The Lawsuits Thread

Discuss the latest Johnny Depp news, his career, past and future projects, and other related issues.
User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1524
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Tue Nov 03, 2020 5:13 pm

Imo

I think he had to find all or nothing. If he outright didn’t believe one or more then it becomes a credibility issue for her. If she lied here, why not everywhere. He denied two on a technicality.

If she “lied” for one then that casts doubt in all. I think that’s why he found the same on doggy gate etc and even not a gold digger cause she donated. She’s an angel

The Thanksgiving incident was denied because Wass didn’t question JD on it so he couldn’t rule but thought it likely he drank and went upstairs and abused her and they came back down 🤦🏻‍♀️

The Bahamas one he asked for reamended statements in September. I guess he didn’t like what he got and I think he says it was inconsequential anyway. But I think that’s the one Tara witnesses

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1622
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Tue Nov 03, 2020 6:13 pm

Justice Nicol is a horrible judge. He based his decisions on assumptions about what Johnny did or didn't do because he had no proof.

Jennifer Robinson works at Doughty Street Chambers for over six hears which is founded by Geoffrey Robertson, who is a co-author of a book written with Justice Nicol "Robertson and Nicol Media Law 2015." This is a clear confict and is terrible injustice. It means they are all connected both personally and professionally. I could not find proof, but it was reported on twitter (maybe someone looked up instagrams or something) that Jennifer Robinson is friends with Judge Nicol's wife and Geoffrey Robertson's ex-wife. :no2: :mad: :banghead:
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

justintime
Posts: 1916
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Tue Nov 03, 2020 8:26 pm

FYI: The only Johnny Depp film left on Netflix is The Rum Diary!
Guess we can all figure out why.

What they should be doing is showing every Johnny Depp film ever made.

:censored:
"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

Someareborn
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2020 7:16 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Someareborn » Tue Nov 03, 2020 8:40 pm

AdeleAgain wrote:
Tue Nov 03, 2020 1:44 pm
Those are good points Someareborn - but in UK libel the defendant has to prove it happened. It seems to general to me that he has made his assumptions.
You are right, I mixed it up. Sorry!
I disagree on the tape there were crucial things in there:

1. he explains (and she doesn't argue back) that he 'splits' because if he stayed he might become angry and hurt her back.
I accept. So, the very fact that he did not "admit" anything and she never accused/adressed him of assaulting her should lead to the conclusion that the allegations are untrue.
The judge overlooked this evidence arguing its different than giving evidence in court due to:

1.a) obligation to tell the truth in court
1.b) questioning can be controlled through judge in court. (verdict, sidenote 175)

This implies:
2.a) audio contains lies by parties
2.b) parties could control narrative on audio through manipulative questioning

But, if 1.a is relevant, judge has to believe Johnny and Ambers evidence on the stand until proven otherwise. Draw. So, 1.b equal 2.b is decisive.
But there are no "unanswered questions" or "rephrased questions" in the tape conversation. Instead, she admitts being abusive.

God, its awful applying logic to it all.
Its far to late to adress your other good points but I agree, a DV expert would be a great idea for this case.
Evil, unexpected king move would be to give the job to Kaplan and Amanda de Cadenet if they were able. Just to make them look and comment on real evidence and force them to work for real victims.

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1622
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Tue Nov 03, 2020 10:17 pm

I think it's pretty clear that alot of people except for the ex's stands (and there are not a whole lot of them) that the judge made a really bad and confusing decision.

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

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1622
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Tue Nov 03, 2020 11:29 pm

The personal connection of Jennifer Robinson is confirmed.

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

AdeleAgain
Posts: 1105
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by AdeleAgain » Wed Nov 04, 2020 12:10 am

Good middle of the night once again. Once again woken up by the dread feeling and immediately felt overwhelmed. Now listening to the election coverage which is not helping. So let me hold onto something:

1). Two nights have passed and support for him by the public seems very solid. He has a lot of support. I pray (doing a lot of that) that WB just don’t do anything but quietly carry on. There is a lot of time for more evidence and other factors to emerge.

2). I have got Johnny movies playing constantly I left iPod going overnight and Dark Shadows currently playing in corner of my screen.

3) I ve seen several people say that he should never have gone down this path. Maybe so but remember this. The aggressive legal strategy was extremely successful in dealing with the so called financial advisers and spectacularly so regarding his former lawyers.

4). We would not have the tapes of her admitting abuse if it had not been for the legal cases. And those tapes are to my mind the single key factor in keeping his support base so strong right now. They allow us to counter every single article and tweet etc right now. She’s betrayed with her own words and is a simple thing people who are not going to delve deeply can get behind. It makes the judgement nonsensical to most muggles. How can anyone listen to this and not understand who was the abuser. In the US case these tapes are going to be played over and over by his team. Only clips were played in UK. Judge listened to them in private supposedly.

We’ve got an agonising wait. I don’t think Adam will be vocal which unsettles those of us who got used to his swagger - he probably wants to keep a low profile right now and not be a further negative element.

Inquiring Minds
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:41 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Inquiring Minds » Wed Nov 04, 2020 2:23 am

This is so staggeringly flawed I believe it will be a career ending verdict for old "There ain't no" Justice Nichols.

I held off on posting my thousands of words of ranting :lol:

As the MSM start pinkwashing everything, slagging off endlessly against Johnny, I note they have all disabled their commenting sections. They dare not allow criticism.

On the video posted previously I saw there appears to be Youtube censorship on this story. Is this the case?

AdeleAgain
Posts: 1105
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by AdeleAgain » Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:43 am

Such an important point InquiringMinds - the MSM knows full well the support he has. Anything which mentions him gets flooded with pro-Johnny (ie pro-truth comments) - good let them be too scared.

The YouTube thing - I believe community rules stop the use of certain triggering or other sensitive words (possibly ones that could lead to legal action against YouTube - otherwise it would be liable for every nut job which ranted on there). It not just this case.

On the connectivity of the lawyers/judge - London law circles are quite tight - I believe Schillings and JD's previous lawyers and definitely his barristers would be well aware. You'll find all sort of connections with legal power couples in London, like anywhere I suppose. No one would take this seriously as a conflict and neither should it be - lawyers in London are friendly with one another, frequent same bars etc. But on twitter this morning (and so take that not a gospel) I saw someone say that AH had lunch or dinner with the judge's wife. I cannot believe that would happen but if it did - that's a different level of inappropriateness.

What I do think is that Jennifer would have been able to give a lot of insight into the judge and what makes him tick? there is nothing necessarily wrong with that - JD's side will have had their own insight and experience.

Gre3f said yesterday that he has spoken to 6 lawyers including two barristers and 5 had expressed total shock (the other one was a tax specialist).

And Ben Chew has said of course the US case is going ahead.

PS currently got Donnie Brasco playing in corner of iPad - let me know any requests for what should go next ;-)

Inquiring Minds
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:41 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Inquiring Minds » Wed Nov 04, 2020 4:53 am

Thanks for the clarification AdeleAgain :)

The professional smear job has spread to wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depp_v_Ne ... papers_Ltd

Inquiring Minds
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:41 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Inquiring Minds » Wed Nov 04, 2020 6:36 am

Maybe the wiki article isn't too bad, but the only "reaction" it had was one saying what a great victory this was for survivors of DV.

User avatar
meeps
Posts: 3483
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:13 am
Location: Hiding in my imagination?
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by meeps » Wed Nov 04, 2020 9:58 am

AdeleAgain wrote:
Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:43 am
PS currently got Donnie Brasco playing in corner of iPad - let me know any requests for what should go next ;-)
The Pirates movies, perhaps. To support both Johnny, and Johnny as Jack with a firm and indispensable place in the middle of every Pirates film.
And in our hearts --> :heart4:

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1524
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Wed Nov 04, 2020 10:57 am

Morning all. Like Adele I'm so angry and confused on the ruling and now sure how Johnny should go forward. But I've always taken the position that I can't KNOW what is going on in his life. What advice he is getting. So I stand by whatever his decisions are and support him.

When he first sued the Sun, we all thought it a slam dunk. Then she was able to add more to a total of 14 incidents of abuse. Then she was able to add 3 confidential (assume sexual) allegations. That's when I became concerned. Could a male judge (with females in his life-wife, maybe daughter) have the strength to say (In a believe all women world) that Amber Heard lied every time. Could he? Well, we know now he couldn't. That is why he not only ruled on one incident, but went out of his way to twist the evidence or ignore it all together, to attack the characters of everyone associated with Johnny and found 100% all her claims to be true (less two technicalities which included 2 confidential claims). (I so wanted Johnny to walk when the judge dismissed the case over the drug texts. It was Shilling's fault and he already got allot of evidence out)

Should he appeal? (Again, I stand by Johnny whatever he decides). Keep in mind he now has to pay NGN legal costs, court costs, his lawyers, and an appeal is additional costs not to mention his VA bill and California lawyers

Right now he has one :censored: judge whos OPINION denied his claim. He seems to have huge public support. MSM is having a field day calling him a wife beater in their headlines. But is it worth the risk to appeal to 3 judges with enough confidence to overturn each reasoned opinion to win? OR, have 3 more judges higher up deny an appeal and say they agree with Nichol's?

My opinion only is he should not appeal unless he knows now what WB is going to do. If they fire him or substantially shrink his role and "Shapeshift Grindelwald" into a new actor then I think WB is sending a huge message to Hollywood and Johnny's acting carrer may be doomed and he might as well appeal, as he has nothing much to lose (other than more $$$). However, if WB stands with him, I think that is a bigger statement than an appeal risk would do for him.

One good thing about an appeal, that throughout the VA case, the UK case would be referenced as "under appeal"....

Now, as a rminder: there is this pesky case people have forgotten about. Rocky is still suing Johnny for assaulting him. I don't know how this ruling can affect that case, but I'm sure Rocky's lawyer will try to bring it to the jury's attention that the UK judge ruled his opinion that Johnny abused AH 14+ times. It will be up to the Judge in California if she will allow that brought to the Jury (although, of course, the Jury will already know this) (and it could also be referenced as under appeal)

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1524
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Wed Nov 04, 2020 11:08 am

OK, a little speculative update from California.

These hearings were held and there has been a ruling in a minute order issued


10/29/2020: Informal Discovery Conference (IDC) re Twitter: Adam Waldman & 200+ screen names (Moved from 10/20 & 10/22 previously scheduled) 10:00 am

10/29/2020 at 08:30 AM moved to 10:00 am and combined above
Hearing on Motion to Quash Petition to Stay Deposition of Jennifer Howell to Quash Plaintiff's Subpoena Duces Tecum and Request for Sanctions

10/29/2020 at 08:30 AM moved to 10:00 am and combined above
Hearing on Motion to Quash Petition to Quash Plaintiff's Civil Subpoena to Children's Hospital Los Angeles; Separate Statement of Disputed Matter
The First was the IDC on the new 2nd Twitter subpoena that was issued by AH regarding her counterclaim that apparently includes 200+ Twitter screen names. We have never seen that subpoena and based on some of the motions we have read in VA, I now believe that AH team has marked it confidential (because of the screen names) and because I think they are making anything they can confidential (which is how they caught Adam in their trap of potentially leaking confidential info).

The combined ruling on the above hearings has been issued but NOT uploaded to the California court site. I've checked and checked hoping for some good news to share regarding CHLA subpoena. I now believe because the three issues were combined, that the ruling has been marked confidential because of the twitter subpoena and is NOT going to be uploaded, sadly. If that changes, I'll post ASAP

December 3 Depp Team is having a hearing on a protective order issue. As we see no new motion for a protective order has been uploaded in VA, I am guessing it may be to declassify some things AH team has maked confidential and thus that motion has to be confidential for its contents and also not uploaded.

All speculation, I'm afraid. But that means no news for us on CHLA

AdeleAgain
Posts: 1105
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by AdeleAgain » Wed Nov 04, 2020 11:17 am

Lbock how very sobering - I think you are right. The advantage of appealing is that for months and months, it will be under appeal. You'v superbly outlined the risks.

You are also right - we were so jubilant that the case was allowed to go ahead - if it hadn't on a technicality, well we would have been disappointed for a while but over it by now.

I am absolutely certain WB/JK Rowling will take a view. If he lays low now (pandemic, lockdown, he's got months of filming), and then a considered PR campaign which attacks the judgement for relying on someone who has lied and of course success in VA - things will look a lot better.

I hope WB consider this very carefully and do some research. The Harry Potter franchise has had some blows (JK's views on the trans issue, and Ezra Miller) - I hope WB realise that Johnny's fanbase are a huge asset in restoring the franchise.

I also think another killer piece of new evidence will dump a load of sewage onto her victory.

If for example JD's side can get out the evidence that she has not handed over the £7 million, imagine how that would play. Yes many of the papers will ignore it - but the judge said she wasn't a gold digger because she had donated the money.

Did she say in court docs that she had donated the money?

I hate to clutch at straws but that could be the silver bullet.

PS Charlie and the Chocolate Factory now playing - we've gone through Fear and Loathing. And thanks for the Pirates suggestion - you are so right - get watching that everyone please on the Disney channel if you've got it.