The Lawsuits Thread

Discuss the latest Johnny Depp news, his career, past and future projects, and other related issues.
User avatar
Judymac
Posts: 916
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Judymac » Sat May 09, 2020 1:52 pm

Lbock wrote:
Fri May 08, 2020 8:17 pm
Judymac wrote:
Fri May 08, 2020 10:51 am
meeps wrote:
Fri May 08, 2020 3:18 am
JUDYMAC: The reason why I say "might" is that pleading the fifth is not supposed to be taken as an admission of guilt of a crime.

ME: OK, I only know about "taking the fifth" from movies, but there they usually say something like "I decline to answer because it could incriminate myself"
Is that a movie invention?
Because if it isn't I would say that it is sort of admission of guilt. Or what :love: ?
No, it is not a movie invention, it is true. It's hard to explain but I will try. In American criminal law, a defendant is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty in court. Just because a person takes the fifth does not automatically make them guilty. The judge will actually tell jurors that just because someone refused to testify that it is not an admission of guilt. A judge tells a jury to weigh all of the facts before deciding if a defendant is guilty. It is supposed to be a protection against innocent people being convicted of a crime. I do not know of any innocent person who would take the fifth. I am sure it sounds strange but it is the way American law works.
Hey Judymac, I posted this before and here is a reminder.
Inference to be drawn

While in a criminal procedure, the court must instruct the jury that it cannot draw an inference of guilt from a defendant’s failure to testify about facts relevant to his case, (Griffin v. California (1965) 80 U.S. 609). In civil cases, “the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them.” (Baxter v. Palmigiano (1976) 425 U.S. 308, 318.)
So in a Civil Trial, if AH pleads the 5th to any question, the jury CAN assume anything, including that she is lying or guilting of whatever they are asking.

Why specifically do you think that Amber Heard might plead the fifth? The Fifth Amendment is so that a person does not self incriminate. What crime do you think she is covering up by pleading the fifth?

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1658
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Sat May 09, 2020 2:05 pm

Judymac wrote:
Sat May 09, 2020 1:52 pm

Why specifically do you think that Amber Heard might plead the fifth? The Fifth Amendment is so that a person does not self incriminate. What crime do you think she is covering up by pleading the fifth?
Adam is the one who has raised this in several quotes. She can be held for perjury for her TRO declaration and CA deposition. The statue clock starts at the time it is learned of the perjury - so in The Sun trial or the VA trial.

If they ask her specific questions like "you texted Raquel to come from her apartment" yet we've learned she was hiding in the closet in your apartment. Were you truthful in your declaration/deposition for your claims for your tro, etc. Each and every statement she made under oath to get that TRO can now come under scrutiny in another court(s), in the witness stand (not just a depo after she withdrew her claims in CA and she never expected to have to go to court).

As Adam has said, he can bring all her instances of perjury to the attention of state (LA District Attorney) to have her charged. But, it would be up to the LA DA to bring charges. For example.

In addition, now that the audios, and many other declarations have been released, she will be questioned in her upcoming deposition prior to trial in VA.

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1941
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sat May 09, 2020 3:58 pm

I really hate to say this and I want to see her in jail just as much as everyone else but I think the states have more on their minds right now and far into the future because of the Covid-19. The economy, the courts, state agencies, etc. are all thrown off course for a long time to come.

I don't think she will even get a chance to plead the 5th. First of all, it doesn't apply in the UK courts and the VA case isn't going to make it to trial one way or another. History shows none of Johnny's cases ever went to trial BUT the UK case could be an exception, imo. Johnny's case against either one of them isn't about money. It's about clearing his name. Let's say, for instance, she doesn't file an answer and Johnny wins by default she will be exposed even more than she is now because there are more tapes and I'm sure more evidence against her. She could file an answer with crossclaims against him but her evidence is weak and none of her photos have any date and time stamps.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
Judymac
Posts: 916
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Judymac » Sat May 09, 2020 5:30 pm

The only reason why she would take the fifth is so she would not face charges for perjury in this case. The fifth is to avoid self incrimination of a crime. The only crime in this case would be perjury. A perjury case would be a separate criminal case. Even if she did take the fifth it does not make this defamation case go away. She can not plead the fifth in regard to the defamation because defamation is not a crime. Also the domestic violence case is gone. I do not think she will take the fifth. If she took the fifth she would be giving up on her case. All of her high priced attorney's and legal maneuvering would be for nothing. All she could achieve from taking the fifth is possibly criminal charges for perjury. I heard someone say in one of the audio recordings that she was not going to take the fifth.

I disagree with you that the VA case will never make it to trial. The case has already been filed. The courts do not decide that a case will not be heard because they have more important cases. This case is only about, Amber Heard saying that Johnny committed domestic violence against her. She is defaming his character. She is not on trial for the actual acts of domestic violence. I do not know what cross complaint she could file. Filing a defamation case against her is not defaming her. He did not go out into the public and defame her by saying untruthful things about her, he filed a court case. It does not matter if she has pictures. This case is about Amber saying she was abused it is not about the abuse itself.

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1941
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sat May 09, 2020 5:35 pm

You're right that the courts do not decide that a case will not be heard because they have more important cases. I was referring to a perjury trial, not this one. If she does not file an answer, Johnny's team has the right to file the papers for him to win the case by default.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
Judymac
Posts: 916
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Judymac » Sat May 09, 2020 6:36 pm

O.K sorry I misunderstood. You are right she probably will not be tried for perjury. That would be the only way the lying little :censored: :censored: would go to jail.

How do we know that her side has not filed properly? Has someone involved with this case said that the paperwork has not been filed? Johnny could win a default judgement but I also believe that her attorneys could possibly be held in contempt of court. Her attorney's are very experienced. When the court wants something by a certain date they mean they want it by that date. This case has used up a lot of court time and a judge would be angry if Amber's side defaulted by not filing proper paperwork. It would be highly unusual for attorneys of this caliber to do this. High profile and high priced attorneys like Roberta Kaplan don't just accidentally fail to file papers.

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1941
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sat May 09, 2020 6:56 pm

So far, I have not seen any answer being posted on the VA court site and I believe it was extended to June now due to Covid-19, although they could have filed electronically, so I don't understand the extension but bottom line is Kaplan has to do what her client wants her to do. If Amber tells her to file it she will. I am sure Kaplan explained all this to her. If she wanted to file an answer she would have done so from the very beginning instead of filing motion after motion to get the case dismissed. All she wants is for the case to go away. She already tried digging up dirt and it didn't work. Her evidence is weak and so are her so called witnesses. The only one who could really help her is Whitney whom Amber said she was trying to defend and who was present at that episode but we all know she's not talking which only makes Amber look like more of a liar, imo.

I know it feels like a punch in the stomach but my "gut" feeling is that Johnny will win one way or another but he is not going to get awarded anywhere near $50 mil and she won't go to jail for perjury either, even though she belongs there. I hope I am wrong about the perjury...I really do because I would love nothing more to see that.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
RumLover
Posts: 1520
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 5:02 am
Location: Sydney, AUS
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by RumLover » Sat May 09, 2020 7:22 pm

Should Amber be more concerned about court or News Group? I don't know.
If Amber is so concerned about her reputation, then it would be a mistake for her to make News Group into an enemy by not supporting them as a witness in court. News Group could turn against her and write only bad things in the future. This would damage what remains of her acting or activist career. On the other hand, if she is a poor witness, the judge could declare her unreliable and News Group lose the case anyway.
There are a number of indications that Amber doesn't really want to go to court. I have wondered if this goes back to her teenage arrest experience.

MaryS
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue May 05, 2020 8:16 am
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by MaryS » Sat May 09, 2020 7:39 pm

Forever Young, Heard isn't in charge of this case.
Kaplan and Heard's co-conspirators are.
If Kaplan was to file an answer, it's not because Heard told her to, it's because she thinks she can.
If Kaplan feels otherwise, she'll make sure that Heard confesses.
But Kaplan and Heard are both grifters so together they may continue to grift.
We will see.

And it seems that ALL of Heard's stans are in denial of her firing from Aquaman which I believe by the way.
Hahaha. It feels good.

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1658
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Sat May 09, 2020 8:10 pm

The Demurrer ruling was issued April 1 during the COVID-19 adjournment. There was a “toll” for all deadlines through May 17. That has now been extended through June 7.

The New extension does not apply to discovery (which includes documents and deposition deadlines). Depositions will be limited to state COVID-19 rules.

So as I understand her answer is now due June 29.

It’s a fairly standard document. The first claim is a general denial of all allegations. Then It will list all possible affirmative defenses they can possibly attempt to rely on. (For example any harm she caused was self defense). Anyway these are heavy legal lingo paragraphs and will be specific to defamation and possibly against his Counter claims of abuse .

There is a possibility AH or her lawyer on her behalf could file a declaration in support of their answer. She kinda did that back in April some 280+ pages. She may or may not file another one.

http://www.vacourts.gov/news/items/covi ... _order.pdf

One poster in Twitter fears she may try to appeal on the republication ruling. That her OpEd was a republication of her prior articles and thus would be time barred. I don’t feel WaPo is the same audience as say People 🤷🏻‍♀️ (As an example.)

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1941
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sat May 09, 2020 8:33 pm

MaryS wrote:
Sat May 09, 2020 7:39 pm
Forever Young, Heard isn't in charge of this case. ...
You're right. Heard isn't in charge of the "case" but she is the client, or maybe in this case whoever is paying the bills. Kaplan cannot expect to get paid for something the client does not approve of because then the client can refuse to pay her for that service. The attorney cannot file anything without the permission of the client unless there is an agreement between Kaplan and the client.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1941
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sat May 09, 2020 8:51 pm

Lbock wrote:
Sat May 09, 2020 8:10 pm
The Demurrer ruling was issued April 1 during the COVID-19 adjournment. There was a “toll” for all deadlines through May 17. That has now been extended through June 7.

The New extension does not apply to discovery (which includes documents and deposition deadlines). Depositions will be limited to state COVID-19 rules.

So as I understand her answer is now due June 29.

It’s a fairly standard document. The first claim is a general denial of all allegations. Then It will list all possible affirmative defenses they can possibly attempt to rely on. (For example any harm she caused was self defense). Anyway these are heavy legal lingo paragraphs and will be specific to defamation and possibly against his Counter claims of abuse .

There is a possibility AH or her lawyer on her behalf could file a declaration in support of their answer. She kinda did that back in April some 280+ pages. She may or may not file another one.

http://www.vacourts.gov/news/items/covi ... _order.pdf

One poster in Twitter fears she may try to appeal on the republication ruling. That her OpEd was a republication of her prior articles and thus would be time barred. I don’t feel WaPo is the same audience as say People 🤷🏻‍♀️ (As an example.)
Why do an appeal when she can just put that in her answer?
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

MaryS
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue May 05, 2020 8:16 am
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by MaryS » Sat May 09, 2020 9:42 pm

I didn't think of appeal. Hahaha. Let them try.
DENIED.

But Kaplan I thought you could prove your client's claims "if necessary".

And the DC boys who support Heard are her team.

User avatar
Judymac
Posts: 916
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Judymac » Sat May 09, 2020 10:30 pm

ForeverYoung wrote:
Sat May 09, 2020 6:56 pm
So far, I have not seen any answer being posted on the VA court site and I believe it was extended to June now due to Covid-19, although they could have filed electronically, so I don't understand the extension but bottom line is Kaplan has to do what her client wants her to do. If Amber tells her to file it she will. I am sure Kaplan explained all this to her. If she wanted to file an answer she would have done so from the very beginning instead of filing motion after motion to get the case dismissed. All she wants is for the case to go away. She already tried digging up dirt and it didn't work. Her evidence is weak and so are her so called witnesses. The only one who could really help her is Whitney whom Amber said she was trying to defend and who was present at that episode but we all know she's not talking which only makes Amber look like more of a liar, imo.

I know it feels like a punch in the stomach but my "gut" feeling is that Johnny will win one way or another but he is not going to get awarded anywhere near $50 mil and she won't go to jail for perjury either, even though she belongs there. I hope I am wrong about the perjury...I really do because I would love nothing more to see that.
ForeverYoung wrote:
Sat May 09, 2020 8:51 pm
Lbock wrote:
Sat May 09, 2020 8:10 pm
The Demurrer ruling was issued April 1 during the COVID-19 adjournment. There was a “toll” for all deadlines through May 17. That has now been extended through June 7.

The New extension does not apply to discovery (which includes documents and deposition deadlines). Depositions will be limited to state COVID-19 rules.

So as I understand her answer is now due June 29.

It’s a fairly standard document. The first claim is a general denial of all allegations. Then It will list all possible affirmative defenses they can possibly attempt to rely on. (For example any harm she caused was self defense). Anyway these are heavy legal lingo paragraphs and will be specific to defamation and possibly against his Counter claims of abuse .

There is a possibility AH or her lawyer on her behalf could file a declaration in support of their answer. She kinda did that back in April some 280+ pages. She may or may not file another one.

http://www.vacourts.gov/news/items/covi ... _order.pdf

One poster in Twitter fears she may try to appeal on the republication ruling. That her OpEd was a republication of her prior articles and thus would be time barred. I don’t feel WaPo is the same audience as say People 🤷🏻‍♀️ (As an example.)
Why do an appeal when she can just put that in her answer?
Her attorneys would need make the republication argument during the trial. That argument is actually a better argument for dismissal than for appeal. All of their arguments for dismissal have gone nowhere and this one probably would go nowhere too. There is no way they can go through the trial and then complain about articles being time barred after it is over. A judge would tell them that this argument should have been brought up during the case.

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1658
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Sun May 10, 2020 9:51 am

@judymac. She used the time-barred republication in her Demurrer and the judge overruled it. That is what some are thinking she may appeal. The ruling in that part of her Demurrer