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

[katydid23]

Yeah. That makes me quite uncomfortable, she was going for a full lip kiss, not a friendly peck on the cheek. Quite inappropriate for the setting.

Maybe Momoa was afraid of contracting something from her.

Plus she had a see through shirt on, and was about to lean up against him. He was married at the time with children---and there will young children there watching them.

 

[tlcya]

forensic accountant back on the stand (he is here to refute Ms. Arnold's testimony from yesterday)

Before they even begin yet another sidebar (EYEROLL)

 

[makayla]

Ohhh I agree.....She reminds me so much of Jodi. The way she tries to 'connect' with the jury in a kind of creepy way. The way she takes furious notes as if she is an attorney.

So reminiscent …. Peas in a pod!

 

[Chelly]

There is so much satisfaction watching these last two witnesses ripping apart Katherine Arnold's testimony from yesterday.

I took Arnold to be one of those highly-paid-expert witnesses who are used only to inflict as much damage to a case as possible....using falsehoods disguised by appearing confident and condescending. She is good at what she does and easily tricks the naive. IMO

 

[tlcya]

Spindler says Ms. Arnold's opinion is not adequately supported or reasonable.

damages calculation - there wasn't one per se

appears to be using a comparable analysis but couldn't provide specifics on how she arrived at it.

Should be anchored in facts and looking at previous compensation to determine potential future earnings. He looked at tax returns over years and historical compensation info.

He focused on the years of 2013 through 2019. about 10 million for all those years combined. for the last year she earned 2million. Giving her the benefit of the Aquaman success but before the 2020 hubbub, making it the last "clean" year to look at prior to the alleged defamation.

 

[katydid23]

Ha! We had the same question at the same time. I don't see what difference it makes. Do negotiations happen differently?

I think that was a lawyer trick, trying to make the jury believe that because he didnt deal specifically with SuperHero films, he has no relevant experience.

I think they are going to try and say that the deal maker does not understand 'Super Hero' pay structures , as if they are going to be so different than other film series, like Fast and Furious, or Pirates of the C, etc.

 

[tlcya]

yet another objection from team AH and yet another sidebar.

 

[katydid23]

yet another objection from team AH and yet another sidebar.

I hope it is true that the sidebar time is subtracted from their remaining time every time they ask for one.

 

[Chelly]

yet another objection from team AH and yet another sidebar.

....and this gets charged to AH's remaining time, right?

 

[ar3593]

I like this guy.

I do too, old school rules! JMO

 

[whitelilac]

These last two witnesses, what a difference to the AH team witnesses !

 

[BUF]

This witness is very comfortable testifying imo

 

[Herat]

I would have no problem if Ms. Arnold's lucrative career was destroyed by her incompetence, lack of supporting data, and sarcastic attitude while under oath.

 

[Allabouttrial]

Sorry bit behind!

Sky News

Next witness...

They're getting through them quickly today.

Next up is Richard Marks, a long-time entertainment lawyer and Hollywood expert who is appearing in person.

Eagle-eyed readers might remember that Mr Marks has already testified in the case - he is appearing once again as a rebuttal witness for Johnny Depp following testimony from Amber Heard's witness Kathryn Arnold, an entertainment industry expert, yesterday.

He says his opinion is that Ms Arnold is "very slick and smooth" but "not an expert in deal-making". Her assessment of damages for Heard is "built on nothing", he says, and "wildly speculative".

Entertainment lawyer disputes testimony over Amber Heard's estimated loss of earnings

Richard Marks, a long-time entertainment lawyer and Hollywood expert, is appearing in person for the second time during the trial after previously being called by Johnny Depp's team during their initial questioning.

He has been called again as a rebuttal witness to address testimony by Kathryn Arnold, an entertainment industry expert, who gave evidence yesterday.

'The best predictor of future earnings is past earnings'

Entertainment lawyer and Hollywood expert Richard Marks is now being asked about Amber Heard's career trajectory being compared yesterday with her Aquaman co-star Jason Momoa, as well as that of Gal Gadot, Ana de Armas, Zendaya and Chris Pine.



Heard plays Mera in the Aquaman films alongside Momoa's Arthur Curry, who is Aquaman.

Mr Marks says none of these stars is comparable to Heard. Momoa was Aquaman rather than a "supporting character like Mera", Gadot was Wonder Woman and Zendaya goes by one name, he tells the court.

The best predictor of future earnings is past earnings, Mr Marks adds.

Asked for his overall assessment of entertainment expert Kathryn Arnold's opinions, he says they're "not worth the paper they're written on".

Her testimony "did not back up her bottom line," he says, and "does not hold up under scrutiny".

 

[wasnt_me]

This is what I want to know -- what roles did AH want that she didn't get? What opportunities can she tell us she missed?

 

[whitelilac]

This is a hypothetical argument.

 

[BUF]

Doug Bania is next witness, social media witness, previously testified

 

[Allabouttrial]

Sky News

Next witness...

Michael Spindler, an economic damages expert and forensic accountant, is another familiar face in this trial, having given evidence previously.

He is appearing in person once again and reminds the court he has more than 40 years of experience in his field.

Like the previous witness, entertainment lawyer Richard Marks, Mr Spindler is also being asked by Johnny Depp's team for his assessment of entertainment expert Kathryn Arnold's testimony given yesterday.

Asked about Ms Arnold's testimony on estimated economic damages suffered by Heard, he says he believes it is "not adequately supported" and "unreasonable". He says "there was no calculation per se" on damages.

Mr Spindler says that something that is "anchored in facts" should be taken as a basis for future earnings - ie historical earnings, as Mr Marks also said.

 

[gloomy]

This is what I want to know -- what roles did AH want that she didn't get? What opportunities can she tell us she missed?

None. That's why AH's lawyers never brought up any lost opportunities. Which roles did she lose? Pure speculation. MOO

Edit- and if she did lose roles or makeup endorsements etc.. imo it had nothing to do with AW. She had a lot of support from the metoo movement etc... MOO

 

[tlcya]

Doug Bania is the next witness called.

Still under oath. He will refute some of the elements to refute the defamation and damages therefrom. He refutes Schnell (SM guy) and Ms. Arnold (damages).

His SM and online analytics concluded that the comparable actors of AMs. Arnold are not in fact comparable to AH and both witnesses failed to show causation of economic harm to AH.