The Lawsuits Thread

[Lbock]

Thanks so much Lbock - have only skimmed the main document. Doesn't answer the fundamental point that AH was not a party in UK and there is no case law.

I hope that is enough

[Granna]

The confidentiality request - her testimony in regards to the SV that she suffered at the hands of JD. As we all know that was a copycat story of what Kate James went through 20 plus years ago. Trying to control the fall back from the VA trial. She doesn't want everyone in the United States to know what she said in the UK trial. I have not read these documents as of yet, I am sure this is just another spin and delay of the inevitable.

[Lbock]

I think it’s an attempt to shock the judge. ‘He really is a bad man. See what i had to endure. You can’t let him get away with this. Please don’t make me relive this and testify again’. And to smear him as much as possible

[Granna]

LBock: I agree with you on that. I hope that Judge Penny sees what she is trying to do. I know it will be different in the VA court, and I am sure Ben Chew is ready to pounce on this disgusting vile #Heardzilla.

[ForeverYoung]

I think Judge A already sees right through the ex's BS and she and her whole team is digging their own graves with their pathetic attempts to have the case dismissed once again. I really hope Judge A throws the book a them and issues sanctions.

[AdeleAgain]

Just on the 'stolen rape story', because I think it led to a lot of confusion.

Kate James did not accuse AH of taking the details of her rape ordeal and saying those things happened to AH. Like the rest of us, Kate James did not know what AH claimed happened in the confidential segment of the UK trial.

What Kate James was so upset about was that in one of AH's witness statements she related a story whereby Kate told AH about her rape ordeal. AH tells it to show that she and Kate had a good connection and she admired Kate who described herself as a survivor etc etc.

But Kate's point was - that witness statement was made public and the whole world then knew Kate had been raped. There were people in her own family that she had not told.

To suddenly read about your ordeal in a public document must have been horrific. It was an appalling violation. Kate was angry and making the point that AH uses and twists things for her own benefit or ends.

[AdeleAgain]

On a sort of related note - I see Eve Barlow was with AH at Wimbledon and out and about in London, having just flown in from the US.

Eve Barlow has apparently deleted her instagram photos showing he rule breaking.

Someone has made a funny video about reporting her to the Metropolitan Police.

But on a serious note - if AH is on set, she surely should not be needlessly exposing the entire crew and production by mixing with someone who should be quarantining.

Would WB not have rules about this? I have the COVID rules as much as the next person but we all have to abide by them. Even or perhaps especially legendary journalists.

[AdeleAgain]

And on a slightly mean note: AH at Wimbledon - not in the royal box right?

Unlike Katherine Jenkins, JD's co-star in Minamata (and Tom Cruise).

[ForeverYoung]

I just read the ex's papers filed by her desperate attorney. Ben is going to "Chew" her up and spit her out. The UK court did NOT find that JD abused that POS on at least 12 occasions. The judge didn't have proof she was lying and had no evidence whatsoever for some of the alleged incidents so he just went on her lying words. And as for the donations...she was paid in installments every month well before JD filed suit against her and she could have asked that the installments go directly to charities if she had any intention to pay them. I hope the judge throws the book at this lawyer and files sanctions against her and that lying POS.

[Lbock]

Just on the 'stolen rape story', because I think it led to a lot of confusion.

Kate James did not accuse AH of taking the details of her rape ordeal and saying those things happened to AH. Like the rest of us, Kate James did not know what AH claimed happened in the confidential segment of the UK trial.

What Kate James was so upset about was that in one of AH's witness statements she related a story whereby Kate told AH about her rape ordeal. AH tells it to show that she and Kate had a good connection and she admired Kate who described herself as a survivor etc etc.

But Kate's point was - that witness statement was made public and the whole world then knew Kate had been raped. There were people in her own family that she had not told.

To suddenly read about your ordeal in a public document must have been horrific. It was an appalling violation. Kate was angry and making the point that AH uses and twists things for her own benefit or ends.

Here is Kate’s transcript. She definitely accused AH of stealing her rape story as her own.

[Lbock]

Andrea’s analysis of Elaine’s rebuttal filing

[Kathelyndecoke]

I wonder if ACLU or Éric George have provided indisputable evidence that the oped was indeed about Johnny. I really cannot understand why EB has finally admitted it in writing

[Granna]

It's better that EB admits it now, rather than cold egg on her face later (in court). This will give AH & Co., more time to spin something to ease the backlash, though, they try to take JD down in the process. EB might be trying to get herself fired or spin something so she looks victorious. Who knows, with the way things are coming down the pipe, EB, might just turn over alot more in JD's favor, to undeniably prove this was a hoax: blackmail, extortion, lies, lies and pure bs. Hopefully, this will make anyone in Hollywood, think twice about hiring her, not even for a porn flick and restore JD's honor and reputation. I hope, WB, DISNEY & others realize they backed the wrong horse. I believe this has all but destroyed the 3 ring media circus. Not paying attention to the evidence, padding their wallets, while destroying an innocent victim. Hopefully, a lot of them will lose their jobs and reputations (as they have done to JD) for following someone who does not wear the proper undergarments, flirts and exposes themselves for a photo-op for the money and headlines. Good example: People like Sandra Bullock, Lucy Lui, Anderson Cooper & Andy Cohen, are single parents - why is the media trying to make AH, a martyr? There are many, who have been single parents for centuries. IMHO - the innocent child was/is a PR stunt and leverage to avoid any possible jail time. Also, IF this is Musky's child, there is 18 years plus of child support payments. With that, AH will have someone new to blackmail, extort money from, while maintaining her lifestyle and relevance in the headlines.

[ForeverYoung]

It doesn't seem to me like Elaine has too much stock in believing they will win the remaining two counterclaims. They are putting too much time in trying to get the case dismissed instead of trying to prove their defense. By using the UK judgement as a means to dismiss it is basically admitting that the article in fact was written about him. I am curious how this will play out when Ben Chew submits this in his reply.

[justintime]

“TheRealLauraBWater waveCrossed swords
@LauraBockov
In the words of Robbie Kaplan “anyone with a grasp of the English language will know the OpEd is not about…”

But Elaine now makes it perfectly clear

Amber Heard’s OpEd was absolutely about Johnny Depp and her claims & the TRO

Glad that’s cleared up now #JusticeForJohnnyDepp”

***Pls click on the link below to see the rest of RK’s and EB’s implications:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E6TJ1B8XMAA ... me=900x900

Thank you, Arwen sparrow and Lbock (TheRealLauraB).

My head is about to explode: NO ONE EVER OBTAINED A PERMANENT RESTRAINING ORDER vs Johnny Depp! AH and her lackey applied for (while Johnny was out of the country, no less), and received, (as happens with the vast majority of such requests in LA), a TEMPORARY Restraining Order that was withdrawn when the divorce was finalized. At no point did AH submit the evidence - AND POLICE REPORT - needed to ensure the granting of a PRO.

Those two orders are extremely different animals in both their legal weight and defamatory implication, and have been casually referenced interchangeably and repeatedly without correction since the Divorce Agreement came to fruition. IMHO, it’s time that nasty habit not be allowed to continue without correction anywhere, in any publication, from anyone’s mouth.