The Lawsuits Thread
-
- Posts: 57272
- Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:12 pm
- Location: Tashmore Lake
- Status: Offline
Re: The Lawsuits Thread
That's why I wrote the op-ed...
-
- Posts: 57272
- Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:12 pm
- Location: Tashmore Lake
- Status: Offline
-
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
- Status: Offline
-
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
- Status: Offline
-
- Posts: 1985
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
- Status: Offline
Re: The Lawsuits Thread
I'm just going to leave this here.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."
-
- Posts: 325
- Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:41 pm
- Status: Offline
Re: The Lawsuits Thread
I was out of the loop over the weekend and been catching up ever since. But what a week!!! TeamDepp has been on fire. Kate Moss put in a showing and between JD and Kate, Amber was identified as the single source of the Staircase story. Denison kept setting ‘em up and knocking ‘em down. Camille was like a sharpshooter. Ben has spoken a few times, excellent, and will probably do closing statements with Camille. By the time jury instructions were done, the whole team had played a part.
Ian Runkle at LegalBytes has been in court and watching the jury. Whilst it’s impossible to tell, it looks like 7 jurors are pro-JD and 2 are uncertain/unreadable. The lawyers on the LegalBytes panel all agree that Johnny has won in the court of public opinion, but are mixed on possible damages. At the beginning of the trial, unfamiliar with any details, they predicted a Depp win as very slim. Some of their subscribers think awarding $7m (with JD donating it all to CHLA) would be appropriate, but I disagree.
First of all, JD deserves every cent asked – it is both fair (revenue lost) and well below the costs to get him to this point. Given that AH is unlikely to be able to make any significant payment, the amount awarded is more like a rating, rather than an actual compensatory amount. Awarding $1 would be a token win and would infer that JD only barely proved his case. Awarding $50m would send the message that JD did not assault AH, there was a hoax to extort millions from JD with false DV and SA claims and to promote AH and her upcoming movie. It would indicate that the jury believed AH was the one assaulting Johnny. Awarding $157m would send the additional message that AH brought on her own demise, not Johnny - and that she never made the donations. Wishful thinking and unlikely, but I will be disappointed if he doesn’t get the full $50m. I will be crushed if he doesn’t win, or only wins a paltry amount.
Ian Runkle at LegalBytes has been in court and watching the jury. Whilst it’s impossible to tell, it looks like 7 jurors are pro-JD and 2 are uncertain/unreadable. The lawyers on the LegalBytes panel all agree that Johnny has won in the court of public opinion, but are mixed on possible damages. At the beginning of the trial, unfamiliar with any details, they predicted a Depp win as very slim. Some of their subscribers think awarding $7m (with JD donating it all to CHLA) would be appropriate, but I disagree.
First of all, JD deserves every cent asked – it is both fair (revenue lost) and well below the costs to get him to this point. Given that AH is unlikely to be able to make any significant payment, the amount awarded is more like a rating, rather than an actual compensatory amount. Awarding $1 would be a token win and would infer that JD only barely proved his case. Awarding $50m would send the message that JD did not assault AH, there was a hoax to extort millions from JD with false DV and SA claims and to promote AH and her upcoming movie. It would indicate that the jury believed AH was the one assaulting Johnny. Awarding $157m would send the additional message that AH brought on her own demise, not Johnny - and that she never made the donations. Wishful thinking and unlikely, but I will be disappointed if he doesn’t get the full $50m. I will be crushed if he doesn’t win, or only wins a paltry amount.
-
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
- Status: Offline
Re: The Lawsuits Thread
I highly doubt that the jury would come up with the amount of one dollar. What the experts meant, is that *Johnny's lawyers* should ask for one dollar. It would mean that the verdict is not about the money, it is about principle. That's unlikely to happen in this case because Johnny's lawyers are probably getting a percentage of the award as their fee. It is uncommon to ask for one dollar but it is done in US courts. I would be surprised if he got $50 million. Litigants ask for more than they think that they will get. It is part of the strategy. Does anyone think that AH is worth $100. million? It would be nice if he won $50 million, but I don't think he will. First he needs a verdict.
-
- Posts: 176993
- Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 4:20 pm
- Location: Walking my beat in deepest UK
- Status: Offline
Re: The Lawsuits Thread
An article from the Daily Star about what happens next after this court case is over. I didn't feel it was worth opening a new thread for this so I've put it here.
Johnny Depp's career will 'sky rocket' while Amber Heard will struggle – expert
Article written by Daniel Bird ~ Daily Star
25th May 2022
EXCLUSIVE: Johnny Depp could be flooded with job offers after his ongoing level battle with his ex-wife Amber Heard but a leading PR expert claims she won't be too busy
Johnny Depp could become flooded with work offers after his defamation case against Amber Heard is settled, a leading PR expert has claimed.
The actor is currently suing Heard, 35, after she wrote an opinion piece in 2018, detailing her experiences with domestic abuse.
The article in question, initially published by the Washington Post does not name Mr Depp but legal representatives for Heard say it is protected by freedom of speech.
Lawyers for Depp say it "falsely implies" that she was a victim of abuse during their marriage.
Johnny, 58, has denied all allegations made by Heard.
Now, leading PR executive Vanessa Munnings has claimed the Pirates of the Caribbean actor could be inundated with job opportunities now.
Speaking exclusively to Daily Star, the founder of Leopard Print PR said: "Win or lose, Depp's career has been in free fall and it appeared nothing was going to change that.
"But spend any amount of time on social media and you'll see public opinion stacked largely against his former wife, with the actor stifling laughter in court and Heard being named as an alleged homewrecker in what has become the goldfish bowl of their lives
"A carefully considered strategy by one side or justice being done?"
She went on to add: "Regardless of what either party has or hasn't done, stranger things have happened than a member of Hollywood glitterati surviving such a public circus and indeed legal allegations.
"You only have to Google to see how some megastars have overcome the stigma of court cases and go on to cash in super successful careers, with litigious backgrounds seemingly rubbed out."
Sharing her expert opinion, Vanessa continued: "My thoughts are that Depp's career will potentially skyrocket once again once criminal proceedings are over, while Heard, rightly or wrongly, has been painted into a corner and public opinion will continue to be against her."
In 2020, Johnny sensationally claimed Warner Bros had asked him to resign following him losing his libel case against NGN.
Sharing a statement with his followers, he penned: "I wish to let you know that I have been asked to resign by Warner Bros from my role as Grindelwald in Fantastic Beasts and I have respected and agreed to that request."
The trial continues.
Article written by Daniel Bird ~ Daily Star
25th May 2022
EXCLUSIVE: Johnny Depp could be flooded with job offers after his ongoing level battle with his ex-wife Amber Heard but a leading PR expert claims she won't be too busy
Johnny Depp could become flooded with work offers after his defamation case against Amber Heard is settled, a leading PR expert has claimed.
The actor is currently suing Heard, 35, after she wrote an opinion piece in 2018, detailing her experiences with domestic abuse.
The article in question, initially published by the Washington Post does not name Mr Depp but legal representatives for Heard say it is protected by freedom of speech.
Lawyers for Depp say it "falsely implies" that she was a victim of abuse during their marriage.
Johnny, 58, has denied all allegations made by Heard.
Now, leading PR executive Vanessa Munnings has claimed the Pirates of the Caribbean actor could be inundated with job opportunities now.
Speaking exclusively to Daily Star, the founder of Leopard Print PR said: "Win or lose, Depp's career has been in free fall and it appeared nothing was going to change that.
"But spend any amount of time on social media and you'll see public opinion stacked largely against his former wife, with the actor stifling laughter in court and Heard being named as an alleged homewrecker in what has become the goldfish bowl of their lives
"A carefully considered strategy by one side or justice being done?"
She went on to add: "Regardless of what either party has or hasn't done, stranger things have happened than a member of Hollywood glitterati surviving such a public circus and indeed legal allegations.
"You only have to Google to see how some megastars have overcome the stigma of court cases and go on to cash in super successful careers, with litigious backgrounds seemingly rubbed out."
Sharing her expert opinion, Vanessa continued: "My thoughts are that Depp's career will potentially skyrocket once again once criminal proceedings are over, while Heard, rightly or wrongly, has been painted into a corner and public opinion will continue to be against her."
In 2020, Johnny sensationally claimed Warner Bros had asked him to resign following him losing his libel case against NGN.
Sharing a statement with his followers, he penned: "I wish to let you know that I have been asked to resign by Warner Bros from my role as Grindelwald in Fantastic Beasts and I have respected and agreed to that request."
The trial continues.
And Wit, was his vain frivolous pretence
Of pleasing others, at his own expense
Rochester ,"Satyr" on Man
Of pleasing others, at his own expense
Rochester ,"Satyr" on Man
-
- Posts: 1985
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
- Status: Offline
Re: The Lawsuits Thread
Six years ago today, when the closing arguments will end this trial, the ex started all of this after her friends and colleagues advised her against it and for six years she's been doing speeches, videos, "letters to her sisters", etc. and yesterday she was on the stand saying she just wants JD to leave her alone.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."
-
- Posts: 325
- Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:41 pm
- Status: Offline
Re: The Lawsuits Thread
Fitting to wrap this all up today. Best wishes to all zoners for a meaningful resolution.
To Johnny, good luck. My hero
To Johnny, good luck. My hero
-
- Posts: 366
- Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2019 12:44 pm
- Status: Offline
Re: The Lawsuits Thread
FYI: Confirmed in court docs. Camille has jumped on board with Ben Chew to help with the court case against Rocky Brooks.
-
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
- Status: Offline
Re: The Lawsuits Thread
Someone gave Ben Chew a small stuffed Alpaca. He had it sticking out of his pocket yesterday, when he was at the podium.
-
- Posts: 1985
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
- Status: Offline
Re: The Lawsuits Thread
Jury instructions and closing arguments today. I am going to miss seeing him but I am glad he is getting this over with, at least for now.
The lawyers on the life stream I am watching were saying the other day her team seems to be building a the backup for an appeal.
The lawyers on the life stream I am watching were saying the other day her team seems to be building a the backup for an appeal.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."
-
- Posts: 57272
- Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:12 pm
- Location: Tashmore Lake
- Status: Offline
-
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Wed May 04, 2022 4:39 pm
- Status: Offline
Re: The Lawsuits Thread
Just 𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗲? "If he abused her just 𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗲, Amber wins"??? I mean, I think I understand the point AH's lawyer is trying (poorly) to make (even one instance of abuse is one too many) but if this trial is about 𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗮𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, can "it" 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗹𝘆 come down to an instance of abuse? I was a (crappy, albeit) lawyer, but I'm not understanding where this closing statement is going. Can anyone here enlighten me?