VA - Johnny Depp's defamation case against ex Amber Heard, who countersued #6

[squareandrabbet]

Another bad decision to put on this depo. She did not say that the officers failed in any way.

IMO, it's continuing AH/EB prior attempts to say/imply that where there's smoke, there must be fire; "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle them with BS" tactics.

They're counting on the jurors being so bored and wavering that they take their eyes off the bouncing testimony ball.

 

[rebelchild]

All this testimony from the DV cop is further convincing me of is that team AH (her friends living and hanging and partying at the penthouse) didn't like the result of the first call to 911 and so tried to rework the scene and did a do-over.

which I do not understand .. because didn't they supposedly clean up before they arrived?

 

[wasnt_me]

All this testimony from the DV cop is further convincing me of is that team AH (her friends living and hanging and partying at the penthouse) didn't like the result of the first call to 911 and so tried to rework the scene and did a do-over.

From what I understand, they got what they wanted, which was police to come out. I think it was to threaten JD and get the penthouses in the divorce. I also think they thought the police coming out without a report was enough for the TRO, but they realized later that they had to document something that happened in the police call. They didn't think that the officers would have bodycam, I guess, and so they had to stick with the lies they already told about what they'd showed the officers.

They talked about "destruction" and "rampage" and "smashing." They couldn't change that, even though there was no evidence to support it.

 

[PeregrineFalcon]

The jury now knows that she (AH) is being investigated for perjury. Still don't know why EB put these people on.

 

[BUF]

Next witness after lunch break is live 1:45

 

[wasnt_me]

which I do not understand .. because didn't they supposedly clean up before they arrived?

They said they did, but I don't think there was that much damage to start with. The only thing I did see was the same thing Issac saw, which was a little wine on the carpet when the police walked by Ph1. But I wouldn't expect the police to associate a wet spot on the floor to Ph3.

The pictures they show in evidence just do not amount to what they are trying to say happened. That's the problem. Even if the police saw some of that stuff, I wouldn't even suspect they'd think it was associated with DV.

For example, who would associate those picture frames on the bed with DV? Who would associate the box turned over by the desk in Ph5 with DV? Who would think a picture in a frame on the floor, laying perfectly facing you is rage and DV? Who would think wine in the hallway of a common space with 5 apartments was associated with DV?

 

[squareandrabbet]

which I do not understand .. because didn't they supposedly clean up before they arrived?

IMO, they originally said they "cleaned up" because they thought it proved their case ("how can anyone gainsay us, when all they have is our word?"); and then when they found they actually needed the evidence to do anything or get anywhere, then they started re-staging.

 

[Allabouttrial]

Sky News

Court takes a break

Court is now taking its lunch break - it's 12.45 in Virginia, USA.

We will be back at 6.45pm UK time (1.45pm in the US). When we return, we will step away from the recorded depositions (we have just had five video testimonies in a row) and will hear from a new witness live in the courtroom.

See you back here then!

 

[squareandrabbet]

They said they did, but I don't think there was that much damage to start with. The only thing I did see was the same thing Issac saw, which was a little wine on the carpet when the police walked by Ph1. But I wouldn't expect the police to associate a wet spot on the floor to Ph3.

The pictures they show in evidence just do not amount to what they are trying to say happened. That's the problem. Even if the police saw some of that stuff, I wouldn't even suspect they'd think it was associated with DV.

For example, who would associate those picture frames on the bed with DV? Who would associate the box turned over by the desk in Ph5 with DV? Who would think a picture in a frame on the floor, laying perfectly facing you is rage and DV? Who would think wine in the hallway of a common space with 5 apartments was associated with DV?

I thought Isaac said he saw glass from a broken/missing hallway sconce, but no wine stains? Happy to be proven wrong; just trying to re-fix things in my mind...

 

[wasnt_me]

IMO, they originally said they "cleaned up" because they thought it proved their case ("how can anyone gainsay us, when all they have is our word?"); and then when they found they actually needed the evidence to do anything or get anywhere, then they started re-staging.

Additionally, I think she was "keeping her powder dry," so to speak, by not telling the police anything "this time," to use as leverage against JD.

 

[wasnt_me]

I thought Isaac said he saw glass from a broken/missing hallway sconce, but no wine stains? Happy to be proven wrong; just trying to re-fix things in my mind...

Issac said when he got off the elevator and turned the corner, he saw glass. If you follow the police, they get off the elevator, go left, and then you will see on the right -- something. I don't what it is, but something is on the floor right there. Next, they continue around the corner. The long hallway is where Ph1 is. At the end of that long hallway is ph3, where they knock. If you look on the floor on the way to Ph3, you can see some spots on the carpet by ph1.

Issac said when he got to Ph1, he saw the wine and it was in puddles -- it did not look the what you can BARELY see when the officers walk over it. He said as soon as he stopped to look at it, Josh opened the door (Issac did not knock) and said it had been a rough night. My guess is that Josh or someone had just poured that wine and was about to take a picture when Issac happened by. Because if you look at their "evidence" pictures, what do you see? Puddles of wine.

 

[HongKongPhooey]

Sky News

Court takes a break

Court is now taking its lunch break - it's 12.45 in Virginia, USA.

We will be back at 6.45pm UK time (1.45pm in the US). When we return, we will step away from the recorded depositions (we have just had five video testimonies in a row) and will hear from a new witness live in the courtroom.

See you back here then!

Thank you for updates

 

[gloomy]

If you accuse a high profile person of SA with a liquor bottle, it's going to grab the atttention of the masses and in today's SM dominated culture, it's going to go viral. If you are lying about it, no doubt there will be incessant posts about it.

If this story of SA with a liquor bottle was true, believe me, JD woud be demolished on SM just the same.

Couldn't agree more.

But many believe AH on SM. She seems to have a devoted fanbase too and they continue to tweet etc... they believe she is a victim of JD. I'm sure JD could have brought up SM and how terrible people talk about him - but its AH who was giving interviews and wrote the Op-ed.

I don't believe these witnesses helped her claims that there is a smear champaign against her. AH is not a young girl who is being bullied online for no reason. People are responding to her claims and words. MOO

p.s. excuse my writing, English is not my first language and I sometimes struggle to find the correct words.

 

[squareandrabbet]

Additionally, I think she was "keeping her powder dry," so to speak, by not telling the police anything "this time," to use as leverage against JD.

I believe JD team has indeed alleged this silence was a tactic she employed under lawyer advice from Samantha Spector.

 

[wasnt_me]

I believe JD team has indeed alleged this silence was a tactic she employed under lawyer advice from Samantha Spector.

Yes, and if we listen to that recorded message, the one where she berates him because HIS attorney filed for divorce, it becomes even more clear of her strategy. The tape where she eventually says no one will believe JD is a DV survivor.

 

[rebelchild]

IMO, they originally said they "cleaned up" because they thought it proved their case ("how can anyone gainsay us, when all they have is our word?"); and then when they found they actually needed the evidence to do anything or get anywhere, then they started re-staging.

I should have explained better .. that's the part I don't understand. What was staged any differently to make it look like DV? Because we can see by the body cams that nothing seemed out of place or "destroyed" and that set of officers didn't see anything that lead them to believe that DV had taken place .. so what did they think they were documenting any different then when the first set of officers arrived? The wine on the carpet?

 

[Kiranerys]

IMO, it's continuing AH/EB prior attempts to say/imply that where there's smoke, there must be fire; "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle them with BS" tactics.

They're counting on the jurors being so bored and wavering that they take their eyes off the bouncing testimony ball.

If I was a juror I think that I would find for Depp if the defence couldn't even keep me engaged in listening to testimony. If I'm bored senseless then your "evidence" is not compelling and if its not compelling then how is it believable?.
I mean the only thing memorable on the defence side is that no one has ever seen JD be violent to anyone and this is all a waste of time.

 

[wasnt_me]

I should have explained better .. that's the part I don't understand. What was staged any differently to make it look like DV? Because we can see by the body cams that nothing seemed out of place or "destroyed" and that set of officers didn't see anything that lead them to believe that DV had taken place .. so what did they think they were documenting any different then when the first set of officers arrived? The wine on the carpet?

I think they hadn't had their evidence together before the police arrived. They didn't know they needed to stage. So the first set didn't see anything. I think they thought they could stage, take pictures and LIE that they showed the police. I think they thought that because there was NO REPORT, it didn't matter. They can say the police came, they can say these pics are the damage, and they could say they chose not to file a report that time.

The staging was not for the police. It was for the pictures --- just like she always does. The police were there just to have it on record that a call went out to them. There are videos on Youtube explaining it, and I can send you links if you DM me.

 

[Kiranerys]

Next witness after lunch break is live 1:45

Is that because they haven't had to sit through all these lose the will to live depo's like the rest of us?

 

[rebelchild]

I think they hadn't had their evidence together before the police arrived. They didn't know they needed to stage. So the first set didn't see anything. I think they thought they could stage, take pictures and LIE that they showed the police. I think they thought that because there was NO REPORT, it didn't matter. They can say the police came, they can say these pics are the damage, and they could say they chose not to file a report that time.

The staging was not for the police It was for the pictures --- just like she always does. The police were there just to have it on record that a call went out to them. There are videos on Youtube explaining it, and I can send you links if you DM me.

Thank you!! I think I understand now! I just couldn't wrap my head around the reason they thought this was a good idea and then the second set of cops show up and still see nothing.