The Lawsuits Thread

[justintime]

I think I’m going to be sick; see the second message, A Win For Heard:

[ForeverYoung]

I think I’m going to be sick; see the second message, A Win For Heard

From what I am reading is that the judge is only allowing the jury to decide if they apply and that it got reported wrong.

[ForeverYoung]

I was waiting for this regarding Jennifer Howell.

https://twitter.com/GellertDepp/status/ ... 0914384897

[justintime]

Oh, please be right, ForeverYoung!

[ForeverYoung]

Finally...

https://www.newsweek.com/Johnny-depp-wi ... -1708737?f

[Judymac]

I think I’m going to be sick; see the second message, A Win For Heard:

This means that the jurors can consider Adam's statements. "It's a win", means that it could be helpful to her. It does not mean that she won the case. "It's a win" is an expression that should not be taken literally, as Amber Heard won the case.

[Someareborn]

I expected the statements to survive. Until now, I think its obvious that her abuse claims are nonsense, but I am not so sure about the defamation. Her agent said that she lost a movie on Amazon, a possible TV series and a photoshoot, thats not nothing, even if these things were not put up in writing yet. She basically confirmed what JDs expert (Marx?) said - that nobody wants to hire people with such claims hanging over their head.
The jury will hopefully consider that Adam leaking two tapes and trying to influence social media, or better, inspire the conversation, was based on reality. It were her own words that damaged her career, while JD could only watch his career being destroyer by her lies.
But , defamation is hard to prove in this business it seems.

[ForeverYoung]

If by some chance JD were to loose this case I am not going to loose sleep over it or get stressed out about it because he has already achieved his goal of getting the truth out. He has already won the court of public opinion having one more week to go with the trial, now having 17.7 million followers on his IG account and I see a lot of postings on SM from people who once believed her but after watching the trial they are now on his side. One of the lawyers on the streaming channel I watch said JD is "back on the list" now with producers considering him for some films. Of course, I can't confirm this but it would be nice. I have no idea how she has the nerve to counter sue him for $100 million because she is not worth that kind of money and never has been. Her team is really pushing that her name is all she has, like there is nothing else she can do.

As for Bruce, I think he was just telling the truth because he was under oath. I am guessing that he must have seen JD doing things with people besides Joe Perry but yeah, is was pretty low of him to do that and he seemed a little bitter.

Next week should be interesting with the Jennifer Howell statement and other "slam dunks" JD's team has up their sleeve.

[justintime]

I think I’m going to be sick; see the second message, A Win For Heard:

This means that the jurors can consider Adam's statements. ….

Thanks for weighing in, Judymac .

However, it seems there is an ocean of difference in:
“….The judge ruled that #AdamWaldman’s 3 statements - the sources of Heard’s counterclaim against Depp - WILL BE considered as Depp’s statements under the theory principle/agent…”. i.e. will be = must be/a directive

And “…. CAN BE considered …”. i.e. CAN BE = jurors’ choice/optional

I don’t see any official updates/rulings on the FAIRFAX, VA. site since 05/03/22.

[hollyberry]

Reading on twitter how Johnny coming forward has helped other abused men to do the same, seen a lot of support for him on tumblr...even on a Star Wars fanpage! The truth will set you free.

[Judymac]

Thanks for weighing in, Judymac .

However, it seems there is an ocean of difference in:
“….The judge ruled that #AdamWaldman’s 3 statements - the sources of Heard’s counterclaim against Depp - WILL BE considered as Depp’s statements under the theory principle/agent…”. i.e. will be = must be/a directive

And “…. CAN BE considered …”. i.e. CAN BE = jurors’ choice/optional

I don’t see any official updates/rulings on the FAIRFAX, VA. site since 05/03/22.

This was *only* a ruling that certain evidence can be considered. The judge is a neutral party. She tells them what testimony they should consider. She does not tell them that some testimony is more important than any other testimony. If she did that, then she would not be neutral. The only people who get to decide on the importance of the testimony are the jurors. There is trust in the jurors that they will do the right thing. The judge only gives instructions, she does not take part in the deliberations. Judge Penney will be available for questions, but even that will be procedural questions, only.

[justintime]

Ahhhh! Thank you so much

[Joni]

We seem to be having issues with mixed-up quotes recently. I have gone through today's thread and fixed what needed fixing. Please, don't quote what does not need quoting, and be careful with what you delete when you are quoting posts that include multi-person messages.

Thanks!

[ForeverYoung]

Nice to see Paul McCartney supporting JD at his concert.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/tvsho ... ncert.html

[Granna]

McCartney has been in these shoes. His ex - Heather Mills - claimed a lot of bull. Luckily, the judge didn't fall for ploy.