The Lawsuits Thread

Discuss the latest Johnny Depp news, his career, past and future projects, and other related issues.
User avatar
Chocolat
Posts: 9713
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 11:52 am
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Chocolat » Sat Jun 29, 2019 9:26 am

Thank you Ade. Points well made. Good thoughts that all will be in favor of Johnny's requests.
~ MAGICK HAPPENS ~
Through the years, for the many xoxo's, giggles & kindness...
thank you & love you Johnny.

justintime
Posts: 1587
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Sun Jun 30, 2019 8:07 pm

Ade-ele wrote: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 right 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.
Thank you, Ade, for your concise summary of the two most prominent, and still unresolved, Johnny-initiated lawsuits. I have copied your whole recap here rather than misquote you at any point. I apologize ahead of time for what are really just ramblings - and rants - that I can’t quite let go of just yet.

First Suit, Johnny’s libel action against The SUN, for which, apparently, there has still not been a trial date set(!). Please, please correct me if you have info to the contrary.

The first link below is to The SUN article itself, in case anyone might care to re-read it to perhaps conclude (IMAO) it was not based on “misinformation” but rather an arrogant, conscious, self-serving decision to not bother researching the basic facts already out there (the Divorce Decree itself for one) and instead just go with the most inflammatory garbage they could put together. To hell with any semblance of journalistic integrity, to hell with an innocent-until-proven-guilty man’s reputation, career, family and life, and to hell with a renowned and respected author’s obviously well-considered decision - this was a new article and a potential windfall of clicks awaited . . .

The second link is to the March 1, 2019, Press Gazette article re: The SUN’s failure to put a halt to JD’s libel action. It is this article that ends with the “. . . no trial date set” statement. I am concerned about this, if it is still true, as it would obviously be enormously helpful, for some logical flow, to have this suit resolved - in Johnny’s favor, of course - before the defamation case begins.





And,
Second Suit, his defamation action against AH currently set for court on February 3, 2020, but waiting for Judge White’s jurisdiction decision.


I found after reading your recap (thank you), there are some potential overlapping resolution elements that I am thinking we, who support Johnny, should perhaps be a bit more restrained in putting forth. Two of those are:

1. the presumption that Johnny doesn’t really want or need a settlement award and/or damages to be determined by the court/jury/or presiding justice, and the speculation as to what he might do with same should he be so awarded

Nothing speaks louder or requires less interpretation as to winner/loser than long numbers with dollar signs. And that indisputable “verdict”, more than anything, can go a very long way in giving Johnny the elusive justice he so dearly deserves.

We don’t know Johnny’s true financial situation, nor should we be privy to same. But it doesn’t take the proverbial rocket scientist or person-in-the-know to legitimately surmise JD’s legal fees must have crept into the millions a long time ago, now with no end in sight. Whether he can personally absorb those costs or not, he shouldn’t have to!; nor should there be a risk of him being painted as less than generous because we may have unwittingly set him up for such scrutiny.

When all this is said and done, I am hoping beyond hope that Johnny walks away with the store, so to speak, and that these results are “shouted” from the roof tops of every media vehicle now in existence, be they brick and mortar or internet ether. And a pox on any scum who dare utter even a whisper to the contrary. IMAO, always.

2. the willingness to allow an apology from The SUN and/or AH to somehow be the acceptable cornerstone of any form of resolution, be it settlement or jury trial in each of Johnny’s respective suits against them, and that “said apology” might obviate the need for a monetary element to rise above token status

I’ve stumbled down the settlement road before, I know, and a Zoner here was kind enough to clarify its multifaceted potential for me. I still hold fast, however, to the notion that the apology factor of a settlement is a minefield of potential misinterpretations, omissions, and flat-out disregards on the part of the all-important media and the public at large, especially where Johnny Depp is concerned. In the AH defamation suit, a settlement option may have become a moot point given the recent validation of Johnny’s evidence as being worthy of a jury trial, regardless of jurisdiction.

Here is where overlap in the two cases begets some confusion: A resolution in The Sun case means 200,000£ and damages are considered. A resolution in the AH defamation suit means $50,000,000 is considered. Crazy as I might sound, I don’t for a second feel this was meant to imply, if the jury in the defamation trial decides in Johnny’s favor, that AH should be off the hook with an apology or some token monetary payment because the poor dear doesn’t have $50,000,000.

No, I believe Johnny chose that number for its shock value: to let the powers that be in the judicial system (and the jury itself) know, without equivocation, how important this case is to him and how much he has suffered due to her false allegations directly linking him to the perpetration of domestic violence upon her. AH may not have $50,000,000, but she sure did damage in excess of that to Johnny’s stellar career, reputation, family, and life in general - his children, e.g., were abused by people, emotionally and psychologically, on line for years with threats and comments so hideous most of us can’t even imagine sane human beings could stoop so low.

The fact is, ordinary people get hit with financial judgements seemingly beyond their means every day and they find ways - or, ways are found for them - to meet their obligations. Leveling lies and false accusations against an innocent person is vile, inexcusable behavior that, in truth, defies quantification.

AH may not have $50,000,000 NOW, but she’s young and ruthless. Freeze her bank accounts. Put your hand out, honey, and start putting the arm on all those eager backers - L’Oreal, the ACLU, the UN, etc. Maybe Bloom and TMG could lend a hand. Assess her belongings, the jewelry Johnny gave her and her refitted little red sports car to start with, the paintings and furniture she made off with from JD’s penthouses when she finally left - have a fun-filled auction to dispose of it all, or just donate everything - for real - and let Johnny get the tax deduction. She just came off a triumphant turn as a major character in a phenomenally successful WB film - will she be cast in its sequel? She recently landed a major part in the 10-episode adaptation of Stephen King’s The Stand, to begin filming this September 16 through March 11th. Have every contract she signs include withholding language and every paycheck that comes her way into perpetuity be docked by every employer, studio, etc. she works with. I’m sure Mr. Waldman could be very creative, as well.

Although she may never come close to fulfilling her obligation, her life into the foreseeable future would be imposed upon. One thing is for certain, she is a monster. It is not indulging in dramatic overkill to acknowledge she nearly killed Johnny. AH cannot be permitted to walk away from the fundamentally irreparable harm she routinely and casually inflicted, with just an apology. She would do so, laughing.
"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
Judymac
Posts: 198
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Judymac » Sun Jun 30, 2019 9:48 pm

I am one of the people who said The Amber Heard lawsuit is not about the money. I did not mean that Johnny should not take the money, I meant that his reputation is more important than money. The lawsuit is about Amber's reputation too. Johnny needs to get his good reputation back and Amber needs to be exposed as a manipulative liar. I hope Johnny gets a huge monetary judgement against her. I want Amber to feel pain every time she looks at her bank account. She could not move on quietly from the divorce. Amber wants to be the center of attention and she got lots of attention as a spokesperson for domestic violence. Now it is time for her to pay for her lies.

User avatar
myfave
Posts: 6087
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: South
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by myfave » Sun Jun 30, 2019 10:49 pm

Judymac wrote:I am one of the people who said The Amber Heard lawsuit is not about the money. I did not mean that Johnny should not take the money, I meant that his reputation is more important than money. The lawsuit is about Amber's reputation too. Johnny needs to get his good reputation back and Amber needs to be exposed as a manipulative liar. I hope Johnny gets a huge monetary judgement against her. I want Amber to feel pain every time she looks at her bank account. She could not move on quietly from the divorce. Amber wants to be the center of attention and she got lots of attention as a spokesperson for domestic violence. Now it is time for her to pay for her lies.
:agreesign:
"Hello South Carolina" ...............*swoon*

User avatar
Chocolat
Posts: 9713
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 11:52 am
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Chocolat » Tue Jul 02, 2019 11:22 am

More today from The Blast.
Depp's team send subpoena to James Franco.


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

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 » Tue Jul 02, 2019 2:02 pm

What will happen if Franco is not willing to answer the questions?
I do hope he fears the sentences for perjurie.

justintime
Posts: 1587
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Tue Jul 02, 2019 3:51 pm

Thanks, Chocolat, for the link. It’s a back and forth article, but Mr. Waldman sets everyone straight at the end:

“. . . Depp's lawyer disagrees, telling The Blast, "Surveillance footage and sworn witnesses place Mr. Musk and Mr. Franco separately sneaking into Johnny Depp’s penthouse in the nights after Amber Heard’s May 21 face beating claims. Ms. Heard’s team has now admitted Mr. Franco is the man cuddling with a nightgown-clad, perfect-faced Ms. Heard and hiding from the elevator surveillance camera at 11:00 PM on May 22, the day after her face beating hoax. Lies beget lies. Ms. Heard’s absurd pre-textual excuse for Mr. Franco’s presence in the elevator to Mr. Depp’s penthouse floor is that it was a chance encounter because James Franco 'lived in the building.'"

He continues, "That is a lie. Mr. Franco didn't and doesn't live in the building. Nor does he live in the hallway of Mr. Depp’s private penthouse floor to which elevator 3 goes.. . .”
"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
myfave
Posts: 6087
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: South
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by myfave » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:33 pm

:censored: :censored: :censored: :mad2:
"Hello South Carolina" ...............*swoon*

User avatar
Chocolat
Posts: 9713
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 11:52 am
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Chocolat » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:34 pm

justintime wrote:Thanks, Chocolat, for the link. It’s a back and forth article, but Mr. Waldman sets everyone straight at the end:

“. . . Depp's lawyer disagrees, telling The Blast, "Surveillance footage and sworn witnesses place Mr. Musk and Mr. Franco separately sneaking into Johnny Depp’s penthouse in the nights after Amber Heard’s May 21 face beating claims. Ms. Heard’s team has now admitted Mr. Franco is the man cuddling with a nightgown-clad, perfect-faced Ms. Heard and hiding from the elevator surveillance camera at 11:00 PM on May 22, the day after her face beating hoax. Lies beget lies. Ms. Heard’s absurd pre-textual excuse for Mr. Franco’s presence in the elevator to Mr. Depp’s penthouse floor is that it was a chance encounter because James Franco 'lived in the building.'"

He continues, "That is a lie. Mr. Franco didn't and doesn't live in the building. Nor does he live in the hallway of Mr. Depp’s private penthouse floor to which elevator 3 goes.. . .”

It's always a positive sign when Adam Waldman provides a statement. I'm confident he and his team have everything in order and lining up more witnesses and evidence. My guess is that the subpoena issued to James Franco is for a deposition. It will be interesting to see how the questioning will go and what James Franco will reveal, or not. I just hope he mans up and does the right thing and not avoid the questions, much like Amber Heard did over and over during her deposition. That was a circus!
~ MAGICK HAPPENS ~
Through the years, for the many xoxo's, giggles & kindness...
thank you & love you Johnny.

justintime
Posts: 1587
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Tue Jul 02, 2019 9:47 pm

Chocolat wrote: It's always a positive sign when Adam Waldman provides a statement. I'm confident he and his team have everything in order and lining up more witnesses and evidence. My guess is that the subpoena issued to James Franco is for a deposition. It will be interesting to see how the questioning will go and what James Franco will reveal, or not. I just hope he mans up and does the right thing and not avoid the questions,much like Amber Heard did over and over during her deposition. That was a circus!
I agree, Chocolat, especially re: a Franco deposition, and the earlier Heard deposition “circus”. Apt descriptions.

Just so sick of all the lying, particularly how easily those on AH’s side of the room just keep perpetuating and elaborating upon the hideous lies she started. Not a sliver of truth anywhere. What a festering nest of empty, greedy, soulless creatures she has around her. When I think that if just one of them - or even one of those witnessing or suspecting the abuse Johnny was enduring, friend or foe - had been struck by a bolt of conscience and courage four years ago, Johnny could have been spared all this hell.

Johnny looks wonderful now, most of the time, but it’s easy to see he’s lost so much personally and professionally (can’t help likening - though very different circumstances - the hurt and disappointment of The Professor and The City of Lies debacles to what he experienced with The Libertine/Weinstein). I wonder, now, if there is any hope the defamation case vs AH might come to trial sooner than next year. In all honesty, it’s just too much time for the Viper’s ruthless, twisted brain to be on the loose.
"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

Quin55
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 2:16 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Quin55 » Wed Jul 03, 2019 12:02 am

I agree that a moving up of this court date would be a great development toward justice. He's waited long enough and frankly so have we, the people who care about him. I can't stand the fact that her lies are going to continue to go on unchallenged for 8 more months. Yes I know that Mr. Waldman, the attorney, issues rebuttals to most of the nonsense and I'm glad of that, but still...

gipsyblues
Posts: 347
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 11:36 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by gipsyblues » Wed Jul 03, 2019 3:34 am

It is unbelievable that all this happened, two days after Betty Sue left us. I despise this snake for what she did to Johnny and his family. I hope so much that Mr. Waldman can help Johnny. Ah ... I never thought that James Franco was involved in this reverberating and evil game. (maybe unknowingly). Oh my God, if he's a good soul, he'll relieve Johnny.

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

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Ade3 » Wed Jul 03, 2019 3:58 pm

I don't know masses about James Franco and I believe that when there were rumblings about him and he missed out on an Oscar nomination I said things like "I can't judge, I don't know the facts" etc - influenced of course by what happened to Johnny. I had no idea he was caught up in this. But it seems pretty clear to me that if he was a decent person he would not have been sneaking around like this - I don't want to pre-judge but given her record and their body language you can imagine what happened. She was married. That's not ok. Secondly he has kept quiet all this time - I suppose his argument will be that he didn't want to interfere, that it would have been just another famous white man 'siding' with another famous white men etc etc. But- he saw her unbruised face, must have known from the subsequent furore that she was lying - and still did nothing? Was he worried he'd be accused of the bruise?

I wonder what he will do, how he will answer? If he says she was bruised he contracts 31 other witnesses, many of whom (police officers for one) will be more believable. Also - if he says that - why didn't he come out and support her? If AH's fans are still convinced of her story I would have thought they'd be angry that he hasn't supported her.

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

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Ruby Begonia » Wed Jul 03, 2019 6:49 pm

In exposing her, he would have a hard time not exposing himself as being involved with her going who knows how far back? They were in Pineapple Express together, where some said his character was partly based on Johnny.

There are also a couple recent blind items from the often fictional cdan site seeming to refer to Franco & Heard. One is that Hollywood wants the Depp-Heard battle quashed since it could reveal her link to a major dealer who services the industry and no one wants that dealer exposed or shut down. The blind says she introduced many people to the dealer. Could Franco with his backpack be the dealer? Again, I take all these blind "reveals" with a grain of salt since so many are silly and repetitive, but Franco, Heard and Timothy Chalamet on the Adderall Diaries were revealed as the answer to a blind accusing an actor and actress of getting a much younger actor drunk/drugged before sleeping with him during a movie shoot. The young actor was upset because he wouldn't have done that if he hadn't been drugged and coerced. Quite a coincidence that Chalamet is the actor Lily recently seemed to be dating.

User avatar
Chocolat
Posts: 9713
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 11:52 am
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Chocolat » Wed Jul 03, 2019 7:05 pm

The actor’s attorney Adam Waldman confirmed to PEOPLE he plans to subpoena Franco and Elon Musk as “fact witnesses” on behalf of his client. “We already know from 87 surveillance videos and 31 eyewitnesses what Elon Musk and James Franco saw the week of May 21 — that Ms Heard’s ‘battered face’ was a hoax,” Waldman said.

A rep for Franco did not immediately respond to PEOPLE’s request for comment.
~ MAGICK HAPPENS ~
Through the years, for the many xoxo's, giggles & kindness...
thank you & love you Johnny.