VERDICT WATCH VA - Johnny Depp's defamation case against ex Amber Heard, who countersued #10

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sky News

'Either he hit her countless times or you can't believe a single word that comes out of her mouth'

Johnny Depp's lawyer Camille Vasquez says Amber Heard's team have argued that the jury only needs to find that the actor "touched her once" for her to win this case. "But common sense should tell you that you can't pick and choose Ms Heard's allegations."

She describes Heard's testimony as "incredibly dramatic" and "over the top" and again says this was a "performance".

"Either he hit her countless times or you can't believe a single word that comes out of her mouth," Ms Vasquez tells jurors.

She moves on to "vivid language" used in Depp's messages. "Mr Depp has a unique style of writing. He uses words I don't use and you probably don't use either."

However, Ms Vasquez says Depp has a "dark sense of humour" and modelled writing on literary figures such as Hunter S Thompson.

"It's not everyone's cup of tea, but it's who he is... using bad language and colourful humour does not mean you are a violent abuser."

She says these messages are just a distraction and not evidence of abuse.

"Hitting your husband is evidence of abuse."
 
Sky News

Depp's lawyer: Why would Johnny Depp put himself through this if he was guilty of anything?

Camille Vasquez, Johnny Depp's attorney, finishes her speech by asking the jury: "Why are you here?"

"You're here because of a lie," she says. "The evidence overwhelmingly shows that Ms Heard is an abuser. And that she is a liar. She lied about Mr Depp and took on the role of a lifetime as a public figure representing domestic abuse."

She says Heard's "best evidence" is a video of Depp banging cupboards and his text messages "using bad words and dark, ugly humour... that's her best evidence."

Ms Vasquez says Heard presented herself as a face of the #MeToo movement.

"This is not a #MeToo situation. There are no #MeToos. Just Not Mes."

She says Heard does not "deserve to be known as a representative of survivors of abuse" and Depp does not "deserve to be known as a representative of perpetrators of abuse.

"That is what this case is about. It's not about money. It's about giving Mr Depp his life back."

Ms Vasquez asks the jury to consider why Depp would put him through this, "expose every embarrassing detail of his life on national television, if he was guilty of anything - anything - that Ms Heard accuses him of."

She finishes by saying: "We ask you to set the record straight. That he is not the abuser... and she is not the heroic survivor she portrayed. And we ask you to tell Ms Heard that what she did was wrong."
 
ok, they DO determine damages during this deliberation, not after a verdict
Well, "yes and no"... it takes place in the same jury session; but it's at the end of them answering all of the counts.

(Source: when I was a juror in a civil trial, we all got happy that we were "done"; only for the foreperson to remind us that we still had to decide on appropriate compensation before we could hand jury papers up to the judge...)

Also, I want to include that for anyone who was surprised by all the plaintiff objections during EB, Camille basically rolled up "why" the objections had taken place with her first sentence...

"Miss Heard's counsel has mischaracterized the record multiple times".

Off the top of my head, one which caused the outraged look from Camille to Ben, concerned Elaine claiming Sgt. Marie Sandanaga had said the (rest of the) LAPD acted INappropriately, and should have filled out an incident statement regardless of what AH decided to do about pressing charges... IMO this is a lie.

IIRC, Sgt. Sandanaga in fact repeated that the responding officers had in fact done everything perfectly; and that a responding party DOES have to agree to press charges before an incident report will be filed; and that's just one of EB's four lies.
 
While it does seem like a LOT of deliberation through all the evidence and testimony in the last 6 weeks, I still won't be surprised if the jury has a verdict this evening.
Even though they’re not supposed to, I would imagine some or most of the jurors have decided the verdict. I remember on one of the trials I served on years ago, I couldn’t help forming an opinion and was anxiously awaiting to see what the rest of the jury thought!
 
Sky News

Amber Heard's lawyer: Abuse hoax claims are 'vicious and vile'

Ben Rottenborn, representing Amber Heard, is now making his rebuttal closing argument.

He reiterates that if the jury believes that Depp was abusive in any way once, "your job is very easy".

He says the suggestion that Heard's allegations are a hoax are "vicious and vile" and that evidence shows she did not make up any hoax.

Mr Rottenborn says evidence shows Heard was abused and there are witnesses who support this.

"The evidence shows that Ms Heard did not commit abuse hoaxes," he says.

He reminds the jury of Depp's words in a text saying he would bring Heard "global humiliation".

Mr Rottenborn says Depp kept this "promise".

He asks the jury to hold Depp accountable and "stand up" for domestic abuse victims and freedom of speech.

"Give Amber Heard her voice back. Give Amber Heard her life back."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
54
Guests online
2,350
Total visitors
2,404

Forum statistics

Threads
600,613
Messages
18,111,275
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top