The Lawsuits Thread

[AdeleAgain]

I posted that quickly in case anyone needed to know asap.

IF TRUE/accurate then I think an overall good decision for JD. From this the judge is weeding out testimony which doesn't directly contribute to whether or not abuse took place.

So Kate James' statement relating to things like AH decorating her home to look like Johnny's and wearing BoHo clothes is all very interesting to us but not strictly relevant. The fact that she can say she saw no bruises and that AH asked people to lie - that's directly relevant and so I think that's to be submitted. Similarly David Killakey statement goes to the fact that she isn't nice to people but not really super relevant to the Sun case. JD's side will still easily be able to refute claims that she was without a car for years.

And just pleased if Winona and Vanessa's statements get considered - again not that they do anything more that provide background that JD's a good guy - but the effect on the public narrative is quite powerful. And they are relevant because they confirm he's a good guy and in the Virginia case a claim was made by AH that he'd abused other women. You can be jolly sure that if he had harmed anyone else that would be front and centre of the case!

[MaryS]

Here's the link if anyone is interested. I hope it works.

bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2020/1237.html …

I agree Adele, not bad at all. It's a fair ruling.

[AdeleAgain]

I am having to have a little lie down - the Guardian and the Times are reporting that JD can use his ex-wife's former assistance's testimony.

I was expecting the headlines to read "Depp Refused Key Witness - Judge Says Mechanic Irrelevant" or something similar. Well, well.

I do hope that regarding Kate James, the point gets made that if she was an embittered ex-employee she could have sold her story in 2016 to TMZ which was running both pro and anti stories on them both.

[Lbock]

You hit it right

I like how judge warned The Sun regarding their cross examination. Essentially be careful not to
Open doors to let this testimony back in lol (on Kate)

[In-too-Depp]

Johnny Depp libel claim can use Amber Heard PA evidence, says high court

Testimony related to allegations he was violent to ex-wife can be used in case against the Sun

Article by Owen Bowcott, Legal Correspondent.
The Guardian.
18th May 2020

Evidence from a former employee of Amber Heard can form part of Johnny Depp’s case in his libel claim against the Sun newspaper over allegations he was violent to his ex-wife, the high court has ruled.

In an interim ruling in the high court case, Mr Justice Nicol declared that some, limited testimony from Kate James, a former personal assistant to Heard, will be included in the forthcoming trial. She said she never saw any sign of physical violence.

But the judge dismissed as irrelevant evidence from David Killackey, a mechanic who worked for the couple before their acrimonious divorce. It will not be admitted in the case.
Sign up to our Film Today email
Read more

Depp, who starred in the Pirates Of The Caribbean movie franchise, is suing the paper’s publisher, News Group Newspapers (NGN), and its executive editor, Dan Wootton, over an April 2018 article that referred to the 56-year-old as a “wife-beater”.

Delivering his written decision, the judge said: “I refuse to the claimant [Depp] permission to call Mr Killackey. I give permission to [Depp] to call Ms James to give evidence [to a limited] extent …”

Mr Justice Nicol said he would admit James’s evidence in relation to having not seen a “a serious or messy fight” and having never seen signs of physical violence.

Other matters in James’s statement which go to the credibility of Heard in her dealings with the US Department of Homeland Security will also be included in the trial.

At a preliminary hearing last week, lawyers for Depp said his ex-partner Vanessa Paradis has given a witness statement in which she described the actor as a “kind, attentive, generous and non-violent person and father”.

Lawyers for Depp have submitted evidence from Paradis, who has two children with the star, and actor Winona Ryder, with whom he had a relationship in the 1990s, as part of his case against the publisher. Their statements were not opposed by NGN.

David Sherborne, representing Depp, said in court documents that his relationship with Paradis ended in 2012, shortly before he and Heard were together “and when he is first alleged to have been violent”.

In her statement, Paradis said: “I have known Johnny for more than 25 years. We’ve been partners for 14 years and we raised our two children together. Through all these years I’ve known Johnny to be a kind, attentive, generous, and non-violent person and father.” She added: “He was never violent or abusive to me.”

In her statement, Ryder said: “I cannot wrap my head around [Heard’s] accusations. He was never, never violent towards me. He was never, never abusive at all towards me.”

A spokeswoman for Heard said: “As the judgment today shows, Mr Depp’s team has been attempting to introduce irrelevant evidence. This is one of the defining characteristics of their strategy – to adduce irrelevant evidence designed to smear Ms Heard and distract from the facts so that people do not focus on Mr Depp’s behaviour.”

Depp and Heard met on the set of 2011 comedy The Rum Diary and married in Los Angeles in February 2015.

In May 2016, Heard obtained a restraining order against Depp after accusing him of abuse, which he denied.

A full trial of the libel claim is scheduled for July.

[Lbock]

I love how the judge said that Kate's evidence (and I presume Kevin Murphy's) on the dog smuggling is in. She forged documents and lied to a government. I don't care if she could be charged there, its relevant in this case. bahahahaha

[MaryS]

You got to laugh at Heard's "spokeswoman". Hi Kaplan.

Let's see. It should read.

"Heard has "no" evidence and it's she who's doing the smearing because that is all she can do - distract - from her bad behaviour."

Further, Heard calls herself a "recreational user". Hahahaha. That's what all alcoholics and drug addicts call themselves.
Let's see what Dr Kipper has to say.

[Lbock]

I love how the judge said that Kate's evidence (and I presume Kevin Murphy's) on the dog smuggling is in. She forged documents and lied to a government. I don't care if she could be charged there, its relevant in this case. bahahahaha

I am correcting as I read the ruling incorrect:

The judge said that Kate's testimony on Homeland Security and the letter and payment check can be entered even if its possible it could lead to satellie litigation.

So this is in reference to that not Doggy Gate. Sorry

[MaryS]

Did The Sun report on today's ruling? They normally report on every ruling.

Oh that's right, The Sun didn't have any
cherry-picked texts to read aloud this time. And no new fake claims.
So, probably not.

I just read that the trial will run for 3 weeks. I thought it was for 2 weeks.
Johnny has built up all this evidence so an extra week is needed.

[ForeverYoung]

So it seems the Judge doesn't care that Amber disrespected everyone. He is focusing on her credibility and it won't be good for her I wonder if she is so eager now to testify.

[justintime]

Do we know if Amanda de Cadenet, Whitney Heard (is her married name “Henriquez”?) and others have provided their “witness statements” or any other official court documents (declarations, depositions, etc.) in support of the SUN’s defense since they are now expected to testify (by video link, if necessary) during the trial? When would be the latest date such information could be submitted to allow adequate time for the claimant to review and research these “witness statements”? Will they be available online for public consumption?

[AdeleAgain]

Justinetime sorry I don't know for sure but I assume that they will have given witness statements otherwise the Sun's lawyers could be blind sided by what they say. And they must have been disclosed to Johnny's team - remember what Adam said on twitter recently - in court nothing is really a surprise once you get to trail. I don't think it is as open in the UK though in that the witness statements don't get published to the public before hand. But I don't actually know this for sure.

[justintime]

Thank you, AdeleAgain!

[ForeverYoung]

Do we know if Amanda de Cadenet, Whitney Heard (is her married name “Henriquez”?) and others have provided their “witness statements” or any other official court documents (declarations, depositions, etc.) in support of the SUN’s defense since they are now expected to testify (by video link, if necessary) during the trial? When would be the latest date such information could be submitted to allow adequate time for the claimant to review and research these “witness statements”? Will they be available online for public consumption?

Whitney must have either given a deposition or made a statement because Amber's lawyer references Kate James statement that she saw Amber many times dressing and undressing for fittings and that she was with her almost every day contradicts the evidence "Amber and her sister" gave. I'm not sure but I believe the time to submit any additional witness statements is over.

[Lbock]

Thanks Adele, that's what I heard

Fairfaix just posted an update on reschedules per COVID-19. Johnny's case is in so far
https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/circuit/s ... 051820.pdf