The Lawsuits Thread

[ForeverYoung]

JD had an expert testify that all of her "evidence" photos were ran through an editing software.

We heard the audios of her admitting to starting physical fights and we saw and heard JD's team testify to witnessing her abuse JD both physically and mentally.

She knew when she wrote that op-ed it was about him and she changed her defense so many times about it.

Most of the people who were witnesses by video deposition are no longer friends with her Gee, I wonder why. One of them admitted to the ex-hitting her in the face and does anyone remember when she hurt her leg in Hawaii? iO was dissing her on IG saying something about a basketball fight.

She can't pay him back? She had 7 million BEFORE the lawsuit and she used it on expensive wine and vacations. The house she is living in now is her parents' home. I am guessing that JD can put a lien on her future earnings but since nobody wants to work with her anymore it's going to be interesting on how he will get that money but in the end it wasn't about money for him. It was about justice, which he finally got.

[fireflydances]

The next beach head is the mainstream media. Biased reporting that continues to support the "truth" of AH cannot stand. Otherwise the truth will be buried.

[Granna]

Any update on Rocky Brooks & his baloney? July is it?

[Jackslady]

AH has clearly gone straight into a massive PR campaign, the angle they’ve chosen is that of the self sacrificing saint, topped with the galling implication that she is more worried about other women than herself. Just NO, no one with an ounce of common sense is buying into this pile of The only person who demonised Amber is herself, with her ludicrous court room performance, consistent inconsistencies and her downright lies. Bredehoft makes my skin crawl, just go away you arrogant woman and counsel your client to get help for her sinister and disturbing personality.

Just wanted to add that I think the media is closing ranks and trying to save face because they called it so wrong in the past. That sneering Dan Wootton certainly looks like an idiot now.

[fireflydances]

AH has clearly gone straight into a massive PR campaign, the angle they’ve chosen is that of the self sacrificing saint, topped with the galling implication that she is more worried about other women than herself. Just NO, no one with an ounce of common sense is buying into this pile of The only person who demonised Amber is herself, with her ludicrous court room performance, consistent inconsistencies and her downright lies. Bredehoft makes my skin crawl, just go away you arrogant woman and counsel your client to get help for her sinister and disturbing personality.

But let us fight back. Many of us are either subscribers or supporters of mainstream media and we need to let these organizations know that we will not continue our support if they can't stop the nonsense. It's truly not enough to complain here. If you are a member of an NPR affliate, listen carefully. This morning's story was from Andrew L. Did not get the full last name; it was slightly before 6AM EDT. He totally supported AH and was downright derogatory toward the Depp fans, referring to the fact that so many were dressed up as characters. Like we are all silly ridiculous and mindless followers. Nevermind that verdict.

[In-too-Depp]

Depp-Heard trial: Why Johnny Depp lost in the UK but won in the US

Article by Robert Levinson King
BBC News
2nd June 2022

In 2020, Hollywood actor Johnny Depp lost a UK libel lawsuit against the Sun newspaper. But on Wednesday, he won a similar lawsuit against his ex-wife Amber Heard in a US courtroom.

At the start of his recent trial, many legal experts suggested that Mr Depp had a weaker chance of winning than he did in the UK, because the US has very strong free speech protections.

The fact that the jury found that Ms Heard was guilty of defamation with an article in which she claimed she was a victim of domestic abuse means they didn't believe her testimony.

Mark Stephens, an international media lawyer, told the BBC that it's "very rare" that essentially the same case is tried on two sides of the pond and gets different results.

He believes the main factor that influenced Mr Depp's victory in America was the fact that his US trial was before a jury while his UK trial, over an article in the British tabloid that called him a "wife-beater", was before a judge only.

"Amber Heard has comprehensively lost in the court of public opinion, and in front of the jury," he said.

In both the UK and the US trial, Mr Depp's lawyers argued that Ms Heard was lying - to make their case, they attacked her character and claimed that she was in fact the abusive partner.

This is a common defence tactic in sexual assault and domestic violence trials called "deny, attack, and reverse victim and offender" or "Darvo", said Mr Stephens.

The strategy turns the tables on the alleged victim, shifting the conversation away from "did the accused commit abuse" to "is the alleged victim believable".

"They deny that they did anything, they deny they're the real perpetrator, and they attack the credibility of the individual calling out the abuse, and then reverse the roles of the victim and the offender," Mr Stephens said.

In the UK trial, Mr Stephens said the judge recognised that strategy, and dismissed a lot of the evidence that did not directly address whether Mr Depp committed assault or not.

"Lawyers and judges tend not to fall for it, but it's very, very effective against juries," he said. Men are more likely to believe Darvo arguments, but female jurors are also susceptible.

"People have a paradigm in their mind of how a victim of abuse might be like and how they might behave, and of course we all know that's often false."

Hadley Freeman, a Guardian journalist who covered both cases, told the BBC that another major difference was the fact that the American trial was televised, turning the court case into "almost a sports game".

Each twist and turn of the trial was watched by millions of people - many of whom turned to social media to express support for Mr Depp.

On TikTok, the hashtag #justiceforjohnnydepp got about 19 billion views. The jury was instructed not to read about the case online, but they were not sequestered and they were allowed to keep their phones.

Ms Freeman also thinks that vitriol that the general public lobbed against Ms Heard was a "a bit of #MeToo backlash".

"'Believe women' seems a very long time ago when it comes to Amber Heard," she said.

[Judymac]

The next beach head is the mainstream media. Biased reporting that continues to support the "truth" of AH cannot stand. Otherwise the truth will be buried.

I think there is a combination of AH's PR team working hard to rehab her reputation and the news media not wanting to admit that they are wrong. The news media can continue to babble about AH, but nobody is believing them. To me the important thing is that Johnny is receiving overwhelming support no matter what the news media says. AH's PR team and the news media have lost the battle of public opinion. The truth is not going to be buried as long as people continue to believe Johnny.

[ForeverYoung]

JD lost the UK case because she had an attorney with personal ties to a corrupt judge. Period.

The judge's wife is best friends with Jennifer Robinson and it was on one of their IG accounts of two of them at an event together. Robinson brought AH to a dinner party hosted by the judge's wife while the trial was still going on. The judge's son worked for a radio station owned by Robert Murdoch. The judge co-authored a book with one of the partner's at Robinson's law firm. These were all conflicts and he should have recused himself but he didn't. Also, he made some decisions based on no evidence at all so he took The Sun's side because he "had no reason to believe she is lying." The judge said that everyone who testified for JD was either paid for help or a "yes" person so he didn't take any of their testimony seriously. That's pure BS and sickening for a judge to carry on a trial like that. I have been working in legal many years and never in my life heard of a judge conduct a trial like the kangaroo courthouse he had going on there.

JD won in the US because she was not convincing to the jury, had poor witnesses, poor "evidence", was smirking as he was testifying and just didn't come off as a sympathetic person. She gave testimonies like she gives her speeches. Johnny had great witnesses, a great legal team and just him being there and pouring his heart out probably went a long way for the jury.

[myfave]

Exactly ForeverYoung, exactly!

[hollyberry]

The loss of the libel case against the Sun was one of the biggest miscarriages in UK justice, as a Brit I was shocked and disgusted...but not surprised. The rag has done some pretty horrific things; google the Hillsborough disaster and you'll see why.

[fireflydances]

The next beach head is the mainstream media. Biased reporting that continues to support the "truth" of AH cannot stand. Otherwise the truth will be buried.

I think there is a combination of AH's PR team working hard to rehab her reputation and the news media not wanting to admit that they are wrong. The news media can continue to babble about AH, but nobody is believing them. To me the important thing is that Johnny is receiving overwhelming support no matter what the news media says. AH's PR team and the news media have lost the battle of public opinion. The truth is not going to be buried as long as people continue to believe Johnny.

There have been three additional front page articles about the Depp trial TODAY not counting the article I mentioned earlier. All on the front page. Here are the headlines

Harry Weinstein's Rape Conviction Upheld by Appeals Court -- June 2, 2022 Here are the paragraphs regarding Johnny:

"The ruling follows several setbacks for women seeking to hold celebrity men accountable for alleged wrongdoing.


On Wednesday, a Virginia jury found that Amber Heard’s abuse allegations against Johnny Depp were defamatory. In March, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal after a Pennsylvania court threw out Bill Cosby’s sexual assault conviction.

Depp Heard Verdict Will Have Chilling Impact on #Me/To Advocates Fear -- June 2, 2022

Here is a sample paragraph:

"Over the past several weeks, though, watching the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard trial, Dixon felt as though the clouds were closing in again.

Dixon was alarmed by the “giddy derision” that seemed to follow Heard, in particular. She had hoped to avoid the trial altogether, but when her 17-year-old daughter showed her a pro-Depp meme despite not knowing much about him prior to the trial, Dixon realized how much it had permeated popular culture. The live-streamed trial was widely followed by observers online, and social media was overwhelmed by Depp fans who felt he could do no wrong."

Heard Lawyer: Actress will appeal verdict, thinks social media influenced jury June 2, 2022

Part of article. Bredehoft said that Heard was “heartbroken” after the verdict. “One of the first things she said is, ‘I am so sorry to all those women out there,’ ” the lawyer said, adding that the verdict sends “a horrible message.”

“It's a setback, a significant setback … unless you pull out your phone and you video your spouse or your significant other beating you, effectively, you won’t be believed,” she said.

Guthrie pointed out that Heard’s legal team was able to show the jury evidence they say demonstrated abuse, from the actress’s testimony to pictures and documents. “The jury rejected it,” Guthrie said.

Bredehoft responded that Depp’s team “demonized” Heard and suppressed evidence. She said Heard’s lawyers were not allowed to tell the jury that Depp lost a libel case in the United Kingdom in 2020 against the British tabloid the Sun, which the actor sued after a headline called him a “wife beater” and a judge found enough evidence to support Heard’s claims about 12 instances of domestic abuse."

It's more than upsetting.....

[fireflydances]

NY Times
The Actual Malice of the Johnny Depp Trial June 2, 2022
A.O. Scott, co-chief film critic



A very long article.

One odd comment I noticed off the bat: "In that regard, Depp possessed distinct advantages. He isn’t a better actor than Heard, but her conduct on the stand was more harshly criticized in no small part because he’s a more familiar performer, a bigger star who has dwelled for much longer in the glow of public approbation."

Another sample:

"Because he’s a man. Celebrity and masculinity confer mutually reinforcing advantages. Famous men — athletes, actors, musicians, politicians — get to be that way partly because they represent what other men aspire to be. Defending their prerogatives is a way of protecting, and asserting, our own. We want them to be bad boys, to break the rules and get away with it. Their seigneurial right to sexual gratification is something the rest of us might resent, envy or disapprove of, but we rarely challenge it. These guys are cool. They do what they want, including to women. Anyone who objects is guilty of wokeness, or gender treason, or actual malice."


I realize that AH's side is trying to crush JD. However, I feel strongly that that lack of PR from JD's team needs to be corrected. Those of us who know JD, know these articles are garbage but I contest that MOST of the people who READ these mainstream rags do not know Mr. Depp and to have no one out there correcting the picture, commenting etc. is not good.

[ForeverYoung]

NY Times
The Actual Malice of the Johnny Depp Trial June 2, 2022
A.O. Scott, co-chief film critic



A very long article.

One odd comment I noticed off the bat: "In that regard, Depp possessed distinct advantages. He isn’t a better actor than Heard, but her conduct on the stand was more harshly criticized in no small part because he’s a more familiar performer, a bigger star who has dwelled for much longer in the glow of public approbation."

Another sample:

"Because he’s a man. Celebrity and masculinity confer mutually reinforcing advantages. Famous men — athletes, actors, musicians, politicians — get to be that way partly because they represent what other men aspire to be. Defending their prerogatives is a way of protecting, and asserting, our own. We want them to be bad boys, to break the rules and get away with it. Their seigneurial right to sexual gratification is something the rest of us might resent, envy or disapprove of, but we rarely challenge it. These guys are cool. They do what they want, including to women. Anyone who objects is guilty of wokeness, or gender treason, or actual malice."

"He isn't a better actor than Heard"???

[fireflydances]

Yes, indeed, it's a stupid comment by Mr. Scott. I still feel strongly that there has to be someone playing ball on the Depp team. Yes, he won a wonderful verdict, but I believe his ultimate goal is to restore his reputation. The media is spinning this as a LOSS for women. There are congressmen trying to pass laws that will prohibit future trial juries like this in the future (both of these new "facts" from That Umbrella Guy).

We know JD is RIGHT and the other one lied. But Team Depp and those who support Johnny can't turn our backs. We have to continue to resist and someone in PR on Johnny's side needs to get articles out there. Nothing in this world of media is static. It always moves.

Anyway, I hope someone gets what I am trying to say. I guess I will end for the day.

[Inquiring Minds]

MSM has gone into meltdown and the shills are out in force. These are malicious and, imo, defamatory. A number are claiming JD has used DARVO against AH. DARVO, is a direct claim that the one claiming to have been the victim (ie JD) was actually the perpetrator. They have called him an abuser, plain and simple.

I thought this was going to be over, instead the shill press have hit overdrive. I've started collecting names, articles and links. I would recommend others do the same. I guess JD will be able to recover the shortfall from the VA trial many times over in a blitz of scorched earth lawsuits. Even if JD is litigation weary, he can always licence the recovery task to one or more legal teams - maybe even a network spanning several countries. I expect that Mr Waldman, Mr Chew and Ms Valequez will have plenty of work over the next few years.

Has Nicol made any public statement yet?