News I'm watching the Johnny Depp defamation case

[fingercuffs]

This. I'll reiterate my point again. I believe they were both physical with each other on multiple occasions. It was an extremely toxic relationship between 2 pretty messed up people (or at least 1 messed up person and one functional addict). But I believe Amber was probably the worse of the two and had a major temper/crazy side to her that didn't help matters at all. I'm guessing she poked and prodded and nagged and was constantly just on that guy's ass 24/7.

Exactly where I'm at. She knew how to rile him up and then played the victim when she got what she wanted. We all have a switch. End of the day, I don't know anyone who's on her side so I doubt she'll work again, Johnny still will though even if it's Ricky Gervais TV shows again.

 

[fingercuffs]

The judge in that trial had a son who works for Rupert Murdoch, who owns the Sun. Should have recused himself.

Plus, a major reason the judge believed Heard in the written decision was about her donating all the divorce money to charity. We now know that was a lie.

I mean this is a belter of her honesty. Tugging on the heart strings of women who have actually been abused that she's taking a stand, and then keeps the money...while getting Elon Musk to pay her court fees.
Only one thing for it.

 

[Joe_Armstrong]

It's been a wild ride for Johnny Depp

 

[fingercuffs]

lol is this true?

I bloody wish it was, sadly the fun police have fact checked it and it isn't.
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...-talented-mr-ripley-johnny-depp-b2073688.html

 

[eddymotto]

This is really the only point I heavily disagree with. Depp has the pretty much the whole world (minus the media) backing him now and everyone hates Amber Heard. They literally changed her name to Amber Turd on IMDB. I've never seen some shit like that. Depp's already won this case honestly. This rest of this is just a formality and if his lawyer destroy Amber in cross it's only going to be that much better for him.

The logic is pretty straight forward. Depp lost his libel case (and his appeal was rejected) in the UK. UK law is very friendly to the plaintiff in libel cases. The defendant (The Sun newspaper) had to prove that it was reasonable to refer to Depp as a wife beater. The Sun did and they won. That is a permanent black mark on Depp.

Now Depp is pursuing the same basic legal strategy in the US where libel laws favor the defendant. In the UK, the Sun had to prove that Depp was an abuser. In the US, Depp needs to prove that he is not an abuser. It is a risky strategy to try the same basic set of facts that he already lost on in a court system that is less friendly to plaintiffs in these types of cases.

You obviously feel that Depp is going to win a smashing victory in the US courts despite the odds so I understand why you disagree.

 

[what-wut]

The logic is pretty straight forward. Depp lost his libel case (and his appeal was rejected) in the UK. UK law is very friendly to the plaintiff in libel cases. The defendant (The Sun newspaper) had to prove that it was reasonable to refer to Depp as a wife beater. The Sun did and they won. That is a permanent black mark on Depp.

Now Depp is pursuing the same basic legal strategy in the US where libel laws favor the defendant. In the UK, the Sun had to prove that Depp was an abuser. In the US, Depp needs to prove that he is not an abuser. It is a risky strategy to try the same basic set of facts that he already lost on in a court system that is less friendly to plaintiffs in these types of cases.

You obviously feel that Depp is going to win a smashing victory in the US courts despite the odds so I understand why you disagree.

It's not a purely legal matter as you're trying to paint it. The fact that Depp got the trial televised is a huge win for him. The social media support he has gained is massive.

Have you heard the tapes? It really shows amber in a very terrible light. She is more fucked career wise than him.

 

[method115]

The logic is pretty straight forward. Depp lost his libel case (and his appeal was rejected) in the UK. UK law is very friendly to the plaintiff in libel cases. The defendant (The Sun newspaper) had to prove that it was reasonable to refer to Depp as a wife beater. The Sun did and they won. That is a permanent black mark on Depp.

Now Depp is pursuing the same basic legal strategy in the US where libel laws favor the defendant. In the UK, the Sun had to prove that Depp was an abuser. In the US, Depp needs to prove that he is not an abuser. It is a risky strategy to try the same basic set of facts that he already lost on in a court system that is less friendly to plaintiffs in these types of cases.

You obviously feel that Depp is going to win a smashing victory in the US courts despite the odds so I understand why you disagree.

No you seemed to completely misunderstand what I'm saying. I agreed with your friend that Depp is not going to win this case. He won his case in the court of public opinion. Which before this case he was hated and was seen as a wife beater with Amber being innocent. I do remember some people would bring up Amber's craziness but overall people believed her. That is not the case anymore.

 

[eddymotto]

It's not a purely legal matter as you're trying to paint it. The fact that Depp got the trial televised is a huge win for him. The social media support he has gained is massive.

Have you heard the tapes? It really shows amber in a very terrible light. She is more fucked career wise than him.

I definitely agree that Depp has succeeded in hurting Heard's reputation and likely significantly decreasing her future earnings.

My original post on this thread was sharing some comments from a friend of mine who is a divorce lawyer. That may explain why you find the arguments legalistic

 

[fingercuffs]

The logic is pretty straight forward. Depp lost his libel case (and his appeal was rejected) in the UK. UK law is very friendly to the plaintiff in libel cases. The defendant (The Sun newspaper) had to prove that it was reasonable to refer to Depp as a wife beater. The Sun did and they won. That is a permanent black mark on Depp.

Now Depp is pursuing the same basic legal strategy in the US where libel laws favor the defendant. In the UK, the Sun had to prove that Depp was an abuser. In the US, Depp needs to prove that he is not an abuser. It is a risky strategy to try the same basic set of facts that he already lost on in a court system that is less friendly to plaintiffs in these types of cases.

You obviously feel that Depp is going to win a smashing victory in the US courts despite the odds so I understand why you disagree.

See this is where it gets murky for me. I believe that they both abused each other. I think her more so because she seems like a conniving manipulative cow, but this case is about her op-ed in The Washington Post where she claims she was abused. Surely, all the proof they need is that he hit her once. Therefore, she was telling the truth. It isn't about who abused the other more, no?

She's already got a counter sue case at the ready, this could take flippin years. At least she's getting the spotlight she so craved.

 

[eddymotto]

No you seemed to completely misunderstand what I'm saying. I agreed with your friend that Depp is not going to win this case. He won his case in the court of public opinion. Which before this case he was hated and was seen as a wife beater with Amber being innocent. I do remember some people would bring up Amber's craziness but overall people believed her. That is not the case anymore.

I appreciate your sharing your perspective. Cheers

 

[eddymotto]

See this is where it gets murky for me. I believe that they both abused each other. I think her more so because she seems like a conniving manipulative cow, but this case is about her op-ed in The Washington Post where she claims she was abused. Surely, all the proof they need is that he hit her once. Therefore, she was telling the truth. It isn't about who abused the other more, no?

She's already got a counter sue case at the ready, this could take flippin years. At least she's getting the spotlight she so craved.

I could be wrong but I believe that her countersuit is "attached". that is, they are both being litigated during this trial.

 

[fingercuffs]

I could be wrong but I believe that her countersuit is "attached". that is, they are both being litigated during this trial.

Ah, like running concurrently?

Also, and this sounds completely like I know nothing about it. If he wins this $100 million, where do the funds come from? Where does he get the $100 million? If she couldn't donate her 3 million divorce settlement as she concocted how is she going to afford $100 million? Tap up Elon again?

 

[fingercuffs]

Anyone watching the English minder guy whose job it was to clean up $50,000 of damage after the finger incident know why he was questioned about Marilyn Manson? The line of questioning didn't end up going anywhere.

 

[Err]

See this is where it gets murky for me. I believe that they both abused each other. I think her more so because she seems like a conniving manipulative cow, but this case is about her op-ed in The Washington Post where she claims she was abused. Surely, all the proof they need is that he hit her once. Therefore, she was telling the truth. It isn't about who abused the other more, no?

She's already got a counter sue case at the ready, this could take flippin years. At least she's getting the spotlight she so craved.

A jury is making the decision now which makes the outcome completely dependent on how they feel, not necessarily what either side can prove.

 

[eddymotto]

Ah, like running concurrently?

Also, and this sounds completely like I know nothing about it. If he wins this $100 million, where do the funds come from? Where does he get the $100 million? If she couldn't donate her 3 million divorce settlement as she concocted how is she going to afford $100 million? Tap up Elon again?

I believe that they are running concurrently.

I believe he is suing her for $50m. She is countersuing him for $100m.

I doubt either one of them has the money to pay out if their opponent is awarded the full amount. Depp was claiming to be broke a couple of years ago.

I assume that the winner can work through the courts to seize assets, go after future earnings, etc.

 

[fingercuffs]

A jury is making the decision now which makes the outcome completely dependent on how they feel, not necessarily what either side can prove.

Which is a farce in itself. Apparently the jury aren't allowed any prior knowledge to The Sun case in the UK.

 

[fingercuffs]

I believe that they are running concurrently.

I believe he is suing her for $50m. She is countersuing him for $100m.

I doubt either one of them has the money to pay out if their opponent is awarded the full amount. Depp was claiming to be broke a couple of years ago.

I assume that the winner can work through the courts to seize assets, go after future earnings, etc.

Well she doesn't really have many assets compared (I would imagine) to him. I do remember him saying he'd spent it all on fine wine and shooting Hunter S Thompson into the sky for $3 million, lol. Money well spent if she doesn't get her grubby mitts on it

 

[Err]

Which is a farce in itself. Apparently the jury aren't allowed any prior knowledge to The Sun case in the UK.

It certainly can be, the OJ trial is proof of that. However, the trial in the UK wasn’t much better. The judge in that trial apparently had connections to the Sun and Amber Heards council and was solely responsible for the legal decision. Reading that judges findings and opinions during the previous trial in light of this current one makes him look either obscenely biased or clinically retarded.

 

[TheNinja]

This is really the only point I heavily disagree with. Depp has the pretty much the whole world (minus the media) backing him now and everyone hates Amber Heard. They literally changed her name to Amber Turd on IMDB. I've never seen some shit like that. Depp's already won this case honestly. This rest of this is just a formality and if his lawyer destroy Amber in cross it's only going to be that much better for him.

It's not a purely legal matter as you're trying to paint it. The fact that Depp got the trial televised is a huge win for him. The social media support he has gained is massive.

Have you heard the tapes? It really shows amber in a very terrible light. She is more fucked career wise than him.

Agreed. I honestly knew very little about Depp and Heard and didn't even know there was a case in the UK. I didn't care at all. I just figured Depp got old or something and Hollywood stopped using him. Now I kind of like the dude and think this Amber chick is certified insane!

Depp was incredibly smart taking this case public in the US. He knows how to work the public a bit and is playing it very well. Even if he doesn't win any money from Heard (and I don't believe he'll win the case), I'm guessing he's likely to start getting some Hollywood roles again. Everyone loves the idea of a person coming back from adversity (home life issues, drugs, addiction, stressful court cases) to reappear in Hollywood and become successful again. He's going to make money again....maybe not the $50mil but who knows.

Amber on the other hand won't get a job anywhere IMO. Though she'll have enough money to live comfortably from Depp's career, her own money, and Elon.

 

[fingercuffs]

It certainly can be, the OJ trial is proof of that. However, the trial in the UK wasn’t much better. The judge in that trial apparently had connections to the Sun and Amber Heards council and was solely responsible for the legal decision. Reading that judges findings and opinions during the previous trial in light of this current one makes him look either obscenely biased or clinically retarded.

I'm sure if you're selected for jury you look at these things, even when you swear under oath that you haven't looked up back history. I know curiosity would get the better of me, I'd just use someone else's device to look it up.