VA - Johnny Depp's defamation case against ex Amber Heard, who countersued #2

[Allabouttrial]

Sky News

'Crying, red eyed and was not making eye-contact'

Officer Melissa Saenz is being asked what VINE is, and she explains that it's an automated computer programme offered for domestic violence crime victims in Los Angeles and Los Angeles County.

She is asked why she did not offer this to Amber Heard when she attended the incident, and officer Saenz says it's because "we only offer it to victims of domestic abuse".

Heard's lawyer now takes us through a transcript of the initial radio calls concerning the calls to the station from Heard's friend reporting an incident. Officer Saenze says when she arrived, along with another officer called Officer Hadden, they saw Heard who said she had had an argument with her husband, who wasn't present, but "would give no further information".

Officer Saenze says they gave her a "business card" so she could "call them if she changed her mind" and then left the apartment.

The officer's list of incidents which they attended that day includes the visit to the penthouse, which includes codes for domestic violence and battery.

Officer Saenze has previously said she believed she was at the incident for around an hour, but Heard's lawyer says CCTV footage shows the officers getting to the apartment at 9.04pm and leaving at 9.19 minutes - making their stay 15 minutes.

Officer Saenze agrees that she "took no notes, or photos, or recorded anything" during the visit. She agrees that "Heard was crying, red eyed and was not making eye-contact" when they talked to her. She says she "does not recall" what Heard was wearing or how she was wearing her hair on that night.

She also testifies that she "saw nothing out of the ordinary" at the apartment on that night, and didn't see anything broken or damaged.

 

[Allabouttrial]

Sky News

'That was crazy'

LAPD officer Melissa Saenz is asked what she was thinking when she left the apartment, and she answers: "I was impressed with the penthouse, how big and beautiful it was".

She agrees she did not know who Amber Heard was at the time.

The officer is then shown a video of herself leaving the building. There is no sound on the video, but she is asked what she is saying to her colleague, and it's suggested to her she was saying "That was crazy". She says she does not know. She is also asked to look at an image of Heard, in which Heard's lawyer says the actress's "eyelid is swollen". The police officer says she cannot see any injury, and did not see any injuries on the night. She is also asked to look at an image of the carpet in the apartment hallway which we are told has some form of "red liquid" spilled on it. It's suggested by the lawyer that it's red wine. Officer Saenz says she does not know what it is, did not see it on the night, and did not take a photo of it.

She is shown a note she made after the call which said recorded the incident as a "dispute" and said a business card had been left in case Heard "changed her mind". Heard's lawyer asks what she could be changing her mind about if there was no evidence of disruption or violence. The officer says it was a "courtesy". The lawyer says as no report had been made, or evidence taken, Heard would have been unable to pursue the case if she had indeed "changed her mind".

Officer Saenz is now shown a photo, which we are told are of Amber Heard [we cannot see them in court]. She is asked if she can see redness or marks on her face, and replies: "It does not look like an injury caused by a cellphone." She adds that she thinks it's "consistent with her crying, her face was flushed." She says she does not consider it to be consistent with an injury.

She is shown further photos, and again asked if she sees injury or redness, but while the officer says she can see some redness in a few of the pictures, she says she believes all the marks are simply the result of "crying".

She says she walked through all the rooms of the house and didn't see any damage.

 

[Allabouttrial]

Sky News

'A lot of people do not like us'

LAPD officer Melissa Saenz says on the night she attended Depp's apartment, she spoke to several people in the apartment but they were "all uncooperative". She says she asked their names but no one would answer.

She is asked by the lawyer why she thinks that was and she says: "A lot of people do not like us", which causes a little laughter in the court room.

The officer says she did not write peoples' names down as they would not provide them. The lawyer asks why she did not have her notebook in her hand ready to write details down, and she explains that it is a protocol for officer safety not to have anything in your hands until you are satisfied that there is no risk to your safety.

Questions by Heard's team have now concluded.

 

[HongKongPhooey]

I don’t think that went particularly well for team AH.

 

[Allabouttrial]

Sky News

Depp's team now question the witness

Depp's team now take their turn to question officer Melissa Saenz.

She is asked whether a security guard showed them up to the apartment, and she says that while security guards let them in and gave them access, they did not escort them up to the apartment.

Depp's lawyer asks: "Did you see anything that made you believe a crime or an act of domestic violence had been committed?" She says no, she did not.

The officer says it was a neighbour who called the police, and that "a generic white male" answered the apartment door to her.

Depp's lawyer asks how closely she was standing to Heard when talking to her in the hallway, and she says two to five feet. She also says the hallway was well lit. She is asked if she observed any injuries on Ms Heard, and says she did not. The lawyer asks if she has ever "worn corrective lenses" and she says she has not, her eyesight is good.

She says on questioning, Heard "was uncooperative", clarifying that she would ask her questions and "she would not say anything". She says she asked her questions to ascertain whether there was some form of crime, but she would not answer. She says at one point she asked the male at the apartment to go into the hall with her male colleague, in case that would help the situation, but said it did not and still no one would give her any information.

Officer Saenz says she then carried out "a protective sweep" of two of the penthouses to check there were "no potential suspects" or "injured victims" within the location. She says she was accompanied by her colleague and the "generic white male". She says during the penthouse protective sweeps she did not "see, or hear anything that made her think a crime had been committed or an act of domestic violence had occurred".

She says during her interviews with Heard she "was constantly scanning" her and did not see any evidence of injury. She says she believes she had plenty of time to determine whether or not she had sustained any injuries and determined that she had not. She agrees that she had at least two separate conversations with Heard, and that she was two to five feet from her - "right in front of me". She is asked whether at any point in time Heard complained of any injuries, and she says she did not. She also says she saw "no signs of disarray" in either of the penthouses she walked through.

Depp's lawyer again asks whether at this point or within "the entirety of her time at the incident" whether she had "seen, or heard anything that made her think a crime had been committed or an act of domestic violence had occurred". Again, she says she did not.

The officer reiterates that "I had never heard of Amber Heard at that time" and "did not recognise any of the people at that incident". She says at the time she had no reason to believe that "anyone there was famous". She says she also had no reason to believe that "Johnny Depp was affiliated or connected to the incident in any way."
.......

Court adjourned for today.

 

[HongKongPhooey]

Thanks for the updates.

 

[Chelly]

This trial, about these two egocentric celebs, continues to leave me shaking my head.

 

[everlearning]

Thanks for keeping us updated!

 

[squareandrabbet]

Sky News

'A lot of people do not like us'

LAPD officer Melissa Saenz says on the night she attended Depp's apartment, she spoke to several people in the apartment but they were "all uncooperative". She says she asked their names but no one would answer.

She is asked by the lawyer why she thinks that was and she says: "A lot of people do not like us", which causes a little laughter in the court room.

The officer says she did not write peoples' names down as they would not provide them. The lawyer asks why she did not have her notebook in her hand ready to write details down, and she explains that it is a protocol for officer safety not to have anything in your hands until you are satisfied that there is no risk to your safety.

Questions by Heard's team have now concluded.

yeah, I thought that was rather sadly glum of her, lol.

I was all “Can’t we say this a little bit better? Like, I dunno, maybe something more like ‘a lot of people don’t believe we necessarily have their best interests at heart’?”

 

[BUF]

Chanley Painter was on CourtTV and said jurors had heads down taking notes while Dr. Curry was testifying…but not the same during her cross. She also said jurors seemed disengaged in the afternoon during the depo of the law enforcement that went to the penthouse.

According to her, the reason Heard was allowed to be interviewed by the forensic psychologist is because Heard went to a psychologist and was diagnosed with PTSD. Heard’s lawyers weren’t able to, but tried, to get Depp interviewed by a forensic psychologist but couldn’t because he was never diagnosed with a mental disorder.

 

[Lillymac]

I wouldn't think so unless she isn't actually bisexual and only says she is to get attention (histrionic). But I don't think there's any legit reason to think she's faking being bisexual.

Oh I don't think she's faking it. She was in a domestic partnership with a woman when she and JD hooked up. And I believe that relationship lasted twice as long as hers and JD's. I was speaking to the Dr's testimony. Just a question that came to mind. I don't care one way or the other if she's bisexual or not, just wondering if it could be a factor in the doc's findings. Just please disregard my question. Don't won't to side track unnecessarily.

 

[Lillymac]

yeah, I thought that was rather sadly glum of her, lol.

I was all “Can’t we say this a little bit better? Like, I dunno, maybe something more like ‘a lot of people don’t believe we necessarily have their best interests at heart’?”

My son, retired Dallas PD, told me they hate domestics because by the time you get there they have all lost their memories and before you leave, they have all blamed the police and turned on them. He said those calls are the most dangerous of any for LE...

 

[Lillymac]

IMO Although the outcome of the JD case and AB gun incident will set the precedent for future cases, please tell me I am not the only one feeling like I'm gagging over "celebrities" in general but even more so with disturbing behavior. sigh

It's all the same, Stolichnaya or Absolute. Rich or poor. People's weaknesses are all the same. Might happen on a private island or in an alley. JMO

 

[Ray_of_hope]

Been listening to the audio and all I can think is that AH is sick. I could not live that way. It's like a war zone.
Had a thought last night before today's bombshell regarding BPD and HPD.
AH complained to JD that she was regarded as the glamorous blonde with exposed breasts and that she was tired of that image. JD reportedly gave her advice. I wondered if this whole DV thing was not only for attention but a way to disallow herself to be sought after for anything but serious roles. Just a thought.
Despite her looks, I just don't see a presence or an ability to emote that good actors have.

 

[BeachSky]

Chanley Painter was on CourtTV and said jurors had heads down taking notes while Dr. Curry was testifying…but not the same during her cross. She also said jurors seemed disengaged in the afternoon during the depo of the law enforcement that went to the penthouse.

According to her, the reason Heard was allowed to be interviewed by the forensic psychologist is because Heard went to a psychologist and was diagnosed with PTSD. Heard’s lawyers weren’t able to, but tried, to get Depp interviewed by a forensic psychologist but couldn’t because he was never diagnosed with a mental disorder.

Dr Curry said what needed to be said about AH.
Law Enforcement said what needed to be said about AH.

Someone’s pants are on fire IMO

 

[ZoriahNZ]

I've only just starting watching some of the courtroom testimony. This case is a hard one for me to follow closely due to my own personal experience with DV. AH pretty much scares me/makes me uncomfortable. It's hard to articulate why specifically, it's just a general feeling I get from the court footage and audio/video evidence released of her.

But Dr. Curry's testimony today was extremely helpful in explaining what mental health issues might be presenting in AH, which may have impacted her intimate relationship with JD.

It's mind-blowing to me that she was assessed as not actually having PTSD after all. This is something she has claimed in the controversial Op Ed at the center of the defamation case, I believe. That she has been diagnosed with BPD and HPD explains a lot of her behavior, but it still doesn't excuse her actions, imo.

The examples of AH's aggressive, explosive, manipulative and cruel behavior keep mounting up from multiple sources. The fact that JD keeps trying to de-escalate and leave the argument but is being prevented from doing so, sometimes physically, is being corroborated very convincingly imo. AH's claims of being the DV victim and JD the DV perpetrator seem to be making less and less sense as the trial goes on.

There seems to be some oddness with the timing of the police call out incident, the video footage and photo evidence that was submitted, the 'metadata' of the photos, as it were. I am interested in seeing that investigated further, because there does seem to be a weird discrepancy with regard to timestamps. Interesting to hear the officer testifying as to her impressions. Not seeing any injuries, not seeing any disarray etc.

I know it's early days yet, and that AH's own testimony and counter suit is still yet to come, but I'm having a hard time believing AH's claims. She comes across as a fabricator, to me. Which I wish wasn't the case, since she once seemed to be a strong MeToo advocate, speaking out against sexual harassment and domestic violence in the past.

Her gleeful mocking of JD's pain that was caught on audio, daring him to claim he is being abused, declaring no one would believe him (in this case because of his gender) is something that really upsets me. Because it's the kind of thing an abuser says to control his/her victim and keep them ashamed and silent.

 

[ZoriahNZ]

duplicate

 

[squareandrabbet]

I've only just starting watching some of the courtroom testimony. This case is a hard one for me to follow closely due to my own personal experience with DV. AH pretty much scares me/makes me uncomfortable. It's hard to articulate why specifically, it's just a general feeling I get from the court footage and audio/video evidence released of her.

But Dr. Curry's testimony today was extremely helpful in explaining what mental health issues might be presenting in AH, which may have impacted her intimate relationship with JD.

It's mind-blowing to me that she was assessed as not actually having PTSD after all. This is something she has claimed in the controversial Op Ed at the center of the defamation case, I believe. That she has been diagnosed with BPD and HPD explains a lot of her behavior, but it still doesn't excuse her actions, imo.

The examples of AH's aggressive, explosive, manipulative and cruel behavior keep mounting up from multiple sources. The fact that JD keeps trying to de-escalate and leave the argument but is being prevented from doing so, sometimes physically, is being corroborated very convincingly imo. AH's claims of being the DV victim and JD the DV perpetrator seem to be making less and less sense as the trial goes on.

There seems to be some oddness with the timing of the police call out incident, the video footage and photo evidence that was submitted, the 'metadata' of the photos, as it were. I am interested in seeing that investigated further, because there does seem to be a weird discrepancy with regard to timestamps. Interesting to hear the officer testifying as to her impressions. Not seeing any injuries, not seeing any disarray etc.

I know it's early days yet, and that AH's own testimony and counter suit is still yet to come, but I'm having a hard time believing AH's claims. She comes across as a fabricator, to me. Which I wish wasn't the case, since she once seemed to be a strong MeToo advocate, speaking out against sexual harassment and domestic violence in the past.

Her gleeful mocking of JD's pain that was caught on audio, daring him to claim he is being abused, declaring no one would believe him (in this case because of his gender) is something that really upsets me. Because it's the kind of thing an abuser says to control his/her victim and keep them ashamed and silent.

as for the police timing, IIRC there were two pairs of officers who visited the home than evening; and I am also given to understand (we may, nay probably, will hear more), that there’s some discrepancy about Heard’s reactions being sponsored by a divorce attorney she in fact may have been consulting (conversations like Isaac saying he came home one evening to a clatch of people in the hallway including Amber, saying they were going to change the locks to keep JD out; which basically supports that AH was going to try to cling to a claim of residency in the Eastern Standard building).

 

[BUF]

Just an fyi if you were wondering…

Makeup company weighs in on Amber Heard, Johnny Depp trial after product shown as evidence

The company added that it is “not taking a formal stance on the trial, evidence or future outcome of the case.”

 

[rebelchild]

Just an fyi if you were wondering…

Makeup company weighs in on Amber Heard, Johnny Depp trial after product shown as evidence

The company added that it is “not taking a formal stance on the trial, evidence or future outcome of the case.”

That doesn't surprise me .. taking a side could definitely impact sales.

Edited to say .. I think they made it clear whose side they may be leaning towards by making their tic tok but now they've gotten a lot of messages that are making them put out this statement. IMO