The Lawsuits Thread

Discuss the latest Johnny Depp news, his career, past and future projects, and other related issues.
User avatar
myfave
Posts: 6087
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: South
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by myfave » Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:00 pm

The February 2020 date is a trial date for defamation against Amber or The Sun?
"Hello South Carolina" ...............*swoon*

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 695
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:14 pm

myfave wrote:The February 2020 date is a trial date for defamation against Amber or The Sun?
It is the case against Amber but a lot can happen between now and then.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

justintime
Posts: 1583
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:03 pm

A lot IS happening - now. Despite implausible “perhaps the writers/producers/casting are unaware(!)” of the sworn testimony against AH that has been steadily mounting over the last few weeks, look who has nailed a leading role in a highly anticipated production scheduled to begin shooting THIS September. Who/What is behind the continued blatant push to strengthen this vile liar’s and abuser’s foothold in the film industry??

http://hollywoodnorth.buzz/2019/06/even ... inter.html

And where is the ruling on the motion re: a dismissal/change of venue that was supposedly such a slam-dunk in Johnny’s favor that we were expecting word early this morning?

Sorry for the rant - well, not for the content, just the whining tone. I know in my heart we are all on edge right now. Still keeping fingers crossed and praying as hard as I can . . .
"Stay low." ~ JD
"I don't like it in here . . . it's terribly crowded." ~ Hatter
"There's something about Johnny that breaks your heart." ~ John Logan, ST
"Tear deeper, Mother." ~ Wilmot

User avatar
Chocolat
Posts: 9711
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 11:52 am
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Chocolat » Fri Jun 28, 2019 1:13 pm

justintime wrote: And where is the ruling on the motion re: a dismissal/change of venue that was supposedly such a slam-dunk in Johnny’s favor that we were expecting word early this morning?



According to the motion document, the time set was for 10:00 am EDT this morning.

Image

We should be getting an update soon.
~ MAGICK HAPPENS ~
Through the years, for the many xoxo's, giggles & kindness...
thank you & love you Johnny.

User avatar
Chocolat
Posts: 9711
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 11:52 am
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Chocolat » Fri Jun 28, 2019 2:54 pm

So far, the update according to posts on IFOD:

~ MAGICK HAPPENS ~
Through the years, for the many xoxo's, giggles & kindness...
thank you & love you Johnny.

justintime
Posts: 1583
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Fri Jun 28, 2019 3:06 pm

OMG . . .

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D-Kv6t_X4AA ... name=large

But the Post DID accept it. They were fully aware of the ACLU working as a go-between for AH in order to get that acceptance. Was the Op-Ed ever actually posted, in entirety, on-line? Anything done with it after they (The Washington Post) accepted and published it is irrelevant, no?

I can’t believe Waldman et al were not prepared for this “discussion”.
"Stay low." ~ JD
"I don't like it in here . . . it's terribly crowded." ~ Hatter
"There's something about Johnny that breaks your heart." ~ John Logan, ST
"Tear deeper, Mother." ~ Wilmot

Ade3
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Ade3 » Fri Jun 28, 2019 4:06 pm

Hi this is Ade - sorry had to rejoin with a different user name - new computer and couldn't remember my password.

So as I understand it this was just the motion which AH brought to dispute where the case should be heard. She didn't manage to get it thrown out yesterday. Virginia I believe has tougher perjury laws so yay if it comes to that. Adam Waldeman et al definitely knew this was coming - that's what all of those papers about previous precedents were all about. So there is a chance the judge could decide that Virginia does not have jurisdiction over the case I guess - but in that case they can simply do as AH suggests and try it in California or New York. As long as it is heard, or she apologises and admits her lies (not likely) - I will be satisfied.

Today would have been one of those legal, technical discussions which no doubt gets lawyers very excited but leaves the rest of us cold.

It is so unbelievably frustrating and it simply beggars belief that she breezes about the place as if nothing were afoot but there is nothing to do but keep going and keep the faith. The weight of evidence is simply compelling and one day it just will catch up with her.

The Sun law suit should come to fruition before the defamation suit anyway.

Ade3
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Ade3 » Fri Jun 28, 2019 5:11 pm


User avatar
Chocolat
Posts: 9711
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 11:52 am
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Chocolat » Fri Jun 28, 2019 5:44 pm

Court document for scheduling date for trial.

~ MAGICK HAPPENS ~
Through the years, for the many xoxo's, giggles & kindness...
thank you & love you Johnny.

User avatar
Chocolat
Posts: 9711
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 11:52 am
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Chocolat » Fri Jun 28, 2019 6:11 pm

More from The Blast.

~ MAGICK HAPPENS ~
Through the years, for the many xoxo's, giggles & kindness...
thank you & love you Johnny.

User avatar
Ruby Begonia
Posts: 189
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2017 1:31 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Ruby Begonia » Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:09 pm

Unfortunately, @babewhlte's twitter account is suspended. Unless it's in Johnny's attorneys court pleadings somewhere (I think there were legal citations referencing other VA defamation cases), I believe it was "Babe" who explained in detail why VA would be the most appropriate and also beneficial venue for JD. The Washington Post Op-Ed was published in print in VA locations where the movie premiered, as was the online edition with the Op-Ed. Damage caused by defamation is also easier to prove in VA than CA and perjury penalties are harsh, some including jail time. There are other ways for witnesses to testify than appearing physically in court (plus, JD's CA-based witnesses would face the same travel issue). Also, JD's attorneys do much of their work in the VA and DC area - they know the VA court system.

User avatar
Judymac
Posts: 198
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Judymac » Fri Jun 28, 2019 9:04 pm

According to the Blast article the judge will not have a decision until after the July 4th holiday.

Ade3
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Ade3 » Sat Jun 29, 2019 3:46 am

It is probably worth a recap here of the legal strategy behind this law suit - a few points occur to me. I think I am right, just based on my experience of working on UK litigation cases, obviously I don't know the US system as well but:

1. The purpose of the defamation case is not to get 50 million dollars from AH - she doesn't have it, this is not about the money. If money is paid over from her to him it will be a far, far smaller amount, I wouldn't mind betting it will go to a domestic violence charity or something, and it will be part of a settlement deal in which she has to admit wrong doing.

2. The US system is different to the UK. There are extremely strict laws here about media coverage of legal cases so most of Johnny's evidence has not aired in the press relating to the Sun case. In the US it is different there is far more coverage of disclosure.

3. I think the Sun case is a straightforward matter of them writing an opinion based on misinformation. But it was clear from fairly early on that AH would not turn up as a witness for the Sun. I don't think she will or ever intended too. And so imagine this scenario: Johnny wins the case against the Sun or more likely they settle, and as part of that the Sun has to put on its front page that it was wrong and apologise. AH will continue to claim that the reason they lost was because she was silenced and couldn't appear as a witness because Johnny refused to waive the confidentiality agreement. Yes - that will be a complete lie but that will undoubtedly be her strategy. And whilst the majority of people will know that this is nonsense, it will allow her to stick to her story and as we have seen, some people simply cannot accept facts.

4. So the ONLY was to get exoneration is to sue her directly. I wondered why they didn't sue the Washington Post but of course - same problem. She will duck out of being a witness and claim she was silenced and attacked.

5. If they had sued in California we would no doubt be having a hearing now claiming that this is nothing to do with California because the article was published in Virginia.

6. If the case has to move - yes there are differences in the system but Johnny has a literal mountain of actual evidence. If he just had the video footage of her in the lift, well then people might convince themselves she did have marks. But he has video footage AND multiple witnesses and that's before you even get all the instagram photos of the aftermath of her supposed savage beatings where she is remarkably bruise free. If you consider the witnesses - all of them can arguably sit on a stand and say they are independent - the police, building employees, stylist and former employees don't work for Johnny. They aren't dependent or being paid by him. IF you only had the body guards - then she might have a chance of saying they are biased. But he has a range of credible witnesses. And then she has a small problem of repeatedly breaking the law.

Apologies for the length of this - just all points I have been sitting on or discussing with other interested friends for a while.

User avatar
reindeermoon
Posts: 229
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 1:17 pm
Location: Basel, Switzerland
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by reindeermoon » Sat Jun 29, 2019 5:29 am

Thank you Ade-ele for your explanation. I hope the case will not be dismissed and stays in Virginia. Heards witnesses might think twice there to lie in front of a judge.

Ade3
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Ade3 » Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:41 am

I hope also it won't get moved because guess what Amber's PR will say - "case dismissed' and then all her minions will say that this proves she didn't lie ...... when of course it proves nothing of the sort, it is only about jurisdiction.