Johnny Depp trial in Fairfax County

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is talking about the evidence presented that he patently told his lawyer to go spend a bunch of money to hire bots to destroy public opinion of her and get in the way of her playing in aquaman. And JD directly talked to producers to try to take the job away from her.

That’s bonkers. Who does that? His texts about wanting to absolutely destroy her seem very real. It remains like that’s what this whole trial was about.

She ruined his career.

He is hoping to repay the favor.

They are both sad people.

Except she didn't ruin his career, he did that all by himself. Just how many times do you think you can show up hours late to set, hung over and unprepared, before movie studios drop you?

Even if that’s why they dropped him he could arguably claim he had these problems in part because of the abuse he suffered at her hands and turned to drinking and drugs to self medicate during an abusive situation. She was doing drugs too during the relationship which can’t be helpful to an addict to be around another drug user.

That’s not what was alleged in his complaint. The jury cannot simply invent new theories of liability that were not alleged and are by supported by evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One outcome is that they both could be found guilty of defamation but no damages awarded. I think that’s unlikely but it could happen. More likely, I think there will be no guilty verdict in either the suit or counter suit.

The standard of legal defamation is quite high and it’s not clear either side met all the criteria.

It’s a civil trial. There is no finding of “guilty,” that’s a criminal standard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so obvious that they are both abusive and to blame.

Perhaps. But to say she is a survivor of sexual assault is too far for me to believe. She claims to be raped with a broken bottle and was bleeding for her vagina but she never went to a hospital or a doctor?

But I also don’t believe that she was beaten.

She never explicitly said she was raped with a broken bottle. She said there was pressure against her pubic bone. And that she was worried that it might have been one of the broken bottles as it was happening to her, not that the bottle was in fact broken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One outcome is that they both could be found guilty of defamation but no damages awarded. I think that’s unlikely but it could happen. More likely, I think there will be no guilty verdict in either the suit or counter suit.

The standard of legal defamation is quite high and it’s not clear either side met all the criteria.

It’s a civil trial. There is no finding of “guilty,” that’s a criminal standard.

Wow, so glad to have you on this thread. Clearing up all kinds of confusion.

[Anonymous]

I feel very sorry for the jurors in this case. The arguments are going to go on forever. At least another 4 days of h***ll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel very sorry for the jurors in this case. The arguments are going to go on forever. At least another 4 days of h***ll.

I actually feel worse for the 2 alternates. Having to listen to 6 weeks of trial and being dismissed without the chance of deliberating with fellow jurors or discuss the case with anyone while other jurors deliberate really sucks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One outcome is that they both could be found guilty of defamation but no damages awarded. I think that’s unlikely but it could happen. More likely, I think there will be no guilty verdict in either the suit or counter suit.

The standard of legal defamation is quite high and it’s not clear either side met all the criteria.

It’s a civil trial. There is no finding of “guilty,” that’s a criminal standard.

Wow, so glad to have you on this thread. Clearing up all kinds of confusion.

Does your being a snide dumbass change that? Because you seem utterly confused on this and most points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel very sorry for the jurors in this case. The arguments are going to go on forever. At least another 4 days of h***ll.

I actually feel worse for the 2 alternates. Having to listen to 6 weeks of trial and being dismissed without the chance of deliberating with fellow jurors or discuss the case with anyone while other jurors deliberate really sucks

It is really amazing when you think about it how functional juries are. They have to return a unanimous verdict and in the vast vast majority of cases, they do. I’ve been on a jury and was impressed with how seriously everyone took their jobs. Kudos to all of the jurors who served.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel very sorry for the jurors in this case. The arguments are going to go on forever. At least another 4 days of h***ll.

Maybe not. A Guardian article said they only need to agree he abused her *one* time. Done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel very sorry for the jurors in this case. The arguments are going to go on forever. At least another 4 days of h***ll.

Maybe not. A Guardian article said they only need to agree he abused her *one* time. Done.

If abuse includes emotional and mental, where’s the question? He’s basically admitted it in texts and videos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so obvious that they are both abusive and to blame.

Perhaps. But to say she is a survivor of sexual assault is too far for me to believe. She claims to be raped with a broken bottle and was bleeding for her vagina but she never went to a hospital or a doctor?

But I also don’t believe that she was beaten.

She never explicitly said she was raped with a broken bottle. She said there was pressure against her pubic bone. And that she was worried that it might have been one of the broken bottles as it was happening to her, not that the bottle was in fact broken.

Jesus, if she didn't explicitly say the bottle was broken, then it wasn't. She shouldn't have been worried whether the bottle was broken or not. Any woman would feel it if a bottle jammed inside of you is broken or not. By alluding to her fear of broken bottles, she's trying to have jurors believe that it was in fact broken without her having to lie about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel very sorry for the jurors in this case. The arguments are going to go on forever. At least another 4 days of h***ll.

Maybe not. A Guardian article said they only need to agree he abused her *one* time. Done.

If abuse includes emotional and mental, where’s the question? He’s basically admitted it in texts and videos.

That’s why most people who have followed the case closely believe that the first defamation claim which relates to the title of the online op Ed is Johnny Depp‘s best chance of winning. The title mentioned sexual violence and if the evidence does not show that Johnny Depp was sexually violent, he could meet the standard to claim defamation against amber heard. Johnny’s team has to prove that Amber made the statement knowing it was false. If you believe Amber is lying about being raped multiple times, then he would not win.

[Anonymous]

What’s interesting is that if Amber had simply said that the sexual violence part of her article had nothing to do with Johnny, I think it would be a slam dunk that she would win. Instead, she went all in and claimed massive sexual and physical abuse over multiple years. Truth is the way to win a defamation case. But yes, if he physically abused her even one time then claiming she is a domestic violence survivor is truthful and his claim of defamation would not be supported.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is talking about the evidence presented that he patently told his lawyer to go spend a bunch of money to hire bots to destroy public opinion of her and get in the way of her playing in aquaman. And JD directly talked to producers to try to take the job away from her.

That’s bonkers. Who does that? His texts about wanting to absolutely destroy her seem very real. It remains like that’s what this whole trial was about.

She ruined his career.

He is hoping to repay the favor.

They are both sad people.

Except she didn't ruin his career, he did that all by himself. Just how many times do you think you can show up hours late to set, hung over and unprepared, before movie studios drop you?

That's not the chain of events I gleaned from the trial. I thought she made allegations, then his role got canceled. So he lost $50-$100m.

DP. Then I guess you didn’t follow the trial all that much. There was plenty of evidence introduced of how his drinking and drug use disrupted production on past films. On the last Pirates film, the studio had someone tasked with monitoring him each day for when he finally woke up in the morning to then start preparing for the day’s filming so they didn’t pay everyone for hours just standing around on set waiting for him to show. Not only does the at drive up the production budget, but it very likely made him increasingly difficult to insure.

Ok. He was late on set. . . But regardless, he had a deal for another Pirates film or other film, and after the abuse allegations, it was canceled. Correct?

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Nobody is talking about the evidence presented that he patently told his lawyer to go spend a bunch of money to hire bots to destroy public opinion of her and get in the way of her playing in aquaman. And JD directly talked to producers to try to take the job away from her.

That’s bonkers. Who does that? His texts about wanting to absolutely destroy her seem very real. It remains like that’s what this whole trial was about. [/quote]

She ruined his career.

He is hoping to repay the favor.

They are both sad people.[/quote]


Except she didn't ruin his career, he did that all by himself. Just how many times do you think you can show up hours late to set, hung over and unprepared, before movie studios drop you?[/quote]

That's not the chain of events I gleaned from the trial. I thought she made allegations, then his role got canceled. So he lost $50-$100m. [/quote]

DP. Then I guess you didn’t follow the trial all that much. There was plenty of evidence introduced of how his drinking and drug use disrupted production on past films. On the last Pirates film, the studio had someone tasked with monitoring him each day for when he finally woke up in the morning to then start preparing for the day’s filming so they didn’t pay everyone for hours just standing around on set waiting for him to show. Not only does the at drive up the production budget, but it very likely made him increasingly difficult to insure. [/quote]

Ok. He was late on set. . . But regardless, he had a deal for another Pirates film or other film, and after the abuse allegations, it was canceled. Correct?[/quote]
Actually, that’s not correct. He never had a deal to make Pirates 6 because Pirates 6 has yet to get off the ground for a whole host of reasons, many of whcih have nothing to do with Depp.