VA - Johnny Depp's defamation case against ex Amber Heard, who countersued #11

[TTF14]

Verdict tomorrow? Yay or Nay?

Nay. Wednesday just before lunch.

 

[wasnt_me]

I have no problem believing that she may have experienced SA by college age as she (or ghostwriter) claimed in the op-ed. However, if what BR said is true, then why risk perjury by--IMO--stealing KJ's story as her own and testify to SA?

BR said the op-ed is nothing to do with JD other than the Titanic reference and career fallout, essentially, and that is only about AH's experiences as a woman prior to JD and following 2016 TRO.
BR claims that no one has to believe anything AH said about the alleged SA, it doesn't matter, blah blah.

Then why put her on the stand to testify to it? And why not better prepare your witness with the cross (which hand was the bottle, was it before or after holding her by the neck, before or after finger injury, etc)? Why are we throwing everything at JD, hoping something will stick?

IMO, because AH insisted upon it. She is not finished trying to punish him for things not working out her way.
Provoking him throughout their relationship did not get the result she wanted, which IMO was to make him assault her and collect a big payday.
The presence of the bodyguards ruined a set-up, IMO, in May 2016--that ruined her plans to "act in self-defense" on a large scale...I shudder when I think about what the headlines could have been.
JD wasn't playing her game in the midst of divorce talks, which is why she filed the TRO--again, for a payday....
but then she started dating EM, and hey, why not settle for $7m to pledge-aka-donate, build saint persona, and land a bigger fish?

But back to the case, who IS in charge of AH legal team? I guess I really shouldn't be asking until the verdict comes in.
Moooooooooooooooooooo!

I 100% back this post.

You make a good point BR spent a lot of time trying to say the article wasn't about JD, but then she got on the stand in rebuttal and said she wrote it ABOUT him because she knows how many people "protect" him. SMh. Can't make this stuff up!

 

[raja]

Verdict tomorrow? Yay or Nay?

I think it will be Wednesday morning.

 

[katydid23]

Amber Heard's mother's text message to Johnny Depp saying: I love you, son

In the midst of the legal battle for defamation that Johnny Depp and Amber Heard are facing each other, the trial between the actors has generated revelations about the relationshi

www.marca.com

AH’s parent’s were not called as witnesses?

Amber's mother passed away I believe.

 

[LaborDayRN]

I am trying to prepare myself to accept and be Okay, with any upcoming verdict.

I would jump for joy if Johnny wins and she has to pay his legal fees and she loses the countersuit.

But juries have broken my heart before so I am steeling myself. And in this case, thank goodness Johnny already got what he wanted most. He really needed to explain his story.

And Camille and Ben were able to catch her in some big lies. The TMZ guy was devastating to her case, imo. And I just
re-watched some of Heard's final cross by Camille. lmao What a train wreck for Amber.

I think it was very healing for Johnny's soul to watch Amber hem and haw and try and deny so many obvious lies in her final testimony. That was exactly what Johnny was here for.

So I am not going to live or die by this upcoming verdict. The law in this case makes it a difficult roads for Johnny to prove that he never did anything considered abusive towards his evil ex-wife. The jury might feel they were both toxic and just nullify the whole thing, both ways. ....whatever....

Johnny is doing an awesome Little Rock tour with some of the world's best musicians. And he is in preproduction for a French film to play King Louie XV. Spending 3 months in Versaille gives him lots of time with his kids as well.

So I don't really care all that much what happens with this verdict. Unless of course they come for him and want him to pay Amber millions....but I just don't see that happening....

I feel the same way. I do have one hope though...I hope that whatever way the verdict comes back, these two people can agree to move on with their lives and leave this chapter behind. I know that it's very unlikely that AH will allow that to happen. One can dream, right?

 

[whitelilac]

Verdict tomorrow? Yay or Nay?

I don't believe so. Leaning to Thursday. There's too much to go through imo, plus the award amount, if any.

IF there is a verdict tomorrow, I think it would be in favor of JD, but I don't think they will come to a decision tomorrow.

 

[concernedmother]

I don't believe so. Leaning to Thursday. There's too much to go through imo, plus the award amount, if any.

IF there is a verdict tomorrow, I think it would be in favor of JD, but I don't think they will come to a decision tomorrow.

Just listen to the rebuttal testimony of AH . Makes the op-ed intention pretty simple. Thus, Johnny wins his case.

 

[Herat]

Can part of the verdict or terms also be some sort of verbal restraining order so that AH cannot be making false statements about JD, and perhaps also visa versa?

He will find this easy to live with.

She won't.

 

[Anxala]

A good, pertinent and sobering read here.

A trial by TikTok and the death knell for MeToo. Who won Depp v Heard?

JOHNNY DEPP V AMBER HEARD: With both Johnny Depp and Amber Heard resting their cases in the multi-million-dollar defamation trial, it now comes down to the jury to decide the verdict. But with Johnny Depp already winning the social media war, does it really matter? <strong>Rachel Sharp</strong>...

uk.yahoo.com

 

[hopingicanhelp]

Mostly the news that Juror H/8 is now merely an alternate, also, rehashing Dr. (I am being polite and using her full title) Hughes' PTSD claims which, while I feel her assessment was sloppy (to be VERY polite), the Jury may give a lot of credence. I also worry that Dr. Curry does not have among her credentials that she is Board Certified, which, in the jurors' eyes, may devalue her evaluation of AH, and her opinion re: the BPD/HD diagnosis .

In general, PTSD is a much more familiar, understood and acknowledged diagnosis by laypersons than personality disorders are-- I have often found people find PD 's vague, confusing and don't understand how they "came to be" as it were. With PTSD, the origins are often far more concrete, and clear to point to. PD's origins can be esoteric, and PD's to laypersons sound hard to understand and cope with, impossible to cure and off-putting. So, then I start to wonder wether the jurors will lean toward a familiar term and diagnosis? And ascribe and excuse AH's "inconsistencies" (lies) and manipulations to being a poor victim with PTSD?

Then, I calculate the influence of the women in the lives of the jurors -- how many have actually connections to genuine #MeToo 'ers-- or want to do the right thing by women and giving AH a mountain of benefit of doubt? BPD/HD 's are such manipulators-- will the Jurors have her number? I worry.

Thankfully, there are also very concrete, clear testimonies that discredit AH greatly--but will AH's side's attempt at spin render those testimonies inconsequential?

I am just going to plant some beans and tomatoes and smell the air. And work on trusting the young men on the jury to deliberate soundly. With common sense!!!!

BBM

I am holding on to hope that the jurors can recognize different specialties or concentrations within a field.

From a therapeutic standpoint: if Hughes approached AH with the purpose of determining best place to start for therapy, it might make sense that she started in one place to more gently assess AH (especially if AH was resistant, rambling, etc) and get a sense of the most severe symptoms to first address.

From a litigation/forensic standpoint: Curry's job was not to treat AH but to assess her, to cut through to the heart of the matter and administer testing to provide testimony based on standardized metrics. Hughes's board certification may help her testimony, but she did not do herself any favors by suggesting Curry didn't follow directions, especially once WD pointed out Hughes's own cherry-picking of instructions.

Should the jury decide to give more weight to Hughes due to certification, I do hope they can discern that Hughes's assessment of AH trauma symptoms might reflect childhood trauma, not JD, since Hughes did not follow CAPS-5 protocol.

Curry stood out among all the psych professionals with her assessment as none of the others documented PDs in their notes. I hope some of their notes indicated traits mentioned by Curry even without mention of diagnoses, and I hope the jury members have at least some experience with the practice of some medical professionals withholding documentation of diagnoses (preferring to document symptoms/traits only) for the purposes of dealing with insurance companies.

MOO!

 

[Kiranerys]

The ACLU filed to be reimbursed (by JD) for their time and cost of document preparation - $86,253.26.

"For the foregoing reasons, the Court should grant the motion and order Mr. Depp to pay the ACLU Non-Parties production expenses totaling $86,253.26 ($85,156.59 in fees and $1,096.67 in costs)."

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fb...tId=AUBGLo/iyQoAI7l9e_PLUS_pWwg==&system=prod

ETA:

https://deppdive.net/pdf/aclu/154545_2021_John_C_Depp_II_v_John_C_Depp_II_MEMORANDUM_OF_LAW_I_99.pdf

The only thing the ACLU should be filing at this point is a heartfelt apology and a plea not to sue the s*it out of them for their part in this witch hunt IMO

 

[they'll get you]

From the beginning of his testimony, Depp emphasised that he brought the lawsuit to “clear my name,” for his sake and that of his children, Lily-Rose, 22, and Jack, 20, as well as for those in the movie industry who trusted him.



“When [Johnny Depp] stepped off the stand, I think he already won based on his definition of winning,” Texas civil lawyer Katherine Lizardo told the New York Post.
“Because he already obtained the favour of the court of public opinion … once he told his story.”

https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/music/johnny-depp-makes-surprise-appearance-on-stage-with-jeff-beck-in-england/news-story/70718d0eab79e1fa4ac2b4de25c07b68

 

[fred&edna]

A good, pertinent and sobering read here.

A trial by TikTok and the death knell for MeToo. Who won Depp v Heard?

JOHNNY DEPP V AMBER HEARD: With both Johnny Depp and Amber Heard resting their cases in the multi-million-dollar defamation trial, it now comes down to the jury to decide the verdict. But with Johnny Depp already winning the social media war, does it really matter? <strong>Rachel Sharp</strong>...

uk.yahoo.com

This is one of my favorite lines from the article. Ms Bedera obviously suggests that guilt nor innocence matter AND thinks women (and men) are idiots for supporting Mr Depp. As a woman she insults ME.

Regardless of innocence or guilt, Ms Bedera says the outpouring of support for Mr Depp is not actually surprising.


jmo

 

[Kiranerys]

Oh no, now its made it into the Urban Dictionary

MEGAPINT
A larger pint usually to sooth the pain caused by someone p******g in your bed.

The amount of alcohol necessary to deal with the fact your abusive wife just cut off your finger.

A large glass of wine consumed only by Gods.

Stop it my kid is asleep on the sofa because he is sick and I nearly woke him up with my lol'ing then

 

[hopingicanhelp]

I know… I was thinking he had good taste, except for the super gaudy megapints! I’m much more pro-ornate and art deco than I am modern…


I thought when he said ‘ambition’, he was referring as shorthand to her jealousy and ego; the way she was always so palpably competitive with him and his career, even though anyone will tell you it’s ludicrous to compare a 26 y o female with a 55 year old male… I could be wrong though.

I agree that is definitely another way to explain it--her jealousy of him and desire to mirror HIS career would fit with the PD traits. She probably wanted everything he had--the name, reputation, talent, admiration, money, staff, and power (though it probably irked her that he was humble and generous). I do believe she wanted to compete with everyone, not just JD.

They have a difference in values, priorities, what they find worthwhile. He is driven by projects, passions, and relationships that feed the soul and he just happens to have the talent and personality to draw audiences. She is driven by the audience, so the narrative and personality has to shift accordingly, IMO.

 

[Anxala]

This is one of my favorite lines from the article. Ms Bedera obviously suggests that guilt nor innocence matter AND thinks women (and men) are idiots for supporting Mr Depp. As a woman she insults ME.

Regardless of innocence or guilt, Ms Bedera says the outpouring of support for Mr Depp is not actually surprising.


jmo

I have no favourite lines since the piece needs to be read objectively as a whole and in context.

As I said, I think it's a very good and sobering read about how the very dark side of social media can so critically influence opinion.

 

[fred&edna]

I have no favourite lines since the piece needs to be read objectively as a whole and in context.

As I said, I think it's a very good and sobering read about how the very dark side of social media can influence a court case like this.

If the piece had been written objectively you might have a point. But, since it wasn't... I'll just take a hard pass.

 

[Breathe]

Was In The Fire the one where she was paid $65,000 for?

I believe so. I was surprised when EB said she filmed in Guatemala. IIRC

Amber Heard Gets to Work Filming New Thriller ‘In The Fire’ in Guatemala City

See the set photos

www.justjared.com

Here’s a summary of the film according to Variety: “In the Fire takes place on a farm in Colombia in the 1890s. A couple with a young autistic son have to face both the villagers and the local priest who worry the boy is possessed by demonic forces and is the reason for all the village’s woes.

“After the death of his wife, Don Marquez (Eduardo Noriega) brings in Grace Victoria Burnham, an American psychiatrist (Heard) to find out what is ailing the boy, played by Lorenzo McGovern Zaini. Heard’s character accurately diagnoses and heals him while facing up to the villagers.”

Amber Heard roped in for Conor Allyn’s period drama thriller ‘In the Fire’

Amber Heard is all set to feature in the 19th century-set supernatural thriller titled In the Fire. Check the details about her character and film below.

www.republicworld.com

The plot of the film revolves around a couple with a young autistic son having to face both the villagers and the local priest who worry the boy is possessed by demonic forces and is the reason for all the village's woes. Amber will be seen playing an American psychiatrist named Grace Victoria Burnham.

 

[squareandrabbet]

I have no problem believing that she may have experienced SA by college age as she (or ghostwriter) claimed in the op-ed. However, if what BR said is true, then why risk perjury by--IMO--stealing KJ's story as her own and testify to SA?

BR said the op-ed is nothing to do with JD other than the Titanic reference and career fallout, essentially, and that is only about AH's experiences as a woman prior to JD and following 2016 TRO.
BR claims that no one has to believe anything AH said about the alleged SA, it doesn't matter, blah blah.

Then why put her on the stand to testify to it? And why not better prepare your witness with the cross (which hand was the bottle, was it before or after holding her by the neck, before or after finger injury, etc)? Why are we throwing everything at JD, hoping something will stick?

IMO, because AH insisted upon it. She is not finished trying to punish him for things not working out her way.
Provoking him throughout their relationship did not get the result she wanted, which IMO was to make him assault her and collect a big payday.
The presence of the bodyguards ruined a set-up, IMO, in May 2016--that ruined her plans to "act in self-defense" on a large scale...I shudder when I think about what the headlines could have been.
JD wasn't playing her game in the midst of divorce talks, which is why she filed the TRO--again, for a payday....
but then she started dating EM, and hey, why not settle for $7m to pledge-aka-donate, build saint persona, and land a bigger fish?

But back to the case, who IS in charge of AH legal team? I guess I really shouldn't be asking until the verdict comes in.
Moooooooooooooooooooo!

I keep saying- albeit not too loud, just in case this saga is not yet over - that amongst other things, who AH really needed to seduce was a stunt coordinator, because her ‘blocking’, as they call the choreography of action sequences, stinks out loud.

Also, I think it’s super hard for the jury to counteract/disregard the fact that if they have no idea who Amber Heard in fact is, which seems likely, they too will have the same questions we have about the editorial, namely ‘Why does the preeminent newspaper in the US think the general public will give a hang about Amber Heard’s experiences, unless a famous ex is invoked?’

I mean, to some extent surely part of Elaine etc mandate, has been ‘trying to show the jury who Amber Heard in fact is’, for a very good reason??

 

[Herat]

The only thing the ACLU should be filing at this point is a heartfelt apology and a plea not to sue the s*it out of them for their part in this witch hunt IMO

WHAT?????

The ACLU expects Johnny Depp to pay their costs, when it was THEIR lack of ethics and circumspect review that caused all this in the first place.

This actually seems to harm the awareness of Sexual Violence even more.