VA - Johnny Depp's defamation case against ex Amber Heard, who countersued #7

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

Reader

New Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2004
Messages
7,033
Reaction score
101
Last edited by a moderator:
ADMIN REMINDER:

Websleuths Victim Friendly rule does not allow members to poke fun at an alleged victim, trash them, or blame them for what they claim has happened to them.

If you want to do any of the above, WS isn't the place to do it.

ETA: Hopefully this clarifies ...

Johnny Depp has claimed defamation. Amber Heard is counter suing and has claimed DV.

Members shouldn't be poking fun at or trashing either of them. If you wish to make a respectful point based on known fact, that's fine, but please leave snarky comments about appearances and attire out of this discussion.
 
ADMIN NOTE:

While this case has something for everyone to :rolleyes: at, WS still aims to be above the fray of the rest of the internet by following these key TOS:

- derogatory nicknames are not allowed.
- bashing anyone’s appearance is a violation.
- social media comments are not allowed.
- if you “saw” it or “heard” it but don’t have a link to substantiate it, it is considered rumor and subject to removal.

Thanks for checking yourself before you click REPLY.
 
Sky News

'You called Mr Depp an idiot'

Psychiatrist David R Spiegel is asked by Johnny Depp's lawyer about the actor's "processing speed". Part of the doctor's testimony has been that he has witnessed "cognitive decline" during Depp's testimony. He says it is slower than one would expect for a man aged 58 (Depp is 58).

He is also asked if it's true he called Depp "an idiot" in his written testimony. He says he may have said he was an idiot, for the way he was planning to give a video deposition just the night before it was required. The doctor says: "If I said he was an idiot, I meant an idiot in planning... I don't know his IQ".

1653323803936.png

During the doctor's questioning Depp is listening intently, and at point smiles a little at heated moments (of which there are many, as Dr Spiegel seems to be quite an animated character).
 
I am about to check out. While Dennison has scored some decent points in discrediting this witness I am disappointed that he hasn't gone in on the correlations between what Siegel (sp?) projects onto JD and the behaviors we have heard ascribed to AH.

I am let down so far with this cross, I think it could have been much more impactful for the jury.
 
Sky News

'You called Mr Depp an idiot'

Psychiatrist David R Spiegel is asked by Johnny Depp's lawyer about the actor's "processing speed". Part of the doctor's testimony has been that he has witnessed "cognitive decline" during Depp's testimony. He says it is slower than one would expect for a man aged 58 (Depp is 58).

He is also asked if it's true he called Depp "an idiot" in his written testimony. He says he may have said he was an idiot, for the way he was planning to give a video deposition just the night before it was required. The doctor says: "If I said he was an idiot, I meant an idiot in planning... I don't know his IQ".

View attachment 345551

During the doctor's questioning Depp is listening intently, and at point smiles a little at heated moments (of which there are many, as Dr Spiegel seems to be quite an animated character).

I am in love with this picture.
 
This witness is squirrelly and knows how to answer questions to help his client. He’s forceful and overbearing. I’m not impressed with this atty at all. The purpose of cross is to maintain control of the narrative through questioning. This atty is flipping pages and seems like he’s coming up with questions on the fly. Poor cross!
 
HERE WE GO, MDMA, please don't let me down Dennison. Please get into AH's prolific and regular drug and alcohol use. Please. If this guy can opine on JD without ever having seen him he should be able to opine on AH, based on her behaviors as described in testimony and deps.
 
This witness is squirrelly and knows how to answer questions to help his client. He’s forceful and overbearing. I’m not impressed with this atty at all. The purpose of cross is to maintain control of the narrative through questioning. This atty is flipping pages and seems like he’s coming up with questions on the fly. Poor cross!

I tend to think he knows exactly what he is doing .. we just aren't aware of game plan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
100
Guests online
1,405
Total visitors
1,505

Forum statistics

Threads
598,524
Messages
18,082,722
Members
230,653
Latest member
distrustHUMANS24
Back
Top