Johnny Depp trial in Fairfax County

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

You are misunderstanding the case. Amber Heard did not write the headline that referenced “sexual violence,” that was written by WaPo editors. Depp’s entire care for the “sexual violence” line is not based on it having been written as the headline, their claim is that she defamed him by *re-tweeting* WaPo’s tweet of the op-Ed with that headline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

You are misunderstanding the case. Amber Heard did not write the headline that referenced “sexual violence,” that was written by WaPo editors. Depp’s entire care for the “sexual violence” line is not based on it having been written as the headline, their claim is that she defamed him by *re-tweeting* WaPo’s tweet of the op-Ed with that headline.

Irregardless of who technically wrote the article she actually testified she wrote it.
[youtube] https://youtu.be/bk4ewIOswao[/youtube]

[Anonymous]

For those interested in understanding the specific’s of Depp’s defamation allegations against Heard, this article does a pretty good job of laying it out simply.

https://variety.com/2022/film/news/amber-heard-johnny-depp-dismiss-trial-1235257109/amp/

Note that motions for directed verdicts are rarely granted (and are largely made by both sides to preserve grounds for appeal), so there is little significance to the judge denying it on two of the alleged defamatory statements (and is somewhat significant that the judge declined to rule on the third at that point).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

You are misunderstanding the case. Amber Heard did not write the headline that referenced “sexual violence,” that was written by WaPo editors. Depp’s entire care for the “sexual violence” line is not based on it having been written as the headline, their claim is that she defamed him by *re-tweeting* WaPo’s tweet of the op-Ed with that headline.

Irregardless of who technically wrote the article she actually testified she wrote it.
[youtube] https://youtu.be/bk4ewIOswao[/youtube]

There is a difference between the article and the headline. The author writes the article (or had it ghostwritten for them). The publication typically writes the headline, which is exactly what happened here. That’s why Depp’s team spent so much of their closing argument talking about republication by tweet, because Heard did not write the headline in any fashion and therefore can have zero liability for its contents as originally published by WaPo.

[Anonymous]

Did JD jointly sue wapo and AH? If not, did he ever sue wapo?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did JD jointly sue wapo and AH? If not, did he ever sue wapo?

No, he did not sue WaPo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did JD jointly sue wapo and AH? If not, did he ever sue wapo?

I think he can’t because it’s supposed to be an opinion piece by Heard. WaPo didn’t present it as factual-they just published her essay

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did JD jointly sue wapo and AH? If not, did he ever sue wapo?

I think he can’t because it’s supposed to be an opinion piece by Heard. WaPo didn’t present it as factual-they just published her essay

Who wrote the headline? The aclu? He should have triple sued all three of them and let them fight it out amongst each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did JD jointly sue wapo and AH? If not, did he ever sue wapo?

I think he can’t because it’s supposed to be an opinion piece by Heard. WaPo didn’t present it as factual-they just published her essay

Who wrote the headline? The aclu? He should have triple sued all three of them and let them fight it out amongst each other.

For the third time on just this page, WaPo editors wrote the headline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did JD jointly sue wapo and AH? If not, did he ever sue wapo?

I think he can’t because it’s supposed to be an opinion piece by Heard. WaPo didn’t present it as factual-they just published her essay

Who wrote the headline? The aclu? He should have triple sued all three of them and let them fight it out amongst each other.

For the third time on just this page, WaPo editors wrote the headline.

Then he should have jointly sued them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did JD jointly sue wapo and AH? If not, did he ever sue wapo?

I think he can’t because it’s supposed to be an opinion piece by Heard. WaPo didn’t present it as factual-they just published her essay

Who wrote the headline? The aclu? He should have triple sued all three of them and let them fight it out amongst each other.

For the third time on just this page, WaPo editors wrote the headline.

Then he should have jointly sued them

He couldn’t, because he would have to prove that WaPo published the headline with knowledge of its falsity and intent to harm Depp. They simply had no evidence of that, it probably would have been dismissed on First Amendment/anti-SLAPP grounds, and bringing in WaPo would have made his case appear more frivolous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did JD jointly sue wapo and AH? If not, did he ever sue wapo?

I think he can’t because it’s supposed to be an opinion piece by Heard. WaPo didn’t present it as factual-they just published her essay

Who wrote the headline? The aclu? He should have triple sued all three of them and let them fight it out amongst each other.

For the third time on just this page, WaPo editors wrote the headline.

Then he should have jointly sued them

He couldn’t, because he would have to prove that WaPo published the headline with knowledge of its falsity and intent to harm Depp. They simply had no evidence of that, it probably would have been dismissed on First Amendment/anti-SLAPP grounds, and bringing in WaPo would have made his case appear more frivolous.

Then why is the headline so important?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did JD jointly sue wapo and AH? If not, did he ever sue wapo?

I think he can’t because it’s supposed to be an opinion piece by Heard. WaPo didn’t present it as factual-they just published her essay

Who wrote the headline? The aclu? He should have triple sued all three of them and let them fight it out amongst each other.

For the third time on just this page, WaPo editors wrote the headline.

Then he should have jointly sued them

Doh, I can’t believe Depp’s crack legal team didn’t think of that! 🤦

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did JD jointly sue wapo and AH? If not, did he ever sue wapo?

I think he can’t because it’s supposed to be an opinion piece by Heard. WaPo didn’t present it as factual-they just published her essay

Who wrote the headline? The aclu? He should have triple sued all three of them and let them fight it out amongst each other.

For the third time on just this page, WaPo editors wrote the headline.

Then he should have jointly sued them

He couldn’t, because he would have to prove that WaPo published the headline with knowledge of its falsity and intent to harm Depp. They simply had no evidence of that, it probably would have been dismissed on First Amendment/anti-SLAPP grounds, and bringing in WaPo would have made his case appear more frivolous.

Then why is the headline so important?

“Sexual violence” is more specific than “domestic violence” or “abuse,” which could be proven through non-sexual physical violence, emotional abuse or financial abuse, and therefore would be the hardest one for Heard to prove was true. But since Heard didn’t write the headline, they have to prove that she defamed him by retweeting the article when it contained the headline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did JD jointly sue wapo and AH? If not, did he ever sue wapo?

I think he can’t because it’s supposed to be an opinion piece by Heard. WaPo didn’t present it as factual-they just published her essay

Who wrote the headline? The aclu? He should have triple sued all three of them and let them fight it out amongst each other.

For the third time on just this page, WaPo editors wrote the headline.

Then he should have jointly sued them

He couldn’t, because he would have to prove that WaPo published the headline with knowledge of its falsity and intent to harm Depp. They simply had no evidence of that, it probably would have been dismissed on First Amendment/anti-SLAPP grounds, and bringing in WaPo would have made his case appear more frivolous.

Then why is the headline so important?

“Sexual violence” is more specific than “domestic violence” or “abuse,” which could be proven through non-sexual physical violence, emotional abuse or financial abuse, and therefore would be the hardest one for Heard to prove was true. But since Heard didn’t write the headline, they have to prove that she defamed him by retweeting the article when it contained the headline.

How did wapo come up with sexual violence headline?