The Lawsuits Thread

Discuss the latest Johnny Depp news, his career, past and future projects, and other related issues.
User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1604
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Wed Nov 04, 2020 8:05 pm

More proof. Johnny Depp Wins Public Opinion

“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

Someareborn
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2020 7:16 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Someareborn » Wed Nov 04, 2020 8:25 pm

I don't want to rain the parade, just want to be careful and precise my definition of words.
I agree that the fan base is huge and will be even stronger after the verdict. But my definition of "general public" means: your unknown neighbour, the schoolteacher of your kids, the guy who mows your lawn. People, who are no fans, who just read headlines. And wasn't that the whole point why Johnny made the case, to clear his name in the media, implying that the general public acknowledges the truth?
I understood his fans believed him from day one, no need to convince them. As for all the positive comments on social media, I take it with a grain of salt, because of the filter bubble alert.

Apart from the personal reasons to appeal, I agree with the legal angle concerning a precedent case. He cannot be treated as a criminal without being convicted, through the backdoor of a defamation case.

a) Does the Court of Appeal review the verdict, point out the flaws and order Judge Nichol to reconsider the verdict?
b) Or, does the Court of Appeal review the evidence and make another ruling?

If a) doesn't Judge Nichol retire next summer? What will happen then?

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1604
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Wed Nov 04, 2020 8:46 pm

Can someone please tell me how someone like Justice Nicol does not see anything but a small scratch and believe the ex said she was abused on this trip simply because she said so?

Image
Last edited by ForeverYoung on Wed Nov 04, 2020 8:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1498
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Wed Nov 04, 2020 8:47 pm

Someareborn wrote:
Wed Nov 04, 2020 8:25 pm
a) Does the Court of Appeal review the verdict, point out the flaws and order Judge Nichol to reconsider the verdict?
b) Or, does the Court of Appeal review the evidence and make another ruling?

If a) doesn't Judge Nichol retire next summer? What will happen then?
As far as I understand, Judge Nichols has nothing to do with the appeal.
Initial rulings of the High Court are appealed to the Court of Appeal and, from there, to the Supreme Court. Appeals to the Supreme Court invariably need the permission of either the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.

An appeal is started by filing an appeal notice which must be done within 21 days of the date of the decision of the lower court (unless the lower court has directed a different period in which to bring the appeal). Once an appeal notice has been filed, it must be served on each respondent as soon as practicable, and in any event, within seven days after being filed.

The test that must be satisfied before permission is granted is whether the court considers the appeal would have a real prospect of success; or there is some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard. For instance, an issue of law may need clarifying so permission to appeal is granted.
So He has to be given permission to file the appeal to move forward.
What’s the process of appealing?
Unless the appeal court orders otherwise, the appellant’s appeal notice must be served on any respondents (as stated above). Skeleton arguments are required for all civil appeals. A skeleton argument sets out the appellant’s case, and is the appellant’s opportunity to show the judges the merits of their case, using reasoned justification for asking the court to reconsider the initial ruling.

A copy of the appellant’s skeleton argument must be served at the same time as the appeal notice, unless this is impracticable (in which case it should be served within 14 days of filing the notice). Any other relevant documents must also be served on the respondent, for instance, a chronology of events. Civil court appeals
In most civil cases, whether family court rulings, debt or employment claims, or commercial cases, the outcome is uncertain. This means the parties in a civil dispute are often anxious to know whether they can appeal if they lose the case.

If someone loses their case, they may then have to consider whether or not to appeal. An appeal is where the losing party asks the court to reconsider the ruling of the lower court – either in whole or in part.

Some appeals can be brought as of right because there is an automatic right to appeal. However, most decisions can be appealed only with the court’s permission. This is called ‘leave of the court’.

What is the civil appeals framework?
Rulings of county court district judges may be appealed to county court circuit judges, and if further appeal is required – to the Court of Appeal.

Initial rulings of the county court circuit judges are appealed to the High Court.

Initial rulings of the High Court are appealed to the Court of Appeal and, from there, to the Supreme Court. Appeals to the Supreme Court invariably need the permission of either the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.

Appeals from the Upper Tribunal and the Employment Appeal Tribunal are heard by the Court of Appeal.

What are the time limits for bringing an appeal?
An appeal is started by filing an appeal notice which must be done within 21 days of the date of the decision of the lower court (unless the lower court has directed a different period in which to bring the appeal). Once an appeal notice has been filed, it must be served on each respondent as soon as practicable, and in any event, within seven days after being filed.

When is leave to appeal required?
With three minor exceptions, leave (permission) is required to bring an appeal. The exceptions where decisions may be appealed without permission are those from:

Committal orders;
A refusal to grant habeas corpus, and;
Secure accommodation orders under section 25 of the Children Act 1989.
The test that must be satisfied before permission is granted is whether the court considers the appeal would have a real prospect of success; or there is some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard. For instance, an issue of law may need clarifying so permission to appeal is granted.
I also read it will be reviewed by three judges
What’s the process of appealing?
Unless the appeal court orders otherwise, the appellant’s appeal notice must be served on any respondents (as stated above). Skeleton arguments are required for all civil appeals. A skeleton argument sets out the appellant’s case, and is the appellant’s opportunity to show the judges the merits of their case, using reasoned justification for asking the court to reconsider the initial ruling.

A copy of the appellant’s skeleton argument must be served at the same time as the appeal notice, unless this is impracticable (in which case it should be served within 14 days of filing the notice). Any other relevant documents must also be served on the respondent, for instance, a chronology of events.

Generally, no response is required from the respondent until permission is granted. The purpose of this is to ensure the respondent is informed of any landmarks in the appeal process.

Note that initiating an appeal does not have the automatic effect of staying execution on the judgment or order under appeal. You would need to make an application for a stay of judgment pending the appeal.

There may not be a hearing, as the application can often be dealt with administratively instead. If leave is granted, an appeal hearing will be set. It is important to understand that an appeal is not a re-hearing, it is a review of the decision made.

In most cases, the appeal court will allow an appeal only where the decision of the lower court was wrong in law or on the facts; or it was seriously unjust because of a serious procedural or other irregularity in the proceedings in the lower court.

The court can either refuse the appeal, or uphold, set aside or vary the initial order or judgment, or even refer any claim or issue back to the lower court or tribunal. It can also order a new trial or hearing if necessary. In addition, the appeal court can make a costs order for payment of interest, and make costs orders.
Can fresh evidence be produced to the appeal court?
The appeal court can receive fresh evidence, but only if it is satisfied that such evidence:

Could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence for use at the hearing;
Would probably have an important influence on the result of the case, and;
Is apparently credible.
Where there is fresh evidence, a new trial could be ordered.
https://www.inbrief.co.uk/civil-court/c ... rt-appeal/

Inquiring Minds
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:41 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Inquiring Minds » Wed Nov 04, 2020 8:56 pm

[Helena Kennedy QC] Kennedy met Heard at a dinner party in the north London home of the novelist Kathy Lette during the trial. Others present were the TV presenter Sandi Toksvig and Heard’s lawyer, Jennifer Robinson.

“[Heard] was brought by Jen in the middle of the trial when there was a small dinner taking place. Jen asked if she could bring Amber Heard along because she was feeling pretty down and beleaguered.
from the Guardian article https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/n ... ts-says-qc

Via (many thanks Tracey

So according to these tweets and screenshots Kathy lied about the Ambers Angels party.



So the question is - did Kylie and Cate Blanchett zoom in as claimed in the original article?

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1604
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Wed Nov 04, 2020 9:35 pm

Someareborn wrote:
Wed Nov 04, 2020 8:25 pm

a) Does the Court of Appeal review the verdict, point out the flaws and order Judge Nichol to reconsider the verdict?
b) Or, does the Court of Appeal review the evidence and make another ruling?

If a) doesn't Judge Nichol retire next summer? What will happen then?
I am not sure about the UK but in the US where I live an appeal gets filed in a higher court and the lower court judge gets copied on all the papers. The decision is an exhibit to the appeal papers. They have to state in the appeal brief what they are appealing. Both sides go back and forth like the lower court with motions and such and in the end the higher court decides whether the lower court judge was wrong in his (or her's) decision. In the US this is long process because the appellate courts move a lot slower and the paperwork is voluminous, meaning you have to supply seven copies of all your papers to the court because they get distributed to the judges involved, including the judge assigned to the case. There is electronic filing but the still require the paper copies as well and they are very particular about the font, binding, color copies of the covers, etc. and it is not right they will make you resubmit.

I believe that whether Judge Nicol retires next summer is irrelevant since he would not involved in the higher court case if this was the US.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1604
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Wed Nov 04, 2020 9:40 pm

Inquiring Minds wrote:
Wed Nov 04, 2020 8:56 pm
[Helena Kennedy QC] Kennedy met Heard at a dinner party in the north London home of the novelist Kathy Lette during the trial. Others present were the TV presenter Sandi Toksvig and Heard’s lawyer, Jennifer Robinson.

“[Heard] was brought by Jen in the middle of the trial when there was a small dinner taking place. Jen asked if she could bring Amber Heard along because she was feeling pretty down and beleaguered.
from the Guardian article https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/n ... ts-says-qc

Via (many thanks Tracey

So according to these tweets and screenshots Kathy lied about the Ambers Angels party.



So the question is - did Kylie and Cate Blanchett zoom in as claimed in the original article?
Aaaahhhh, some back peddling here???
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

Inquiring Minds
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:41 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Inquiring Minds » Wed Nov 04, 2020 10:23 pm

ForeverYoung:
Aaaahhhh, some back peddling here???
And why did she deny it happened? This was mid-trial. Was this when the fix went in?

Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws is a Member of The House of Lords. This means she gets to determine legislation. She became a Peer of The Realm for her services to women and authored "Eve was Framed". There is a TED talk she gave titled "The law is male". Most of her google hits relate to the same theme of voiceless women. She is a member of "JUSTICE" (the Justice League :lol: ) that advocates their views amongst the legal community.

She also works out of the Doughty Chambers. That single office seems to be a common theme in this trial.

justintime
Posts: 1915
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Wed Nov 04, 2020 10:48 pm

ForeverYoung wrote:
Wed Nov 04, 2020 5:45 pm
After listening to the recordings the judge said "In my view no great weight is to be put on these alleged allegations by Ms. Heard to aggressive violent behavior.... This all makes me sick.”
Thank you, ForeverYoung, for that summary! I agree. And, I don’t say it often enough, but many, many thanks to all those working so hard to keep everyone aware, up-to-date, thinking positive, and hoping and praying for Johnny, one of the few truly “good ones” left in this chaotic world.

I, too, like so many here, have been reading the comments posted as well as the Decision document itself. I cannot let it go - the overwhelming injustice just keeps playing in my head and I find myself constructing rebuttal after rebuttal. I cannot even begin to imagine the horror and stress Johnny is going through now.

Bottom line, I don’t think Johnny has any real choice: he must appeal this vacuous decision. Not only is it riddled with blatant, outrageous personal prejudice, inappropriate comments, baseless almost flippant dismissals of JD’s claims, and unsubstantiated reasoning, but Mr. Justice Nicol actually took it upon himself to reword and/or clarify AH’s tales to fit his own, preferred interpretation of what she was saying - or meant to say!

This little tidbit is disconcerting to say the least, but I still think Johnny must persevere:
hollyberry wrote:
Wed Nov 04, 2020 5:25 pm
As a UK citizen, let me tell you about the Sun.
Not only are they tabloid used to telling lies,their owner is a wealthy Tory donor. Most British QCs are Tories.
Johnny didn't stand a chance....
Johnny threw down the gauntlet in the midst of unmitigated media persecution when he declared in British GQ he “would never stop fighting....”. That was just not false bravado speaking for an interview. I believe he was and is motivated by the gut-wrenching need to right things as much as humanly possible for his children’s future even more so than for his own. There has been a grievous and cruel miscarriage of justice from the bench of the U.K.’s High Court - a ruling that has left the victim more vulnerable now than before he ever set foot in the High Court seeking one thing only: Justice. And the whole world is watching, listening, waiting.

Another thought: Timing is everything, they say. For Mr. Justice Nicol, I suspect July 21st, 2021, cannot come fast enough. Good riddance. For Johnny Depp, the 12 to 18 months (minimum) to appeal may actually work in his favor. If his PR keep JD’s appeal front and center, and the obvious legitimacy of his request is continually reinforced (as it deserves), the sting of his U.K. “loss” is diminished somewhat with the possibility of a decision reversal, and his VA trial benefits from the publicity of justice having a chance to triumph the first time around. Certainly a better prospect than going to VA court with that horrid “w_ _ _- _ _ _ _ _ _” tag boasting uncontested legitimacy.
Last edited by justintime on Wed Nov 04, 2020 11:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"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
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1604
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Wed Nov 04, 2020 10:58 pm

If I recall correctly, Judge Nicol said from the beginning that he thought this would probably be a case to go to appeal but either way, he doesn't get involved in the appeal so why should he care? He certainly doesn't care about his reputation because if he did he would not have given such a horrible decision based on assumptions instead of facts and disregarding credible witnesses such as the police, of all people.

I think we need a bobble head smilie because ever since the decision came out I have been shaking my head in disgust for this injustice by the British Court. He basically says it's ok for a woman to abuse a man without repercussion. :smh: :facepalm: :mad:
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

Scout
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 1:10 pm
Location: New York City
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Scout » Wed Nov 04, 2020 11:27 pm

I have one question and one comment. Can this UK decision be brought up against Johnny to the jury in VA?

Also, after reading all the great research and comments of zoners, I must once again mention Adele and LBock and Forever Young specifically, J. Nicole seems to have had prior connections effecting his impartiality. During the trial it seemed to me that court room decorum was a high priority, with Depp's team have to walk a fine line. I hope they can bring up some of the conflicting interests of the Judge in the appeal. I plan to do further research on him and his background.

Inquiring Minds
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:41 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Inquiring Minds » Wed Nov 04, 2020 11:44 pm

Scout:
I have one question and one comment. Can this UK decision be brought up against Johnny to the jury in VA?
I believe anything in the public domain can be brought up, but the judge will decide if it will be allowed. But Adam has been sanctioned in VA for raising material (legally) disclosed in the UK trail, so I can't really say.

Another thing the judge didn't mention was how he had to remove Amber from the gallery because she was texting Whitney while she was on the stand.

He shouldn't be given the chance to retire. He should be stood down immediately.

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1604
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Thu Nov 05, 2020 12:02 am

Scout wrote:
Wed Nov 04, 2020 11:27 pm
I have one question and one comment. Can this UK decision be brought up against Johnny to the jury in VA?

Also, after reading all the great research and comments of zoners, I must once again mention Adele and LBock and Forever Young specifically, J. Nicole seems to have had prior connections effecting his impartiality. During the trial it seemed to me that court room decorum was a high priority, with Depp's team have to walk a fine line. I hope they can bring up some of the conflicting interests of the Judge in the appeal. I plan to do further research on him and his background.
Good question. I think they can use the decision in the UK as an exhibit to support some of their future arguements but if JD appeals in the UK maybe not because then he can oppose the argument in VA saying the decision in UK is in appeal.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
RumLover
Posts: 1515
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 5:02 am
Location: Sydney, AUS
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by RumLover » Thu Nov 05, 2020 1:55 am

I took this tweet from Greef to mean it is possible to bypass Nicol and the Appeal Court and go to the Supreme Court to request an appeal.
So his decision is not just whether to appeal but which court to appeal to.

AdeleAgain
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by AdeleAgain » Thu Nov 05, 2020 3:23 am

Whilst still oscillating on the question of appeal after Lbock's v convincing argument I think overall he does have to, if for nothing else than to be able to counter and challenge the judge's words in VA. Opening arguments for JD - we've had to come to a court in Virginia for an abused man to get justice, because even in the UK a woman's word is taken at face value even when there is a stack of evidence to counter her .....'

The Amber's Angels story now sickens me. We thought it was PR trying to put her alongside Hollywood A-listers but it seems it was in fact a cosy stitch up of UK old-school feminist lawyers who are still fighting the battle of 30 years ago. And how funny now that Kathy Lette downplayed it - I bet she did.

Gre3f came up with some very interesting thoughts last night including point out where the judge had completely and inappropriately overstepped judicial rules eg commenting/interfering on US and Australian procedures where he has absolutely no jurisdiction and indeed is a complete no-no.

The gloves really are off in VA. And I wonder if the whole 'she's not a gold digger' thing is going to be helpful to Team Depp: argument is that she has staked her claims of good character etc and not gold digging around donating her divorce settlement. If she didn't donate it, by her own admission she must be a gold digger. Again standing up before the VA jury - Amber managed to convince a judge of her good character because he believed she had donated her divorce settlement. In fact we are going to demonstrate that she lied.

And she must have lied because the judge wrote it into his judgement so somewhere in her papers or her testimony she must have said it.

So I am wondering once again if the fact that the judge relied on perjurious testimony can be used for appeal.

This particular example maybe won't help as they can't introduce new evidence for the appeal but they just be able to find and examples and I have no doubt whatsoever that if she didn't pay the money to the charities, it will be a possibly even bigger PR blow that the tapes.

Really WB/L'Oreal - you are going to give work to someone who lied about charitable donations?