneys succeeded in getting the jury to overlook the key issue of Freedom of Speech and ignore evidence that was so conclusive that we won in the UK.

I’m sad I lost this case. But I am sadder still that I seem to have lost a right I thought I had as an American – to speak freely and openly”.

Someone needs to remind Amber that free speech comes with responsibility.

Typical jazbaati Amreekan, when all is lost, cite the 1st amendment.

Good riddance.

 

[Savak]

There is no way she will pay him that kind of money tho. Johnny can easily pay her $2 m. She is going to have to declare bankruptcy.

More importantly for Depp, will this lead to his reputation being restored and his career getting back on track? He had been a declining star even without Amber Heard entering his life i.e. poor box office collections, unprofessional behavior on set, drinking and drug problems.

 

[Savak]

Heard has been blatantly caught committing perjury on numerous occasions with respect to her donations, physical violence from Depp, TNZ leaking story e.t.c. Perjury is a very serious criminal offence for which you can face jail time. She should also be tried for contempt of court for criticizing the judges and jurors. I am surprised she has been let off without a jail sentence.

 

[BreadPakoda]

Heard has been blatantly caught committing perjury on numerous occasions with respect to her donations, physical violence from Depp, TNZ leaking story e.t.c. Perjury is a very serious criminal offence for which you can face jail time. She should also be tried for contempt of court for criticizing the judges and jurors. I am surprised she has been let off without a jail sentence.

That’s privilege that comes from having money.
In other news, Jussie Smollett is making a comeback on OTT.

 

[dildilpak]

Someone needs to remind Amber that free speech comes with responsibility.

Typical jazbaati Amreekan, when all is lost, cite the 1st amendment.

Good riddance.

At least America sussed her out. Imagine the Brits left with egg on their faces after falling for her 2-bit tears!

 

[topspin]

I'm so happy for Johnny bhai.

I hope PCB will invite him for next year's PSL opening ceremony.

As for Amber, she made her bed. Now she's gotta take a dump in it.

 

[Rana]

There is no way she will pay him that kind of money tho. Johnny can easily pay her $2 m. She is going to have to declare bankruptcy.

More importantly for Depp, will this lead to his reputation being restored and his career getting back on track? He had been a declining star even without Amber Heard entering his life i.e. poor box office collections, unprofessional behavior on set, drinking and drug problems.

But Depp can still come back in the big studio movies such as pirates and fantastic beasts. They have no reason to not sign him now

 

[Savak]

But Depp can still come back in the big studio movies such as pirates and fantastic beasts. They have no reason to not sign him now

He said during the trial he won't go back to Pirates even if they offered him $300 million dollars.

 

[sweep_shot]

Very happy for Depp. Justice has been served.

Amber got what she deserved.

 

[moghul]

Depp does have a big fan club , including majority of jury member , I think. He won due to his popularity, not due to the facts. American judiciary system has many flaws. You have to win jury's sympathies or likeness , irrespective of the facts, to win the case.

 

[Savak]

Depp does have a big fan club , including majority of jury member , I think. He won due to his popularity, not due to the facts. American judiciary system has many flaws. You have to win jury's sympathies or likeness , irrespective of the facts, to win the case.

This is incorrect. In this case he won the basis of the evidence, facts and law all of which the jury considered over two plus days. The UK legal system needs to be questioned for their verdict

 

[Robert]

This is incorrect. In this case he won the basis of the evidence, facts and law all of which the jury considered over two plus days. The UK legal system needs to be questioned for their verdict

Different cases. Depp sued The Sun unsuccessfully for defamation under English law. Heard was called by The Sun’s lawyers as a witness.

 

[dildilpak]

Different cases. Depp sued The Sun unsuccessfully for defamation under English law. Heard was called by The Sun’s lawyers as a witness.

Now the question emerges whether proper witness-vetting was done back then or did the judges/ jury just go by her testimony, for we now know her account is sketchy to say the least.

 

[Savak]

Now the question emerges whether proper witness-vetting was done back then or did the judges/ jury just go by her testimony, for we now know her account is sketchy to say the least.

I would say that Depp has the right to go after the Sun, Washington Post and even the UK judges based on this verdict.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Some Women have been gaming the system for decades now.While the genuine ones rarely get justice, the clever ones manipulate the system to cry victim and emerge victorious.

Time has come that laws are made more gender neutral.

 

[Technics 1210]

I would say that Depp has the right to go after the Sun, Washington Post and even the UK judges based on this verdict.

Actually there is a chance that Amber Heard could be tried for perjury and sentenced to prison.

From what I am reading there is also high probability that AH will file for bankruptcy.

 

[Robert]

I would say that Depp has the right to go after the Sun, Washington Post and even the UK judges based on this verdict.

No. US civil law sets no precedent in English civil law, and vice versa. Even if it did, Depp sued different parties in each case.

 

[Varun]

Always exciting to see preying women lose such cases.

Long may it continue.

 

[Robert]

Always exciting to see preying women lose such cases.

Long may it continue.

Misogyny.

Depp brought the suit.

 

[Rana]

I think the moment Amber lost this case was when she said “I use pledge and donate synonymously”.

Impossible to not be offended (if you are the jury) and to take her seriously after this.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Happy for Johnny Depp.

 

[Technics 1210]

“Tell the world Johnny. Tell them Johnny Depp, I, Johnny Depp, a man, I'm a victim too of domestic violence and I know it's a fair fight, and see how many people believe or side with you.” - Amber Heard.

He did, the world believed him.

 

[MenInG]

We can expect Women to think 10 times before even going to court.

 

[James]

We can expect Women to think 10 times before even going to court.

Yes, this is just one case between two people, but what you have highlighted will be the legacy.

 

[Technics 1210]

We can expect Women to think 10 times before even going to court.

Exactly. The majority of Depp supporters were indeed women, and this case has destroyed the myth a woman should be believed in such cases.

MeToo movement are destroying Amber Heard online, claiming this case has setback the movement.

 

[Mamoon]

Is this nonsense finally over? Will the media stop shoving this story down our throats now?

I couldn’t care less what happened or what didn’t happen, it is baffles me that people take so much interest in the personal affairs of two deranged celebrities.

We have bigger and more important news around the world than what two mad people were doing to each other inside their home.

I hope this is finally over.

 

[James]

Exactly. The majority of Depp supporters were indeed women, and this case has destroyed the myth a woman should be believed in such cases.

MeToo movement are destroying Amber Heard online, claiming this case has setback the movement.

These are bad things.

 

[Technics 1210]

Is this nonsense finally over? Will the media stop shoving this story down our throats now?

I couldn’t care less what happened or what didn’t happen, it is baffles me that people take so much interest in the personal affairs of two deranged celebrities.

We have bigger and more important news around the world than what two mad people were doing to each other inside their home.

I hope this is finally over.

It’s not over, Heard is going to appeal.

Also, no one forces you to watch this news, but this televised trial sure beat the MSM nonsense, and was the biggest case televised since OJ Simpson case.

 

[Marooned]

We can expect Women to think 10 times before even going to court.

I think it's not about gender at all. It just shows that perhaps the people are now

 

[Rana]

It’s not over, Heard is going to appeal.

Also, no one forces you to watch this news, but this televised trial sure beat the MSM nonsense, and was the biggest case televised since OJ Simpson case.

There are no grounds for Heard to appeal. The trial was as fair as it could be. The Judge was brilliant and at times criticised for favouring Heard’s lawyers more than Depp’s

Amber will need to look for another opportunity or another state to take Depp into a legal battle

 

[Ryw]

 

[Technics 1210]

There are no grounds for Heard to appeal. The trial was as fair as it could be. The Judge was brilliant and at times criticised for favouring Heard’s lawyers more than Depp’s

Amber will need to look for another opportunity or another state to take Depp into a legal battle

Amber Heard to appeal against US libel verdict as Johnny Depp celebrates $15m win in Newcastle pub.

https://news.sky.com/story/depp-v-h...p-celebrates-15-win-in-newcastle-pub-12625771

Remember, Amber won 1 of 3 claims.

 

[Rana]

Critical mistakes committed by Amber and her Lawyers which resulted in such a humiliating defeat even with #MeToo not yet irrelevant in the world (my opinion)

1. Amber Heard’s lawyer Ben Rotternborn’s cross examination of Depp and his witnesses.
-BR was trying to hurry, curtail and mock the answers made by Jonny Depp. A witness from JD’s side also snapped back at him for not allowing him to complete his answer. This imo did not go down well on the Jury who might have felt that Amber’s lawyer is very cold and condescending in such a sensitive trial

2. Amber Heard’s inconsistent demeanour throughout the trial. Her change of attitude towards her lawyers on the stand versus Depp’s lawyers
-it was highly evident that Heard’s testimony was very much rehearsed when she would be allowed to speak without objection by her own lawyers. She came across as a woman in deep distress and pain. However, on the cross examination by Vasquez, the jury saw a side of Amber that didn’t know how to maintain that image of a weak/broken woman whilst attempting to clarify the many confusions and contradictions in her story as highlighted by Vasquez. The jury, the world saw the image of a woman taking no ownership and twisting words, narratives to suit her own agenda.

3. Judge Azcarate not succumbing under the pressure of the TMZ lawyer who wanted to block the entry of an ex TMZ employee that would have testified to crucial evidence of the deliberate leaking of the kitchen cabinets video.
-this was a huge blow to AH’s case because she was pinned in the corner with more awkward questions which resulted in more crucial lies on the stand

4.AH herself not knowing when to stop talking and digging a hole for herself, she admitted to writing the Op-Ed about the power of Jonny
-in round 2 of her cross examination by Vasquez, Heard wanted to take a more offensive approach knowing how the defensive approach in round 1 had totally left her exposed and vulnerable. In doing so, she slipped to the point where she clearly mentioned that the reason why she wrote the op-Ed was to talk to that phenomenon of Jonny in which people will come out and support a rich and powerful man. This IMO was a major death blow to her case and the case presented by her lawyers who until then had maintained that the op-Ed was not even about Jonny, and Jonny was misconstruing it to be about him. The jury are not lawyers, they will not look at these statements from the technical lens of the law but the lens of an ordinary person. Amber really did shoot herself in the foot here.

5.Elaine Beherndorf’s inability to keep up with Amber’s cross examination (round 1) and not objecting especially when she was under the pump. This allowed Vasquez to build a serious momentum which the jury would have been fully drawn to with concentration. Moreover, Elaine was a total failure on the rebuttal as she could hardly land a single, appropriate question which could have cleared up at least some of the mess created by AH’s terrible cross.

6. Heard indirectly accusing key witnesses from Depp‘s side of committing perjury whilst she herself had been exposed as a liar.
-using words such as ‘coming out of the woodwork’ and ‘the Johnny Depp show’ were ridiculous for people who have sworn to tell the truth under oath. It totally defeats the purpose of holding a fair trial to reach the truth. Surely, the Jury by now had had enough of Amber’s arrogance and it was just a matter of time when they would deliberate against her.

7. Amber’s terrible, questionable psychological expert and psychiatrist’s testimonies
-These were supposed to be key, fact witnesses which were supposed to provide professional testimony that could not be refuted due to their credibility as experts in that field. The fact that her female psychologist was proven to not administer the Tests for PTSD in the correct manner must have confirmed to the jury of her already blatant bias against JD. The male doctor was an absolute disaster who was exposed for having ridiculous views about Depp without ever treating or examining him. On the contrary, Depp’s witness Dr Curry came across as credible having been someone who treated Heard for 12 hours!

8. As mentioned earlier, the killer blow for everyone (not just the jury) in Amber’s case was her pathetic choice of words when answering the question of not actually donating the $7m to charity when she had already mentioned publicly that she has done so.
-looking at the jury and saying “I use the word pledge and donate synonymously”, and then admitting to not having made that payment a few seconds later was probably the most insulting thing she could have said to the jury. This is a rich woman who has taken adulation and praise for her apparent sacrifices for the right cause, but she wants the jury to believe in her nonsense in an elaborate attempt to avoid having to tell the truth. That was audacious!

 

[Rana]

Amber Heard to appeal against US libel verdict as Johnny Depp celebrates $15m win in Newcastle pub.

https://news.sky.com/story/depp-v-h...p-celebrates-15-win-in-newcastle-pub-12625771

Remember, Amber won 1 of 3 claims.

She won against Waldman, not Depp. That claim by Waldman was quite ridiculous tbf

 

[Technics 1210]

These are bad things.

Why?

Heard thought she could get away with it as she did in the UK. The crucial difference being in the UK there was no jury that had to decide, but a judge alone.

She just didn’t have the evidence, the voice recordings totally undermined her, the photos didn’t prove a thing, no pictures of bruises, 1 witness backing her story, her sister, then caught lying in the dock, the list is endless, and of course she claimed she didn’t release the cabinet video to TMZ, then who did?

This case has set a massive precedent on domestic abuse. No longer is there a defacto position of believing a woman without evidence.

Amber’s career is over, and ironically, it’s the women who are highly critical of her, not the men.

 

[Rana]

These are bad things.

Can I ask you to tell me honestly if you watched this case or are you just commenting on it after the verdict?

 

[Technics 1210]

13 BILLION Tik Tok views.

Trial by Tik Tok

Public opinion does matter, because Amber/Depp are celebrities, and it’s the public who decide on whether they will watch another Amber/Depp movie or not.

If Aquaman 2 is released with Amber scenes, I doubt it will do well. I suspect the studio will completely remove her from the movie for the sake of generating a profit.

Hollywood love a great comeback, and Depp will make up for lost earnings with new movies.

 

[Technics 1210]

I love courtroom dramas, and this case felt like a Netflix series!

 

[Rana]

I love courtroom dramas, and this case felt like a Netflix series!

The people versus OJ Simpson was so good on Netflix

This could be an epic movie/series as well

 

[Technics 1210]

The people versus OJ Simpson was so good on Netflix

This could be an epic movie/series as well

Yeah that series was one of the best shows ever, awesome court room drama.

I hope Netflix do turn this case into a 10 part series - it’s a landmark case!

 

[Robert]

We can expect Women to think 10 times before even going to court.

Would you have had her settle out of court when he sued her, then?

 

[Rana]

Would you have had her settle out of court when he sued her, then?

What is there to settle? Would she retract her statements in the OP Ed which costed Depp 2 huge movie roles?

 

[Technics 1210]

What is there to settle? Would she retract her statements in the OP Ed which costed Depp 2 huge movie roles?

Yeah, it’s ok for Amber to defame and libel Depp, but sexist for Depp to sue her. [/sarcasm].

 

[Robert]

What is there to settle? Would she retract her statements in the OP Ed which costed Depp 2 huge movie roles?

Negotiate a financial settlement out of court and spare both parties the media circus, of course.

 

[sweep_shot]

Amber is getting grilled by feminists themselves. It is funny.

I hope Amber has learned a lesson from this mess.

 

[Savak]

I think the moment Amber lost this case was when she said “I use pledge and donate synonymously”.

Impossible to not be offended (if you are the jury) and to take her seriously after this.

If Jury catches you lying about 5-6 things in the trial, they have every right to feel that you are lying about everything.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Glad this is over. I was sick of hearing about it.

On a side note allowing cameras into these trials in the age of social media is a disaster.

Neither side really walked away as a "winner" from this but both ( and particularly Amber) will be subjected to a lifetime of trolling and memes.

Depp is probably too old and too coked up to care but I think it will stop people pursuing such claims in the future.

 

[Savak]

Critical mistakes committed by Amber and her Lawyers which resulted in such a humiliating defeat even with #MeToo not yet irrelevant in the world (my opinion)

1. Amber Heard’s lawyer Ben Rotternborn’s cross examination of Depp and his witnesses.
-BR was trying to hurry, curtail and mock the answers made by Jonny Depp. A witness from JD’s side also snapped back at him for not allowing him to complete his answer. This imo did not go down well on the Jury who might have felt that Amber’s lawyer is very cold and condescending in such a sensitive trial

2. Amber Heard’s inconsistent demeanour throughout the trial. Her change of attitude towards her lawyers on the stand versus Depp’s lawyers
-it was highly evident that Heard’s testimony was very much rehearsed when she would be allowed to speak without objection by her own lawyers. She came across as a woman in deep distress and pain. However, on the cross examination by Vasquez, the jury saw a side of Amber that didn’t know how to maintain that image of a weak/broken woman whilst attempting to clarify the many confusions and contradictions in her story as highlighted by Vasquez. The jury, the world saw the image of a woman taking no ownership and twisting words, narratives to suit her own agenda.

3. Judge Azcarate not succumbing under the pressure of the TMZ lawyer who wanted to block the entry of an ex TMZ employee that would have testified to crucial evidence of the deliberate leaking of the kitchen cabinets video.
-this was a huge blow to AH’s case because she was pinned in the corner with more awkward questions which resulted in more crucial lies on the stand

4.AH herself not knowing when to stop talking and digging a hole for herself, she admitted to writing the Op-Ed about the power of Jonny
-in round 2 of her cross examination by Vasquez, Heard wanted to take a more offensive approach knowing how the defensive approach in round 1 had totally left her exposed and vulnerable. In doing so, she slipped to the point where she clearly mentioned that the reason why she wrote the op-Ed was to talk to that phenomenon of Jonny in which people will come out and support a rich and powerful man. This IMO was a major death blow to her case and the case presented by her lawyers who until then had maintained that the op-Ed was not even about Jonny, and Jonny was misconstruing it to be about him. The jury are not lawyers, they will not look at these statements from the technical lens of the law but the lens of an ordinary person. Amber really did shoot herself in the foot here.

5.Elaine Beherndorf’s inability to keep up with Amber’s cross examination (round 1) and not objecting especially when she was under the pump. This allowed Vasquez to build a serious momentum which the jury would have been fully drawn to with concentration. Moreover, Elaine was a total failure on the rebuttal as she could hardly land a single, appropriate question which could have cleared up at least some of the mess created by AH’s terrible cross.

6. Heard indirectly accusing key witnesses from Depp‘s side of committing perjury whilst she herself had been exposed as a liar.
-using words such as ‘coming out of the woodwork’ and ‘the Johnny Depp show’ were ridiculous for people who have sworn to tell the truth under oath. It totally defeats the purpose of holding a fair trial to reach the truth. Surely, the Jury by now had had enough of Amber’s arrogance and it was just a matter of time when they would deliberate against her.

7. Amber’s terrible, questionable psychological expert and psychiatrist’s testimonies
-These were supposed to be key, fact witnesses which were supposed to provide professional testimony that could not be refuted due to their credibility as experts in that field. The fact that her female psychologist was proven to not administer the Tests for PTSD in the correct manner must have confirmed to the jury of her already blatant bias against JD. The male doctor was an absolute disaster who was exposed for having ridiculous views about Depp without ever treating or examining him. On the contrary, Depp’s witness Dr Curry came across as credible having been someone who treated Heard for 12 hours!

8. As mentioned earlier, the killer blow for everyone (not just the jury) in Amber’s case was her pathetic choice of words when answering the question of not actually donating the $7m to charity when she had already mentioned publicly that she has done so.
-looking at the jury and saying “I use the word pledge and donate synonymously”, and then admitting to not having made that payment a few seconds later was probably the most insulting thing she could have said to the jury. This is a rich woman who has taken adulation and praise for her apparent sacrifices for the right cause, but she wants the jury to believe in her nonsense in an elaborate attempt to avoid having to tell the truth. That was audacious!

Heard is lucky she is not being tried for Perjury.

Johnny had a much more stellar and professional legal team and that made a massive difference.

I have sympathy for Heards Lawyers, they had a bad case and Heard comes across as someone who doesn't listen to her lawyers

 

[Rana]

Negotiate a financial settlement out of court and spare both parties the media circus, of course.

Heard is delusional. She still doesn’t believe she is guilty. And what financial settlement? Heard’s net value isn’t anything more than $7-8m. The most she could do is offer $1m and what good would that do to JD who has lost $20m from Pirates 6 and potentially $18-20m from Fantastic beasts.

Heard as usual didn’t know when to stop (as evident from her style of testimony). Writing the op-Ed in order to increase her popularity to coincide with the release of Aquaman was an unnecessary move and now she has to pay for it.

 

[Savak]

An appeal will have a lower chance of success, they will only look at whether the law was applied correctly.

 

[Technics 1210]

It was Depp’s lawyers that insisted on a televised trial; being a celebrity, public opinion mattered.

Amber’s lawyers objected of course, but in the end, the televised trial was a tactical move and it paid off.

The truth had to be exposed, if it hadn’t, then Amber would still be masquerading behind the victim card.

I really hope Amber is tried for perjury now.

 

[Rana]

An appeal will have a lower chance of success, they will only look at whether the law was applied correctly.

I followed this case diligently through the law and crime network. The experts on the channel were quite certain that their are no grounds to an appeal as the case was televised and was held fairly. There is no proof that the law was broken at all in this case.

 

[Technics 1210]

Heard is delusional. She still doesn’t believe she is guilty. And what financial settlement? Heard’s net value isn’t anything more than $7-8m. The most she could do is offer $1m and what good would that do to JD who has lost $20m from Pirates 6 and potentially $18-20m from Fantastic beasts.

Heard as usual didn’t know when to stop (as evident from her style of testimony). Writing the op-Ed in order to increase her popularity to coincide with the release of Aquaman was an unnecessary move and now she has to pay for it.

Out of court settlement nearly always denotes guilt. Prince Andrew says hi!

Depp did the right thing, proved his innocence by publicly, and globally, humiliating her in court.

You are right, Amber could have shut her mouth after receiving $7M in divorce settlement, but no, she is a psychopath and didn’t know went to stop.

 

[Savak]

Amber Heard did not win the UK.
The Sun did- based on her witness testimony of abuse allegations against Johnny Depp.
Her allegations were NOT subject to discovery as they were in VA.
When analysis showed editing and lack of evidence, Depp won as they were defamation. The end.

 

[Rana]

In regards to the appeal on the verdict by Amber Heard, this is also in line with her not being in the control of her legal team, or not taking their professional advice.

If you followed the case carefully, it was becoming quite clear around the 4th-5th week mark that Jonny Depp has won the court of public opinion. The evidence in his favour and the evidence against Heard was too overwhelming, her career was basically over.

It was around this point where Amber completely changed her expressions and became extremely pro-active in the court. She stopped displaying herself as a woman with a tear in her eye or a woman recalling serious trauma, but instead a powerful career woman who was actively scribbling notes that were being passed on to her lawyers.

This indicated (to me at least) that Amber no longer believed in the strategies applied by her lawyers and decided to direct them herself whilst on the job, whereas Depp just took a backseat throughout and let his lawyers do everything. There were also rumours (unverified) of alleged bust ups/fights between Heard and Elaine who was scolded by Heard for doing a poor job.

The fact that Amber is now appealing this decision suggests that someone has not advised her properly as this could result in her being tried for perjury. Clearly, she is behaving erratically and her lawyers could care less because they will still make a decent earning at her expense, even though their reputation as a firm is in tatters!

 

[Robert]

Heard is delusional. She still doesn’t believe she is guilty. And what financial settlement? Heard’s net value isn’t anything more than $7-8m. The most she could do is offer $1m and what good would that do to JD who has lost $20m from Pirates 6 and potentially $18-20m from Fantastic beasts.

Heard as usual didn’t know when to stop (as evident from her style of testimony). Writing the op-Ed in order to increase her popularity to coincide with the release of Aquaman was an unnecessary move and now she has to pay for it.

Guilt or Not Guilt don't apply in civil law.

US freedom of speech laws are so liberal that one would have expected Heard to win. But she weakened her case by giving unreliable testimony. If Heard truly does have Borderline Personality Disorder then she is not clothed in her right mind.

Depp is worth $150M even those two films. Life is not all about money especially when one is super-rich.

In any event didn't he lose them because of the English case, which he brought against The Sun and not Heard?

 

[Rana]

Glad this is over. I was sick of hearing about it.

On a side note allowing cameras into these trials in the age of social media is a disaster.

Neither side really walked away as a "winner" from this but both ( and particularly Amber) will be subjected to a lifetime of trolling and memes.

Depp is probably too old and too coked up to care but I think it will stop people pursuing such claims in the future.

There is only so much humiliation a man can take at the expense of another person’s lie about him.

Heard deserved to be exposed, and she has celebrated her victories over Depp in the past through social media trends. She deleted a 2017 video on her Instagram where she and her sister where celebrating the $7m payment by dancing to Justin Beiber’s “sorry” song. She wasn’t mocking an innocent man then was she?

 

[Technics 1210]

Depp didn’t sue for money, a) he is worth over $500M, b) He knows Amber doesn’t have 10M let alone th 50M nominal figure he sued for.

This was all about exposing a delusional liar by exposing the truth.

Amber must be calling Musk right now! )

 

[MenInG]

Amber Heard has said she will appeal against the verdict in the multimillion-dollar defamation lawsuit brought in the US by her ex-husband Johnny Depp.

Heard, 36, said she was "heartbroken" and felt "disappointment beyond words" after Depp was awarded $15m (£11.9m) by a court in Virginia on Wednesday.

Sources close to the actress, who won $2m (£1.6m) in her countersuit against Depp, 58, have told NBC News that she will appeal against the verdict. No additional details were provided.

Depp was awarded $10m in compensatory damages and $5m in punitive damages over a first-person article by Heard in The Washington Post in 2018 in which she claimed she was a survivor of domestic abuse.

SKY

 

[Rana]

Guilt or Not Guilt don't apply in civil law.

US freedom of speech laws are so liberal that one would have expected Heard to win. But she weakened her case by giving unreliable testimony. If Heard truly does have Borderline Personality Disorder then she is not clothed in her right mind.

Depp is worth $150M even those two films. Life is not all about money especially when one is super-rich.

In any event didn't he lose them because of the English case, which he brought against The Sun and not Heard?

Depp’s legal team definitely argued that Disney dropped Jonny from Pirate’s 6 two days after the op-Ed was published in the Washington post. This was confirmed by Depp’s agent who couldn’t rescue Pirates 6 for him. I think the emphasis on this trial was Disney and their snubbing of Depp, so we can at least conclude that the Op-Ed was the reason as to why Disney abandoned Depp.

In regards to your comment about Depp’s $150m net value, we also heard throughout the trial that Depp’s financial condition was alarmingly on the decline around the 2016 mark and his business manager was ‘deeply concerned’ in his own words. Yes, he has money for a lifetime of comfort but these circumstances can change dramatically in a short space of time. Therefore, it is better for Depp to make as much as he can before he is not hired for top draw roles due to age.

Making Amber pay is more personal than business. She married him, used him to propel her career. She made ridiculous demands for her and her friends before filing for the TRO because those ridiculous demands were rejected.

 

[MenInG]

Amber Heard's lawyer has said social media posts "influenced" the jury in Johnny Depp's lawsuit against his former wife, adding that her client cannot afford the $10m (£8m) awarded in damages.

Elaine Bredehoft made the remarks a day after Depp won the high-profile case against his ex-wife, with the court awarding the actor $10m in compensatory damages.

She said she believes the jury could not escape the intense and "lopsided" social media frenzy surrounding the trial.

"How can you not? They went home every night. They have families. The families are on social media," she told NBC.

"We had a 10-day break in the middle because of the judicial conference. There's no way they couldn't have been influenced by it," she said.

When asked if her client would be able to pay the $10m in compensatory damages, Ms Bredehoft replied: "Oh no, absolutely not."

Ms Bredehoft described the social media coverage as "horrible", adding that she opposed having cameras in the courtroom.

Johnny Depp arriving at Sage Gateshead where he is due to join Jeff Beck on stage on Thursday. Picture date: Thursday June 2, 2022.

"It's like the Roman Colosseum, you know? How they viewed this whole case," she said.

"I was against cameras in the courtroom, and I went on record with that and argued against it because of the sensitive nature of this. But it made it a zoo."

Ms Bredehoft said that after the verdict, Heard told her that she was "so sorry to all those women out there" and said the result was "a setback for all women in and outside the courtroom".

She said the Aquaman actor "feels the burden of that".

The lawyer said the verdict sends a "horrible message".

"Unless you pull out your phone and you video your spouse or your significant other beating you, effectively you won't be believed," she added.

Depp had sued Heard for $50m (£38.2m) over an article published in The Washington Post in December 2018, in which she referred to herself as "a public figure representing domestic abuse".

Heard's column did not mention Depp by name, but he argued it was an example of "defamation by implication" because parts of the column referred to allegations of abuse she made against him following their break-up in 2016.

How has online abuse of Amber Heard become acceptable?

Heard had issued a counter-claim for $100m (£76.4m) over statements calling her allegations a "hoax" made by her ex-husband's attorney which were published in Mail Online stories in 2020.

Depp was not in court on Wednesday, but the jury awarded him $15m (£11.9m) in damages - $10m in compensatory damages and $5m (£4m) in punitive damages.

However Fairfax County Circuit Judge Penney Azcarate reduced the punitive damages awarded to Depp to $350,000 in line with the state's legal limit, making his total damages $10.4m.

Heard said she will appeal the verdict, which a court in Virginia delivered on Wednesday.

SKY

 

[Technics 1210]

Amber Heard's lawyer has said social media posts "influenced" the jury in Johnny Depp's lawsuit against his former wife, adding that her client cannot afford the $10m (£8m) awarded in damages.

Elaine Bredehoft made the remarks a day after Depp won the high-profile case against his ex-wife, with the court awarding the actor $10m in compensatory damages.

She said she believes the jury could not escape the intense and "lopsided" social media frenzy surrounding the trial.

"How can you not? They went home every night. They have families. The families are on social media," she told NBC.

"We had a 10-day break in the middle because of the judicial conference. There's no way they couldn't have been influenced by it," she said.

When asked if her client would be able to pay the $10m in compensatory damages, Ms Bredehoft replied: "Oh no, absolutely not."

Ms Bredehoft described the social media coverage as "horrible", adding that she opposed having cameras in the courtroom.

Johnny Depp arriving at Sage Gateshead where he is due to join Jeff Beck on stage on Thursday. Picture date: Thursday June 2, 2022.

"It's like the Roman Colosseum, you know? How they viewed this whole case," she said.

"I was against cameras in the courtroom, and I went on record with that and argued against it because of the sensitive nature of this. But it made it a zoo."

Ms Bredehoft said that after the verdict, Heard told her that she was "so sorry to all those women out there" and said the result was "a setback for all women in and outside the courtroom".

She said the Aquaman actor "feels the burden of that".

The lawyer said the verdict sends a "horrible message".

"Unless you pull out your phone and you video your spouse or your significant other beating you, effectively you won't be believed," she added.

Depp had sued Heard for $50m (£38.2m) over an article published in The Washington Post in December 2018, in which she referred to herself as "a public figure representing domestic abuse".

Heard's column did not mention Depp by name, but he argued it was an example of "defamation by implication" because parts of the column referred to allegations of abuse she made against him following their break-up in 2016.

How has online abuse of Amber Heard become acceptable?

Heard had issued a counter-claim for $100m (£76.4m) over statements calling her allegations a "hoax" made by her ex-husband's attorney which were published in Mail Online stories in 2020.

Depp was not in court on Wednesday, but the jury awarded him $15m (£11.9m) in damages - $10m in compensatory damages and $5m (£4m) in punitive damages.

However Fairfax County Circuit Judge Penney Azcarate reduced the punitive damages awarded to Depp to $350,000 in line with the state's legal limit, making his total damages $10.4m.

Heard said she will appeal the verdict, which a court in Virginia delivered on Wednesday.

SKY

Awwwww. Poor little Amber.

She was playing to the public and social media too but failed. No one believed her. Her acting in the dock was awful, her own acting coach stated she couldn’t cry, then of course there was the point of evidence - the public are not stupid.

Declare bankruptcy! You deserve it for your lies and the humiliation and shame you have brought upon genuine victims of domestic abuse!

 

[Rana]

Elaine has lost the plot.

If according to her, the Jury had access to social media and pro Depp propaganda…would they not also have access to information about what took place in the UK trial and the fact that Depp was found guilty in UK? Wouldn’t that put a doubt in their mind?

 

[Rana]

Elaine needs to own up and take responsibility for training her client in a terrible way. Amber Heard lost this trial because Amber Heard was insulting the jury’s intelligence with her rehearsed testimony, inconsistent displays of mood and poor choice of words and arguments.


One example, the jury heard an Audio of Amber abusing, calling Jonny a deadbeat Dad, loser and other inappropriate things. When questioned about it, her response was “we said a lot or horrible things to each other”. Her inability to own up to her own mistakes instead of blaming it on others is what cost her this trial.

Either Elaine has trained Amber or Amber has totally influenced and changed Elaine’s ability to accept responsibility