Johnny Depp trial in Fairfax County

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in Fairfax County in the 80s and early 90s and had such a crush on Depp in my formative years. I am fascinated and weirded out that he's hanging out in my county for a criminal trial.

Where do you think he's staying?

Please, indulge my teenage dreams.

Good question. I don’t believe he owns any homes out here. I’m just waiting for the paparazzi to follow him around and broadcast where he’s staying.

The Ritz in Tysons is the only decent hotel in NOVA. Unless he went with Landsdowne or Salamander but those would be a bit odd. I would bet he’s staying in DC.

I bet he's renting a house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Somewhere, Vanessa Paradis is laughing. He seemed much more grounded when they were together. Amber is just a bad person.

And Winona Ryder weeps. I think the two of them should have stayed together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sister just got caught lying on stand (denied ever asking JD to stop drugs and now saying that text messages in evidence stating “stop coke” don’t mean just that). Ugh.

He's supporting his entire family, so of course she'd lie for $$$$.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Somewhere, Vanessa Paradis is laughing. He seemed much more grounded when they were together. Amber is just a bad person.

She’s been publicly very supportive of him and along with others wrote lengthy statements about their time together with never any violence. I think if anything she probably feels pitty for who he was and now is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in Fairfax County in the 80s and early 90s and had such a crush on Depp in my formative years. I am fascinated and weirded out that he's hanging out in my county for a criminal trial.

Where do you think he's staying?

Please, indulge my teenage dreams.

Good question. I don’t believe he owns any homes out here. I’m just waiting for the paparazzi to follow him around and broadcast where he’s staying.

The Ritz in Tysons is the only decent hotel in NOVA. Unless he went with Landsdowne or Salamander but those would be a bit odd. I would bet he’s staying in DC.

I bet he's renting a house.

Nah. Security, housekeeping, chefs are way more cumbersome to manage at a random house in this area than a hotel. If he was in LA sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can you just show up at the courthouse and view the trial?

From an article I read, you have to show up in the morning and they hand out 100 passes to view in the courtroom. There's also an overview courtroom where they are broadcasting everything, but I'm not sure how they decide who goes there.

I haven't been impressed by Depp's lawyers yet. Heard's male attorney seems like the best of the bunch.

[Anonymous]

So I just read the Op Ed in question and she's vague to the point that I don't see how Depp wins this case. He bears the burden here and defamation is tricky to begin with. She mentions being abused before college age which is clearly not about Depp.

The specific facts are about her facing backlash for being "a public figure representing domestic abuse" which isn't actually an allegation against him.

Point is, this is an expensive lawsuit and the case seems quite shaky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I just read the Op Ed in question and she's vague to the point that I don't see how Depp wins this case. He bears the burden here and defamation is tricky to begin with. She mentions being abused before college age which is clearly not about Depp.

The specific facts are about her facing backlash for being "a public figure representing domestic abuse" which isn't actually an allegation against him.

Point is, this is an expensive lawsuit and the case seems quite shaky.

That’s why I don’t think he’s after this to win against her for defamation. It’s more just dragging her through public scrutiny

Does he have to pay her legal fees if he loses?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I just read the Op Ed in question and she's vague to the point that I don't see how Depp wins this case. He bears the burden here and defamation is tricky to begin with. She mentions being abused before college age which is clearly not about Depp.

The specific facts are about her facing backlash for being "a public figure representing domestic abuse" which isn't actually an allegation against him.

Point is, this is an expensive lawsuit and the case seems quite shaky.

That’s why I don’t think he’s after this to win against her for defamation. It’s more just dragging her through public scrutiny

Does he have to pay her legal fees if he loses?

It depends but it's a possibility, given courts frown on unnecessary defamation suits because of first amendment issues. Given Depp is known for his financial problems and this lawsuit can be extremely expensive, this is a very bad idea.

Depp lost his UK case against the Sun which explicitly called him a "wife beater" and UK law is much, much friendlier to plaintiffs in these cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I just read the Op Ed in question and she's vague to the point that I don't see how Depp wins this case. He bears the burden here and defamation is tricky to begin with. She mentions being abused before college age which is clearly not about Depp.

The specific facts are about her facing backlash for being "a public figure representing domestic abuse" which isn't actually an allegation against him.

Point is, this is an expensive lawsuit and the case seems quite shaky.

That’s why I don’t think he’s after this to win against her for defamation. It’s more just dragging her through public scrutiny

Does he have to pay her legal fees if he loses?

It depends but it's a possibility, given courts frown on unnecessary defamation suits because of first amendment issues. Given Depp is known for his financial problems and this lawsuit can be extremely expensive, this is a very bad idea.

Depp lost his UK case against the Sun which explicitly called him a "wife beater" and UK law is much, much friendlier to plaintiffs in these cases.

I didn’t get to watch today. Did anything interesting happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Somewhere, Vanessa Paradis is laughing. He seemed much more grounded when they were together. Amber is just a bad person.

And Winona Ryder weeps. I think the two of them should have stayed together.

He was no less volatile. He’s just getting old and careless about it. And all of you who are taking the absence of evidence of him being abusive as proof he isn’t: people just did not talk about domestic abuse in the 1990s, certainly not famous people.

[Anonymous]

Heard’s female attorney was so so so bad at cross examination today of Depp’s friend. She scored zero points, couldn’t control the witness and I think alienated the jury with innane questions. She broke every rule of cross. I’m not sure how important this friend’s testimony will ultimately be, but it was crying-worthy to watch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Heard’s female attorney was so so so bad at cross examination today of Depp’s friend. She scored zero points, couldn’t control the witness and I think alienated the jury with innane questions. She broke every rule of cross. I’m not sure how important this friend’s testimony will ultimately be, but it was crying-worthy to watch.

Can you explain for the non-lawyers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Somewhere, Vanessa Paradis is laughing. He seemed much more grounded when they were together. Amber is just a bad person.

And Winona Ryder weeps. I think the two of them should have stayed together.

He was no less volatile. He’s just getting old and careless about it. And all of you who are taking the absence of evidence of him being abusive as proof he isn’t: people just did not talk about domestic abuse in the 1990s, certainly not famous people.

Are you calling Winona a liar?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Somewhere, Vanessa Paradis is laughing. He seemed much more grounded when they were together. Amber is just a bad person.

And Winona Ryder weeps. I think the two of them should have stayed together.

He was no less volatile. He’s just getting old and careless about it. And all of you who are taking the absence of evidence of him being abusive as proof he isn’t: people just did not talk about domestic abuse in the 1990s, certainly not famous people.

I have never heard anything that would lead me to believe he was abusive towards Winona Ryder. Didn't she say the exact opposite?

I'm just sayin', they should have stayed together.