VA - Johnny Depp's defamation case against ex Amber Heard, who countersued #5

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ontario Mom said:
All of this testimony is stuff the world already knows: Johnny and Amber were drinkers, drug users, and fought like mad, and broke things.

NONE of that, supports her outrageous claims of physical and sexual abuse she claims to have suffered via the op-ed piece, which is the entire point of JD's counter suit.

jmo
Click to expand...
The funny thing is, probably because of my age, I didn’t know anything about JD or AH, other than skipping the dog quarantine in Australia. I’ve never seen any of JD’s movies. Somehow I heard about the trial and I’ve always been fascinated in criminal law, civil law, trials and investigations (one of my daughters is an attorney). I’m also interested in psychology and human behavior. This drew me to start following this trial. I love to study body language, and based on the trial so far I feel AH is anything but authentic. Watching her on the stand was quite unsettling. I agree with you that in spite of their alcohol and drug use, as well as the toxic combination of their personalities, I don’t believe all of what she has claimed. I sense exaggeration. I absolutely do not blame JD for fighting back against her claims. All just my personal opinion, of course …
 
Sky News

Makeup artist says she does not know how Heard's injuries were caused

Johnny Depp's lawyer Camille Vasquez is now asking questions to Amber Heard's former makeup artist Melanie Inglessis.

She asks Ms Inglessis if she ever saw Depp act in a violent manner, yell, kick, slap or punch Heard during their relationship.

The makeup artist says she did not.

Ms Vasquez says: "Any injuries that you claim to have seen on Ms Heard, you don't know one way or another how they were caused?"

"Correct," Ms Inglessis replies.

Ms Vasquez then draws her attention to the injuries on Heard's face on 16 December 2015.

The lawyer asks: "Any information you have about the cause of these injuries came from Ms Head only, correct?

"From 16 December, correct," Ms Inglessis replies.
 
Weki said:
It's difficult for me to understand why these witnesses who have distanced themselves from AH are willing to testify to bolster her story. I mean, I have to believe that they were themselves drained by her emotional neediness and drama. How could they not playback the past & ask themselves whether she was telling them the truth or not? I will say that they've generally been complimentary of Johnny. But I think it speaks to how persuasive this personality type is - that people who are so drained by them and distanced themselves can still testify on their behalf. I'd be like "I don't know her." lol. But maybe I'm just mean! And I also wonder how much the fact that they were feeding off her helps in them believing her bs even after the friendship is over.
Click to expand...
Who's to say AH hadnt threatened them or used blackmail.

It is her character to "threaten people to lie for her."

The fact that she bullied her underling into lieing for her about bringing her dogs over illegally said Amber wielded a lot of power and would have made my life miserable,” he said, saying she could be “subversive!"
 
HongKongPhooey said:
I do strongly believe this.

And why can none of them give a precise reason why they are no longer friends? It’s bizarre to me.
Click to expand...

Maybe they were the ones who signed NDA's, and maybe AH is the one who "persuaded" them? .
IMO the threat of proof that you perjured yourself could be very compelling....
 
Ontario Mom said:
All of this testimony is stuff the world already knows: Johnny and Amber were drinkers, drug users, and fought like mad, and broke things.

NONE of that, supports her outrageous claims of physical and sexual abuse she claims to have suffered via the op-ed piece, which is the entire point of JD's counter suit.

jmo
Click to expand...

Having followed all this case, that's my sense of it too.

If JD ever got clean and sober and went into deep recovery work from his childhood trauma followed by decades of substance misuse / addiction, he may come to realise, when taking inventory of the wreckage of addiction, that picking a poor choice of partner (or even getting into an utterly abusive relationship) is ultimately his responsibility and the consequences of that are being presented here in court. Carnage.

AH has definitely done wrong, she clearly needs to do her own recovery too and she is absolutely IMO profoundly unreal and dishonest with seemingly no moral compass. Maybe she's an incurable Narc with lifelong NPD? but she's probably also really really scared of getting landed with a $50m bill that she can't pay.

For the sake of his kids and her baby, then personally I can only pray for the both of them to get well.
 
The problem is it takes only one juror to hang this case. As one legal commentator said last night, these trials are won or lost in jury selection. I think it's also possible that there could be a juror who finds AH sympathetic like that one juror in the Jodi Arias trial. Although I realize that issue has several layers including that the juror perhaps didn't like the prosecution due to her own prior legal issues etc. I don't want to argue over that but my point is that it takes one juror. This has to be unanimous for JD to win.
 
Last edited:
Weki said:
The problem is it takes only one juror to hang this case. As one legal commentator said last night, these trials are won or lost in jury selection. I think it's also possible that there could be a juror who finds AH sympathetic like that one juror in the Jodi Arias trial. Although I realize that issue has several layers including that the juror perhaps didn't like the prosecution due to her own issues etc. I don't want to argue over that but my point is that it takes one juror. This has to be unanimous for JD to win.
Click to expand...
I hear you. Maybe for JD, it will be enough to be vindicated in public eye and he wouldn't retry the case if the jury is hung.

I heard from some of LawTube who were in the courtroom that a lot of the jury had tuned out on AH. I can't imagine these Depositions got them tuned back in. Who knows.
 
Kiranerys said:
Maybe they were the ones who signed NDA's, and maybe AH is the one who "persuaded" them? .
IMO the threat of proof that you perjured yourself could be very compelling....
Click to expand...

Yes, when multiple million dollar figures are being bandied around in the courts, then anyone 'normal' would be extremely fearful of making a statement. Personally speaking, I would be filled with anxiety and possibly even self-doubt and second guess what I saw / remembered - far easier to not get involved.
 
makayla said:
The funny thing is, probably because of my age, I didn’t know anything about JD or AH, other than skipping the dog quarantine in Australia. I’ve never seen any of JD’s movies. Somehow I heard about the trial and I’ve always been fascinated in criminal law, civil law, trials and investigations (one of my daughters is an attorney). I’m also interested in psychology and human behavior. This drew me to start following this trial. I love to study body language, and based on the trial so far I feel AH is anything but authentic. Watching her on the stand was quite unsettling. I agree with you that in spite of their alcohol and drug use, as well as the toxic combination of their personalities, I don’t believe all of what she has claimed. I sense exaggeration. I absolutely do not blame JD for fighting back against her claims. All just my personal opinion, of course …
Click to expand...

Even though I've watched JD since 21 Jump Street (I'm pushing 60 myself), I pretty much detest and always avoid celeb "news" because a.) it isn't news, it's gossip and b.) it doesn't affect my life so it's none of my business. Even avoiding celeb news you still see all the headlines and the social media posts so I had a general idea of the claims, counter claims, etc. But still, I didn't know most of the finer details (and still don't, I'm sure). Like many others here, I'm also kind of a criminal/civil court trial nerd, human psych nerd, and figured this trial would be quite interesting. Camille's beautiful cross was the icing on the cake, of course :) The next best thing to happen? Is for the ruling to come back in Johnny's favor. I think she's lying and I don't think you get to get away with lying about someone to further your own agenda.

jmo
 
kaos said:
There's a good thread here that explains a lot of the details regarding the dogs.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1524568305247211520
Click to expand...

Whatever that hair piece is that's laying over her shoulder reminds me of the photo from the hair blob that is laying on the floor of her bedroom .. looks like a hair extension. What I've seen, her hair looks very fine and not long enough on it's own to be braided and still have a long enough tail to lay over her shoulder. IMO
 
I think Johnny knows he might not win.

During his testimony he said "No matter the outcome of this trial, the second the allegations were made against me, and turned into fodder for the media, once that happened, I lost then.'' Its not the direct quote but he said this towards the end of his testimony if you want to hear it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 198 more.
Total: 452 (members: 199, guests: 253)

Online statistics

Members online
199
Guests online
253
Total visitors
452
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,591
Messages
18,241,940
Members
234,401
Latest member
CRIM1959
Back
Top