Depp V. Heard

I know that this case is not one that really fits in the the narrative of cases that I blog about here and some would say that being that this was a civil case it is not a true crime case. I would agree obviously that this was a civil case but I disagree with those who would say that there was not a crime here. I have decided to do this case, not just because I do absolutely believe there was a crime committed here, several if you want to get technical, even if they do not rise to the level the readers here are used to, but also because I think the underlying message in this case is important. I plan first to start out talking about my opinion about how I got so very much invested in this case and then about how I believe we got here before I dive into the details.

I want to make clear that I have never been what I consider a “die-hard” fan of Johnny Depp's. I am old enough to remember when the television show 21 Jump Street came out and I liked it, and him, but again was not a die-hard fan. As far as his movies, I do believe he is a good actor, but I would gander to say that I probably dislike, or do not care for, as many of his movies as I do like. I admit to loving the Pirates of the Caribbean movies but I remember going into the theater to see the first. We were having a family night and that movie seemed to be the best option but I did not go into it super excited and expecting a lot. I remember being very wrong and let the theater loving Jack Sparrow.

There have been many who have said they did not even know who Amber Heard was before this case. I am not one of those people. First, I do consider myself to fairly well read in movies but I also have two sons who are now “young” men now, one of which who is a movie “fanatic.” I could not have these boys as sons and not know who Amber Heard was. I remember there being talk when the two started dating and/or got married. I also want to point out that in 2016 when Amber went to the LA courthouse to obtain a TRO against Johnny I had no reason to disbelieve her. That being said, I think I remember at the time thinking I was not surprised. Johnny had been a “bad boy” in Hollywood for decades. Sure there had never been anything to this level reported. I did not dig deep into her allegations at that time, I simply remember seeing she had a bruise on the side of her face.

I paid no attention what so ever to the trial against The Sun, in the UK. I mean I knew it was going on but I did not read things about it and only heard afterwards that Johnny had lost that case. What did know was that Johnny was arguing that The Sun had defamed him, calling him a “wife beater.” But again, I did not know the details of any alleged incidents, only that he was fighting against this term that was used. I also did not know that he had previously filed this civil case against Amber. For those unclear this case was filed before the UK case but due to COVID-19 courts were backed up and it just so happened the UK case commenced first. Since that time I have learned more about that UK case.

First, we have to remember these are two different countries that use very different laws to come to decisions. Secondly, unlike the United States case, the UK case was decided solely by a judge. It has been argued that there were several issues with that such as the fact that he was a seventy-one year old man and there are allegations that he had family connections to someone who either worked for or periodically worked for The Sun or another company owned by the same people. While the evidence was different there were fourteen alleged incidents told in the courtroom, presumably by Amber and others. Three months after the end of the trial the judge came back and ruled that twelve of those fourteen were basically “substantially true.” This has been talked about a lot lately because with the verdict that was announced yesterday there have been questions. But again, it comes down to a) different countries and their laws, b) how those cases were decided and c) the parties in the case. While Amber has declared that she “won” in the UK that is not really an accurate statement. The case was not against her, it was against The Sun, a newspaper and what they stated in their article. Yes, it was based on things that Amber had told them but even if Johnny had won that case the money would not have come from Amber.

When it came to this case, like the UK case, I knew it was going on but had not paid much attention to it. I did eventually start looking into the case and began watching it on one of the many outlets that were broadcasting it. However, I do want to point out that I did not start getting into and watching this case until Johnny Depps side had ended their case in chief. I also want to point out a few things that were questioned by others about this case, and look at some legal issues, before we dig in.

First and foremost this case was at its core, not about domestic abuse. This case revolved around an opinion piece that was published in The Washington Post telling Amber's story of domestic abuse. Because The Washington Post is published in Virginia, this is why the case took place there. Many asked why the case did not take place in California and there was a lot of false information indicating that Johnny, and/or his team of attorneys basically “court shopped” to find some place to sue that would be more favorable to him. Again, this is simply not true. The number rule in the rule of law is jurisdiction...and in this case Virginia held jurisdiction in this case based on where the article was published. The case itself was about defamation and whether the statements (three were pointed out) made in the opinion piece (op-ed) were true or false. While Johnny was suing Amber for 50 million dollars, Amber counter-sued Johnny for 100 million based on three statements that were made by Johnny's attorney that had represented him in the UK case. Keep in mind that in civil courts if someone wins, they rarely win the amount they are asking for and it is up to the jury to come up with numbers for “damages.” The courts threw out a couple of her claims but in the end left three statements made by the attorney. Because the attorney was accused of making the statements he could no longer represent Johnny in this trial. At the time one of the attorneys from the firm in which ultimately represented him was helping that attorney (Waldman) in this case. When Waldman was dismissed from the case other attorneys from the other firm came in to represent Johnny.

As I stated this case at it's core was not about domestic violence. What it came down to what the jury was to decide was when it came to the Op-ed they had to first, determine if the statements were about Johnny and secondly whether they were true or false. You may have heard it often but …. truth is an absolute defense. The same was true for the statements made by Waldman that Amber sued for. I literally break this down at the end and why I believe the verdicts the jury came to, while may seem confusing, I absolutely agreed with when they are read. There are talks already today about appeals and you will hear me talk more about this later, but keep in mind that in order for someone to file for an appeal there must be something on record that they objected to it within the court case. Neither a plaintiff, nor a defendant can play armchair quarterback later after a case has been settled. However, if they objected during the case and the judge ruled against them, they do have the right to go back later and file an appeal based on the idea that they believed they were correct. The objection would be in the court of record. This is not to say that I have not seen cases where a legitimate appeal was filed on something that was objected to and there were other things mentioned in the appeal that had not been objected to. I have also seen where the courts will answer that portion stating that it had not been properly objected to on record in the original case.

The trial lasted six weeks, and yet there was something here that was a little unusual. The judge had a previous commitment just over half way through the trial that was to last a week so the case was on hold during that time. This is now, today being talked about by Amber's attorney as being detrimental to Amber and her case and indicating it is something that they plan to appeal on. It is reasonable to believe that both sides were brought in before all of this started, and hammered out the details such as when it would start, this break and the fact that the judge gave them a “time limit” which is something else I had never seen. It was at that point that the attorneys could have, and should have argued against these things. Considering the break in between it seems odd to me that if either side objected that the judge would not have just found a new time to conduct the trial so this indicates to me that when this was set up the parties agreed. As I mentioned earlier you cannot go back later and basically say “oops.” I suppose we will see later if this is a case of blowing smoke today or if there is a legitimate basis for an appeal on that area.

Because there was a case (Johnny's against Amber) and a counter claim (Amber against Johnny) it was a bit more confusing. When each of the parties were on the stand or in the “case in chief” they not only had to prove their case, they also had to argue against the allegations from the other person's case. As is normal each side, starting with Johnny in this case, was allowed to put on their case, and then the other side, after cross examining all of the witnesses, is allowed to argue their side. Once both sides finish they are allowed to put on rebuttal witnesses. Those witnesses are called ONLY to dispute or impeach previous witnesses. Again, because there were two cases here it was a little more drawn out and confusing than what I have described here but that is the basic premises as things work.

Just as the courts would do I am going to start with Johnny's case. As I mentioned earlier, I did not see a lot of his case in chief, but trust me when I say that I have watched enough coverage since then to get the highlights from his case. I want to start with the three statements from the Op-ed that he sued and claimed were defamatory to him. The first, was the title of the article.... “Amber Heard: 'I spoke up against sexual violence – and faced our culture's wrath. That has to change.” The second statement with in the article said, “Then two years ago I became a public figure representing domestic abuse, and I felt the full force of our culture's wrath for women who speak out.” The third statement said, “I had the rare vantage point of seeing, in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse.”

Johnny's job, or more accurately the job of his attorneys was to prove that the Op-ed about him, that the statements were false and that the statements were done with “malice.” What malice means is that the statements were made in order to cause harm to the person they referred to or at the very least knowing they would cause the person harm. I added this last part because in my opinion, someone can make a statement without the necessary intention of causing someone else harm, but more to elevate themselves or garner sympathy and maybe not thinking about or caring if the person is harmed or not.

While he was suing for fifty million dollars throughout the trial he noted that for him it was not about the money for him. He stated several times that it was about getting the truth out and restoring his reputation. The Op-ed, published in December of 2018, was not the first time that Amber had accused Johnny of domestic violence, but it was the first time it was in writing and it had been a few years since the initial allegation that had come in May of 2016 when Amber had gone to the LA courthouse and filed for a restraining order against Johnny and had a bruise on her cheek. Soon after she filed for divorce proclaiming that she did not want Johnny's money. While most believe that she walked away simply with a seven million dollar settlement and that she had vowed to donate the full amount to two charities, the ACLU and a charity devoted to a children's hospital, that is not fully the truth. She received other things like debts paid that would have been split between the two, a vehicle and it was said possibly some property also. Her donations to the charities have been a huge contention throughout.

I am not going to spend a lot of time on the issue of her donations to charities because in the realm of things it has nothing to do with this case. However, it was used to note her inconsistencies and untruths. At this trial, even after representatives of the charities testified they had not received the monies she insisted that she had. Then she kept saying she had “pledged” to do so and stated on the stand that pledged and donated are the same to her. She reluctantly finally admitted that she had not donated the money. I do want to point out that she now claims that the monies were to be donated over a period of time but this has looked bad for her because her initial claims were that she did not want any money from Johnny and yet then kept the money to give in payments. In court she claimed that she was unable to donate the money because she had been sued by Johnny but it was also pointed out that she had received the money more than a year prior to the suit being filed. Again, I think it had very little to nothing to do with this case but did point to her lack of credibility and the way she handled herself regarding that on the stand also did not sit well. It has been said that during the UK trial she had also made the claim and in the judge's ruling he argued against Amber being a “golddigger” mentioning the donation of the monies. There have been calls for her to be investigated for perjury in the UK case. No one knows if anything will come of it.

For his part Johnny adamantly denied ever physically or sexually abusing Amber. But, was there abuse at all? Her attorney's would argue that there was verbal abuse from Johnny as well as possible financial abuse. I believe they claim the latter was from the lawsuits. As far as the verbal abuse, I am on the fence with this. There were several audio recordings entered into the court during this trial. Both Johnny and Amber had stated that they had been in counseling and that their therapist had suggested that they record each other possibly to go back later and listen to themselves and presumably learn from them. While I never heard either of them say that it was also suggested that they take pictures or videos of the other Amber did provide some of those. I personally did not hear her say that this was suggested from the therapist but on the stand she stated they were basically for the same reason, to show Johnny how he looked and what he did when she claimed he was under the influence of drugs and alcohol.

There was a lot of talk throughout the trial, especially from Amber's team about Johnny's use of drugs and alcohol. This was something that he readily admitted to, although not to the full extent as was portrayed by Ambers defense. In her testimony Amber portrayed herself as only using drugs or alcohol a few times. However, Johnny's team was able to pull from both her, and in testimony from other witnesses, of both hers and his, that this was likely not the case. One of the big moments in the trial was when Johnny's attorney confronted her with an email that had been sent out to friends with their itinerary of their wedding and the parties before and after. Granted, Amber alleged that this was a draft and did not appear to be one that was followed but the attorneys were able to point out that it was noted that at a party for her and her friends prior to the wedding it was noted that there would be drugs available. This was a good valid point for a few reasons. First, contrary to her testimony that the few times she had engaged in drugs it was with Johnny, with the indication that it was his influence that had her engaging. Secondly, the attorney pointed out that while throughout her testimony she kept speaking of how she was trying to get Johnny to be “clean” and yet her initial plan was to have drugs at her wedding. In one of the abuse incidents that Amber testified to she claimed that Johnny had taken “eight to ten” MDA, a synthetic drug. On rebuttal Johnny testified that yes he has taken MDA a few times but it was not his choice of drug. He also pointed out that if he had taken eight to ten as Amber had claimed that he likely would have been dead. This is simply my opinion but I got the impression that while yes, Johnny did drugs, many different kinds, and a lot of them, he also knew their limits if nothing else as to overdosing risks and what each one did. I know there are some that will say addicts do not know this but I am unsure that I agree that can be a blanket statement.

Ambers team presented more than a few pictures of Johnny in which he appeared to be asleep or passed out. One in particular picture got a lot of press and was spoke of often. Johnny was in the sitting position but clearly not awake. In his lap was a jar of gelato and if you look closely you can see the spoon, something I find important but will get to in a minute. I also want to point out that a psychologist, who did not examine Johnny and made a diagnosis of him claimed the picture was vomit (it was not). This picture was very interesting and so this is one of the few that I am going to mention. Amber's testimony was that she took the picture to show that he would “pass out” from drugs in the middle of doing things and that she took pictures such as this to show him later what he would do. For his part Johnny would claim that he had not passed out necessarily. He would call it “on the nod,” something Amber also said once or twice. But, Johnny also claimed that on that particular day he had worked 16 hours and was simply tired and that she had asked him to hold her gelato. Do we know which story is true? No, we do not. However, what IS suspicious is that Johnny's right hand was in his pocket. It is rather difficult, although not necessarily impossible, to hold a jar and use a spoon to eat it with one of your hands is in your pocket. One more thing about this picture because I am sure there will be someone to comment about it.... if you look closely at the picture on the table, across the room from Johnny, was a palette of make-up. It has been alleged that this particular palette matches a known palette that is used to “create bruises.” I cannot confirm nor deny that is the case but will admit that it does look similar to the one that it is allegedly compared to.

(I use a writing software when I compose my blogs and then transfer them to the website and as I look down I am already six pages in and I honestly do not feel I have gotten through half of what I wanted to. I am going to TRY and make an effort to not be so “anal” but I apologize if that does not happen and thank you if you continue to read).

At this point I am going to try to address the statements and discuss what I believe was and was not proven in an effort to put things together better and hopefully prevent at least a little rambling on my part. So let's start with the first one...
“Amber Heard: 'I spoke up against sexual violence – and faced our culture's wrath. That has to change.”

So Johnny's job to prove defamation was to prove that Amber wrote this about him, that it was false and that she published this statement “with malice.” Of course Amber's job in her defense was to prove mainly that the allegation was true. Of course there was the idea that since Johnny's name was not literally mentioned that he would have to prove it was about him, but as you will see in a bit, there was little defense for her in this area and she would eventually admit (at least twice, at two different times) that it was in fact referring to Johnny and their relationship. Keep in mind that whether the statement was true or false was of upmost importance, especially when it comes to law.

There was a lot of talk about First Amendment Rights throughout this trial and Amber's team hammered it quite a bit in their closing arguments. They are right.... the First Amendment is the core of our country. And in fairness, they were arguing that what she stated in the article was in fact, true. And, the truth is what is called an “absolute defense.” Under the First Amendment we are absolutely free to speak... but we are not free to tell lies about another person. Now the sticky part comes in when the person who said the untrue statement absolutely believes what they said. The problem here is that Amber's descriptions of incidents that she described were fairly detailed in her re-telling. They were incidents that either did, or did not, happen. There cannot be an in between on this. But, I will touch on this a little more in the next statement we review.

So as we know you cannot disprove something that did not happen so it was Amber's job to prove that it did. This statement was the ONE question that the jury sent out to the judge while deliberating. They asked the jury if what they were to consider was simply the statement (that was the title of the article) or the content of the Op-ed. They were instructed to consider just the statement. This is where I think both Amber's team as well as some other legal commentators were confused a bit. Maybe they were not however and I just read it like the jury did or would have. In their closing Amber's attorney stated that Amber won if they believed ONE incident in which Johnny abused her. I mentioned this earlier. But, this title specifically spoke of sexual abuse and so this is why I believe she had to prove that sexual abuse happened.

Johnny, for his part, again claimed he had never physically or sexually abused Amber, or anyone for that matter. Amber, while on the stand recounted an incident that she claimed happened while the couple was in Australia. Lots of things occurred at this time to both of them allegedly. I will not go into the details of why she said an argument ensued but within the time of the argument the tip of one of Johnny's fingers were severed. This is actually document. More than one surgery was required and there was an extensive period of therapy and recovery. There was/is a dispute in just how the finger was severed. Amber says that Johnny did it while smashing a wall phone to pieces. Johnny claims that Amber threw a bottle at him and that it hit his finger as it also smashed into pieces. At the trial this became a huge issue as each side brought in witnesses that would disclaim the other sides story. Once again it becomes a he said/she said. What I will say is that there were witnesses later who stated they saw broken glass and pictures were taken of the area in which Amber said took place but there was no sign of a phone, broke or not, or that one had even been on the wall. No witness released a deposition or a statement from the resort they were in to testify that there was a wall phone at all as that has been in dispute as well. I do want to point out that while it was not entered as evidence to the jury it has been alleged that there is an audio recording that was made in which Amber admitted to severing the finger. From my understanding only audio recordings that involved only Amber and Johnny were entered into evidence. But, aside from the dispute about how the injury occurred there was another incident alleged at the same time.

Amber took the stand and relayed that after the finger was severed that Johnny had attacked her. She claimed first that he hit her several times in the face to the point she thought her nose was broken and that he proceeded to hold her down by the neck while he sexually assaulted her with a bottle. She expressed emotion on the stand as she related this story. On the stand she indicated that she was unsure what bottle was used and whether it was broken but a picture of an alcohol bottle was entered into evidence. She claimed that she had been bleeding from her vagina area. This incident, if believed to be true, would have made this first statement in the case substantially true.

But, then came the problems. Despite claiming injuries to her vagina area and claiming to have been beaten on the face repeatedly (by someone who by her own admission always wore rings on all of his fingers) and believing she had a broken nose she did not seek medical treatment. When confronted with this she claimed that she did not need treatment. A doctor, as well as a nurse, who worked personally with the couple both either testified or gave statements to the court that they not only did not know anything about this incident but that they had seen her either JUST after or within a day and they saw no injuries. There was never a police report filed.

The second statement that Johnny was suing about was “Then two years ago I became a public figure representing domestic abuse, and I felt the full force of our culture's wrath for women who speak out.”

The op-ed was released in December of 2018 and coincided with the release of the movie Aquaman in which Amber was in. Amber had sought her temporary restraining order (TRO) against Johnny in May of 2016. Again, while on the stand Amber would admit, more than once that while the op-ed did not specifically name Johnny that it was about him although at least once she said “and others.” So that leaves as to whether the statement was true. This is tricky because while yes, she had gotten the TRO, I do not think that she “felt the full force of our culture's wrath for women who speak out” because she was almost universally believed. The next question would be if this was defamatory to Johnny and if the statement was said “with malice.” If the claim about domestic abuse was false then yes.

This brings us to the third statement Johnny sued Amber for, “I had the
rare vantage point of seeing, in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse.”

Once again while Johnny's name was not mentioned, it was presumed, along with the other statements that it was in fact referring to him. To be clear throughout the relationship the police had only been called twice to their home and that occurred on the same night, six days before Amber filed for the TRO. The officers that responded testified at the trial that not only did they not see any marks on Amber, but that they saw no damage in the home to indicate something had taken place. Johnny was never charged criminally. But the statements indicated once again not only that it was Johnny but that there was reason to charge him but he was “protected.” Presumably that was referring to law enforcement and government officials.

Before I move on to Amber and her claims in her counter suit I want to finish with Johnny and his side and suit. Johnny had several witnesses testify that they either never saw abuse, or when they did it was Amber throwing something or attacking Johnny. There were several audio recordings presented to the court that took place between Johnny and Amber. In my opinion these made the most impact. Some may disagree, but in every recording that I heard it was not Johnny who was the abusive person, but was Amber. In one particular recording she is heard repeatedly taunting him, making fun of him and his career. In another there is a discussion between the two where Johnny accused Amber of “punching” him. Her response was “I was hitting you, I was not punching you.” Johnny goes on to tell her “Don't tell me what it feels like to be punched.” She proceeds to call him a “baby” and again is taunting him and says “Tell the world Johnny, that I, Johnny Depp, am a victim of domestic violence, and see how many people believe or side with you.” In another recording they are discussing events in Australia but it is vastly different than her account on the stand. There is no mention of any sexual attack but there is talk of Johnny running to a bathroom to retreat from her and while she followed the door had hit her toes. Johnny apologizes profusely for this but then they go on to how she then hit him in the head with the door as a reaction to the toe pain and then punched him, which apparently it seems was the goal of her following him. In this recording Amber tells him that he cannot run away every time. In yet another recording they are sitting in a car outside one of their homes. Inside Johnny's daughter is inside and Johnny is attempting to go inside and tell Amber he just needs a few hours and that when he came back they could (or could not) continue the conversation. This went on for a while as she kept preventing him from leaving.

Aside from the sexual assault claims that Amber made that were not proven, she made other claims on the state that Johnny's team was able to bring in rebuttal witnesses to tell a different story. In one Amber talked about when they had gone to a place called Hicksville Trailer Palace located in Joshua Tree California. It was basically a trailer part to be rented and Johnny and Amber had rented there and had friends with them. According to Amber during the evening she had been talking to a female and Johnny had come over angry, grabbed the woman's arm and made some comment about how much pressure it would take to break her arm. She proceeded to claim that afterwards she and Johnny retreated to their trailer where a fight ensured and the trailer was left with a lot of damage that they had to pay for. The woman he allegedly grabbed was never identified, nor did she testify. In rebuttal Johnny's team brought in the manager of the trailer park at the time of their visit and he testified that he had given the couple a tour of the area upon their arrival and spent about an hour hanging out with them. He recounted at least one incident in which Amber had appeared angry with Johnny and took him off to the side. The manager stated as he could not hear what was said it was obvious that Amber was yelling at Johnny and he looked to be cowering. He also testified that the following morning he went to the trailer the two had shared and that the only damage was a light scone and that those were delicate and commonly broken. Because they are replaced as sets the total bill to the couple was $62.00. Neither side it seems showed anything showing what kind of payment that was paid to the Trailer Palace so jurors only had to rely on the manager, if they believed him. When Amber was confronted with this in her rebuttal she claimed that she did not know who the man was and that he had lied about what had happened and “wouldn't know” because “he wasn't there.”

The journalism website/company TMZ attempted to file a motion to prevent one of their former employees from testifying. This is often common to protect the integrity of a journalism company, be it a newspaper, news station or radio station or even a writer of any kind. They want to keep their sources confidential so as they do not feel any fear or retaliation for giving them information. The judge decided that she would allow the former employee to testify. Since he was a former employee he obviously was not risking his job, but he was risking damaging his reputation. In the end the former employee testified about receiving a video that had been presented to the court when he was an employee of TMZ. Actually what he received was a shorten version of what the court received. The video was taken by Amber. She could be seen in the video in the beginning and at the end of the video she could be heard snickering. Those two portions had been edited before TMZ received it. The crux of the video showed Johnny drinking and very angry slamming cabinets in the home. Amber had been asked in her initial cross examination if she had in fact sold the video to TMZ and she claimed she had not. The former employee never mentioned Amber specifically by name but he went through the process of how TMZ came to have the video and how they go about obtaining the copyrights them. According to the former employee it would take approximately fifteen minutes to obtain rights if they get it from the original owner, which in this case would have been Amber, although again, he did not state her by name. He explained it that it took much longer to obtain when they had to go through other people. He then testified that it too, them about fifteen minutes to obtain the rights. This was a clear indication that the video had been approved by Amber. He also testified that a tip was received that on May 27, 2016 Amber would be at the L.A Courthouse attempting to obtain a TRO and that she would stop and show the right side of her face so they could get a picture. This in fact was the side in which there seemed to be a bruise to her face. When called for rebuttal once again Amber was confronted with this evidence and she claimed that it was untrue and continued to say that she had not sold the video to TMZ nor had she contacted them about her TRO. She went on to say when asked or it was indicated that someone in her immediate circle or worked for her had contacted them about the TRO that it was “ludicrous” and “absolutely not.”

The biggest and one of the most anticipated rebuttal witnesses came in the form of Supermodel Kate Moss. She and Johnny had dated in the 1990s. In general she would not have been allowed to testify but if you watch highlights of the trial you will see that during a portion of her testimony Amber actually brought up Kate Moss and you see Johnny and his team smile from ear to ear. Amber “opened this door” which allowed them to call Kate Moss. In her testimony Amber was telling about an alleged incident that had occurred on some stairs. Amber's sister, Whitney was also there but I want to point out that Amber, Whitney and Johnny all had differing stories about this incident on the stand. In fact, there was a fourth story told about the incident by a woman named Jennifer Howell, a friend of Whitney's but while her deposition was played for the jury and there was talk about statements and an email she had written it was unclear if the jury actually saw them. At any rate, in Amber's version her sister was on some stairs and she was at the top while an angry Johnny ran up the stairs and she “immediately thought of Kate Moss on the stairs” and punched him thinking he was going to hurt her sister. She claimed that was the first time she had ever “landed one” on him. I use this quote because her sister Whitney used the same wording. In fact, while Whitney is not the only person, or even evidence presented at the trial that Amber hit Johnny, she was the only one to claim witnessing him hit Amber, but she almost 'glosses over it' and neither attorney pressed her on it. But here Amber had mentioned Kate Moss, who was brought in as a rebuttal witness saying that when she and Johnny had dated they were leaving a hotel and the stairs were slick and she had fallen. According to Kate, Johnny came rushing to her aid, took her inside and got her medical attention. She was on the stand (via video) for less than 10 minutes. Johnny would testify that while it had been a rumor through the media way back in the 90's that he had told Amber the story of what had happened early in their relationship.

At this point I am going to move on to Amber's counter claim. She was suing Johnny for 100 million dollars (twice what he was suing her for) over statements made by his former attorney, Adam Waldman. I cannot proclaim the details but apparently there were more than the three that made it to the jury but the judge dismissed those. For her case I am just going to start by showing you the three statements because they were rather similar in nature. Keep in mind that these statements were published in April 2020 online on a Daily News website.

The first statement said “Amber Heard and her friends in the media use fake sexual-violence allegations as both sword and shield depending on their needs. They have selected some of her sexual-violence hoax as 'facts' as the sword, inflicting them on the public and Mr. Depp.” The second statement said, “Quite simply this was an ambush, a hoax. They set Mr. Depp up by calling the cops, but the first attempt didn't do the trick. The officers came to the penthouses, thoroughly searched and interviewed, and left after seeing no damage to face or property. So Amber and her friends spilled a little wine and roughed the place up, got their stories straight under the direction of a lawyer and publicist, and then placed a second call to 911.” The third statement stated, “We have reached the beginning of the end of Ms. Heard's abuse hoax against Johnny Depp.”

Johnny's team argued that these statements were not made by Johnny but by his attorney, who would later be removed from the current case. Amber's team argued that by acting as Johnny's attorney he was speaking for Johnny, therefore he was responsible or could be held liable. The judge agreed but as I stated earlier there were more statements that had been pulled, presumably from the same article, that the judge dismissed, leaving only these three. As you can see, all three statements refer to Amber's allegation of abuse, specifically sexual abuse, as being a hoax. Unlike Johnny's case against Amber, Amber here did not have to prove the statements were about her since Waldman was not shy in the least in calling her by name. Here it was Amber's job to prove that the statements were false, while it was Johnny's team to prove they were true. And, they had to prove they were said with malice to harm her.

You did not have to know very much about the law to have seen that much of this case came down to being “out lawyered.” While Johnny's team seemed to run like a well oiled machine, including their witnesses, Amber's team seemed to be fumbling a lot. While Johnny's team objected A LOT, they were smart in knowing when the judge was agreeing with them so they kept it up more. Amber's team did not seem to know how to respond to those objections properly which often left the judge with no choice but to side with Johnny. On the other side Amber's team did not object in many situations that they should have hence things got into the record that may not have otherwise. You could almost hear the frustration with the judge when Amber's side would speak to object or answer a question from their table because her lawyer repeatedly failed to turn her mic on and had to be reminded by the judge over and over. In one instance Amber's attorney was attempting to ask a question and Johnny's team was repeatedly objecting. Basically the attorney put her hands up and said “I'm trying... I'm trying.” It almost made you feel bad for them. But, it came down to a few things for me. First, the attorney's could have stop representing her or at least asked to no longer represent her at any time. Secondly, the same could have been said for Amber. One instance became a running joke when her own attorney objection to HIS own question.

Several witnesses testified for Amber but those hurt her too. Most of her witnesses were now “ex” friends of hers and their testimony was given through depositions that that were taken as many as two and three years prior. The only non-expert witness besides Amber herself to take the stand was her sister, Whitney who I discussed earlier and was on the stand for probably less than an hour. There were two doctors of psychology who testified, one of which who was highly disputed by Johnny's side through their own expert witness. The other was a very odd man. His demeanor struck many as just strange. I am still unsure why he was put on the stand as he seemed to diagnose or project things about Johnny although he had never examined him. Keep in mind that Amber was claiming that she had suffered mental anguish and specifically asking for “punitive damages.” Those are what people get that are not “actual” losses and are for “pain and suffering” more or less. So because she was making this claim it was ordered that she be examined, and Johnny's team had the right to bring in their own witness. Johnny on the other hand was not making this claim and therefore was not ordered by the court to be examined.

Both sides presented witnesses that projected what each of them lost in finances due to the statements in which they were suing. Both sides made claims at what they lost while the other side would bring in someone who would claim that it was not the statements but other things that caused them to not make as much money as they expected. There was a dispute whether Johnny lost a role in Pirates of the Caribbean 6 or if there even was a sequel in the works. Johnny had also been in the Fantastic Beasts movie and expected to be in sequels but he claimed that after the allegations Warner Brothers “asked him to resign.” It does not seem that anyone from the studios confirmed or denied these things but Amber's team brought in a former assistant of Johnny's who claimed that his drug and alcohol use was causing him to be issues on sets and show up late, but nothing was truly confirmed. For her part Amber was not what anyone considered to be an “A-list” actor, unlike Johnny, but she had had a small role in the movie Justice League and continued that role in the movie Aquaman. Her team claimed that the Waldman statements had prevented her from continuing her career and there had been a push to have her role removed or reduced in Aquaman 2. Her side also attempted to portray her role as the second lead of the movie. They provided a witness who claimed to all but know how Hollywood worked and projected how much money she lost. The woman compared Amber to several A list actors as well as some who had been in Superhero movies but those who played the lead role, something she did not do in Aquaman. Johnny's side provided witnesses who not only disputed this but that pointed out that the movie had been released more than a year before the Waldman statements were made and if Aquaman was going to be her “breakout role” it would have happened before then. An executive from Warner Brothers testified that Amber's role in Aquaman 2 was reduced not because of the statements or anything to do with the drama in her life but because of the lack of chemistry with the lead actor.

While all of these things happened I would like to say that they were doing their best with what they had but I honestly cannot say that. The biggest thing for me in their incompetency was the fact that they entered the exact same picture into evidence, twice, depicting two separate incidences that Amber described. One had allegedly occurred in December of 2015 and the other occurred in May of 2016. Amber herself did not do well on the stand and it ended up being her that had to answer the question as to the picture that had been entered into evidence twice. I want to point out that the term “ineffective counsel” only applies to criminal cases and not civil ones like this one. Amber cannot appeal her case on those grounds. She could however sue her attorney's later for malpractice if she so chooses to do so. To be fair I have not heard any rumblings about this happening.

Closing arguments are when the attorney's on both side pull their case together and remind the jury what they saw throughout the trial. Juries are often reminded that closing arguments and things said by the attorney's are not evidence. In this case the attorney's for each side not only had to show that they had proven the other side wrong, but proven their case to be true. You do not often see cases like this, where each party is suing each other. Generally you seen the plaintiff (which in a criminal case is the state or federal employee) start their closing, then you see the defendant's attorney's speak and then the plaintiff speak again. With the two cases it was a bit more confusing. Some have argued that Amber's team did better in their closing arguments than they did throughout the trial. I do not know that I agree. They seemed to focus a lot of the audio recordings and text messages. There had been a few between Johnny and Amber released, as well as between them and a few others. One particular set of messages was between Johnny Depp and actor Paul Bentley where Johnny stated some not so kind things about Amber. I think Amber's team expected those to somehow tarnish Johnny image and while it seems in hindsight that did not work, I am unsure that it was necessary. The text messages did not prove that Johnny had done anything to Amber as far as domestic violence. Even still I felt as if the audio recordings were that much more damaging to Amber as she was the aggressor in nearly, if not all, of them. They even showed the video of Johnny slamming cabinets. Personally I thought this also was a bad idea, but then again, in my opinion her team did not have a lot to work with. Johnny had readily admitted to his drug and alcohol issues and stated that the video was taken without his knowledge (you see that in the video itself) at time in which his mother was dying and he had just learned that he had lost money to the tune of $650 million to business managers he accuses of stealing from him. Add to this Johnny's team had all but proven, if the witness was believed, that despite Amber denying it on the stand and claiming that she was always trying to protect Johnny and not get him in any trouble, legally or expose him in the media, had first edited this video and then sold it to the media. In fairness, maybe “sold” is the wrong word as I do not recall there being any mention of a monetary gain. Amber's team still seemed to want to push the idea that the Waldman statements had cost her many roles in the industry. They also told the jury that the case was a Freedom of Speech case and that they only had to believe that Johnny abused Amber one time “and she wins.” At the time of the their closing I had been under the impression that this was in fact true but looking deeper, not only do I disagree, but I also understand where the jury came to their conclusion, something we will get into in a bit.

For Johnny's team and his part they brought up all of the inconsistencies in Amber's testimony and her case in general. They argued that if she lied about one thing, then she could not be trusted on other things. They pointed out her allegations of sexual abuse and how there were no medical records for that or any of her other allegations; they pointed out how many witnesses had proven their case. But, even with all of that, there was one thing that was said that stuck out for me.

Amber went and got the TRO against Johnny in May of 2016. It has been alleged that part of the motive behind this was that Johnny had already told her he wanted a divorce and she could have been forced to move out of his properties. The TRO would prevent that. The couple divorced in 2017 and Amber had pledged to give her seven million dollar cash payout to charity. Then they kind of fell off the radar, at least as far as their relationship issues went. Then coinciding with the release of Aquaman, Amber had published the op-ed that the ACLU had helped her write while they made her an ambassador of their organization. It is said that the height of the ME TOO movement had been around 2017, around the time of their divorce. It was an era in which several high profile, and many low profile people in Hollywood were accused to sexual misconduct. The two most famous of these people were actor Bill Cosby and producer Harvey Weinstein. Both would have several accusers come forward against them. In fact, all of the men, and they were all men, who were accused of sexual misconduct had several accusers. Some were actors, some were directors, producers or musicians. It always started with one and then more would come forward... hence the “Me Too.” Johnny's attorney pointed out that that he was the only “Me Too” …. without the “too.” Not one other person ever came forward and said Johnny had been abusive to them. It was not like there had not been plenty of women in his life, Johnny had been known as a bad boy of Hollywood for years. Amber's team focused so much on Johnny's alcohol and drug use as if it had been a secret.... it was not. And, Johnny readily admitted these issues not just at the trial but pretty much off and on throughout his career. In fact, not only had no other woman come forward claiming abuse, they were coming out and talking about how he had NOT been abusive. These women could have never said anything at all and stayed out of the media, they had nothing to gain from coming forward. In fact, some could argue if they were looking for attention and wanted to come forward they would have gotten more if they had agreed with Amber, and yet no one did. This really resonated with me.

The jury left to deliberate in the afternoon of the Friday before Memorial Day, exactly six years to the day that Amber had gotten the TRO, something Johnny's team kept mentioning. They only deliberated for a few hours before breaking for the day and the three day weekend. Keep in mind that about halfway through the trial there was a week long break as the judge had a previously scheduled issue and during that time. During this time the jury was not sequestered, nor were they sequestered during the break during deliberations. Now, to be fair most of the cases that I do and read about are criminal cases and not civil cases so I am even unsure whether sequestering a jury during a civil case is a thing, especially in Virginia. I mention this though because after the trial one of Amber's lawyers brought this up in interviews. The jury returned to the court on Tuesday and deliberated the entire day, asking one question of the court. Their question was about the title of the op-ed, which was one of the statements they were to consider. Their question was whether they were simply to look at that statement, or if since it was the title if that meant they were to consider the entire op-ed. Lawyers gathered in the courtroom and it was agreed with the judge that it referred to that particular statement only. They returned once again on Wednesday and shortly after taking their lunch it was announced that a verdict had been decided. It took longer than normal to get out however because the jury had failed to place any monetary damages to any of the counts they had decided were defamatory. So the judge had to send them back but, we as viewers and those in the courtroom knew at that point that someone had one at least one of their claims, no one knew who though. Eighteen minutes after the judge released the jury to finish completing the forms they returned and everything seemed to be in order this time.

Because Johnny had sued Amber first and her case was a “counterclaim” the decision for his case came first. The jury had decided that each of the three statements that Johnny had sued Amber over were in fact defamatory to him, that they were untrue and that they had been said with “malice.” Once those verdicts were read the court read what the jury had awarded Johnny. This amounted to ten million dollars in compensatory damages. Compensatory damages are to help the harmed party basically re-coop monies that they lost. In turn they awarded him five million dollars in punitive damages. These are monies they give to the winning party basically to “punish” the losing side. Virginia law caps punitive damages at $350,000 so despite the five million awarded, it will be brought down to $350,000. Despite this, the fact that the jury awarded this seemed to be a statement from them, especially after the verdicts continued to be read.

Next it was time for the verdicts in Amber's counterclaim. When it came to the first and third statements the jury decided that Amber was not defamed. However, they agreed that the second statement, the one where Waldman talked about Amber and her friends calling the police a second time after he claimed they had “roughed” up the place, she did win. For this the jury awarded Amber two million dollars in compensatory damages but they awarded her no punitive damages.

After the verdicts were read both Amber and Johnny's, almost immediately, released statements. There was a lot of talk about Amber's statement in particular. Her she stated, “I'm heartbroken that the mountain of evidence still was not enough to stand up to the disproportionate power, influence and sway of my ex husband.” Many experts were stunned by this statement as it seemed to be more of the same kinds of things that she had stated in the op-ed that had just cost her nearly 10.4 million dollars. She went on to talk about how the verdict was a “set back for women” involved in domestic violence relationships. Outside the courtroom Amber's team did not make a statement, however Johnny's did basically proclaiming victory and how they had helped Johnny get his reputation back.

The following day one of Amber's lawyers did several media interviews. She faced a lot of backlash for several reasons. One was that she had accused several of the witnesses for Johnny as looking for their “15 minutes of fame” and many felt that she was out there doing the same. She also faced backlash at her criticism, not just at the verdict but of pretty much everyone in the case including the judge and the jury. She proclaimed that there was ample grounds for appeal and that several pieces of evidence had not been allowed. She accused the jury of being influenced by social media. At the end of the day it was widely thought that while Amber had sued Johnny for statements that his attorney had made against her, here was her own attorney doing the exact same thing. The following day the attorney had a scheduled interview with Court TV but it was canceled at the last minute. First they stated it was a “family emergency” but later that was changed to a “court emergency.” They had stated that the interview would be rescheduled for the following week but as of yet I have heard nothing. Many have speculated that either the judge or the lawyer's own partners in her firm “shut her down.” We may never know what really happened.

Initially many of the commentators on the various outlets that discussed the verdict seemed to be confused. First, most were surprised that Johnny won all of his claims. It seems that they too had, which is where I had gotten it, believed that any form of abuse from Johnny to Amber would have dismissed his case, just as her lawyer had proclaimed in his closing arguments. They were also confused at first it seemed as to how after Johnny basically “sweeping the board” on his claims, that Amber won any of her claims. For me I understood the verdict and how the jury came to the decisions that they did and many of the legal commentators have seemed to come around a bit. First, as I said I initially believed that if the jury believed there was any abuse to Amber from Johnny that she “won” just as the attorney had stated. But then looking at the statements as they were presented I not only understood, but agreed with how the jury came to the conclusions that they did.

The first statement that they were to consider is the statement they asked the court to clarify. That statement was the title of the op-ed but it specifically mentioned sexual abuse. While on the stand Amber had recounted an incident that she claimed occurred in Australia that involved being sexually abused by Johnny. As noted earlier she had gone into great detail about her injuries but had failed to produce medical records. Several witnesses who saw her directly after reported seeing no injuries. It seems the jury did not find her account credible. I do want to point out that while the jury did not hear it, there was an audio recording taken directly at the time. The jury did not hear it because one of the participants on the recording is no longer alive. I admit that I have not personally listened to the recording but it is reported that in the audio Amber admits that she had severed Johnny's finger, apologizing over and over but never once mentions her alleged abuse. I believe the jury read the statement, concluded that they did not believe that the sexual abuse account happened and since it was in the title of the article, this made the statement false. While Amber's attorney's argued that she had not personally written the title, she did in fact publish on her Twitter page with the caption “Look what I just published” so she took complete credit for the article.

Then it came to the “confusion” as to how Johnny won all of his claims and yet Amber still won one of hers. Once again I understood the ruling and I agreed with it. Johnny's team really did not spend any time in which they specifically addressed Amber's claim against Johnny in open court. There had been discussions outside the jury's presence and apparently behind closed doors about whether Johnny should be held responsible for statements made by his previous attorney. I think their idea was that each of the statements talked about the fact that Amber's claim was a “hoax” and they believed if they proved that to be the case then she would lose all of her counter claims. However, in the one statement in which she was awarded damages Waldman had spoken of specific actions that he claimed Amber and her friends had done before calling the police the second time. In fact, officers from both trips to the home that night testified and indicated that they saw nothing either time. Waldman's statement regarding this went just a little too far in my opinion. I am not saying that I do not agree with him that it may have happened, but there was no way to prove it. No one ever admitted to the court that this is what happened.

Amber's attorney had vowed to appeal but that is in question. The judge gave the parties until June 24^th to have the paperwork of the jury filed. Amber has thirty days from the time that paperwork is official to file an appeal. There have been questions as to first what it would take for her to be able to appeal. Some have said that Virginia requires that she put up the money that she owes from the judgment (10.3 million) in order to appeal while others gave a percentage for her to do so. I cannot say which it is, but I can say that I do not feel that she should have to put the whole amount up. This is not because I think she will win an appeal or that I think the verdict was wrong in any way. I believe this because an appeal is a right she is entitled to and if she cannot afford the judgment out of pocket then it is unfair that she lose this right because she cannot come up with the money.

I want to go into a few things about how appeals work. Finding something to file for an appeal is fairly easy. Amber's attorney has gone to the media saying they have several grounds, and she is correct. Every time a member of the team objected and was overruled by the judge it could be grounds for an appeal. Every time a member from the other team objected and Amber's team argued against it and was ruled against by the judge, it could be grounds for an appeal. If you watched the trial you know there were hundreds of these incidents. The rule is that the issues in which the appeal is filed on had to be a ruling in the court case. They cannot appeal on anything that was not disagreed against in the case. I should also point out that while many have argued that Amber's team failed her as attorneys they cannot appeal a civil case on “ineffective counsel,” that is only in criminal cases. Once there is something that the team finds as an appeal many will throw in anything and everything they can, and some things the cannot. The courts look at these allegations they rule on them. Any of the points made that were not addressed in the case will be dismissed. It is not that all appeals fail but appeal courts generally take great efforts to have trust in their judges and not overturn their rulings. If the court rules that a judge had made an error they then have to decide if that error was such that would have likely changed the outcome of the case.

I admit that there are holes in this recounting and there was a lot that I have left out. But, after eighteen pages and about three days of working on this I think it is time to end this. I encourage others to comment and add more information.