Johnny Depp trial in Fairfax County

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:#teamhopethejuryevaluatedthelegalbasisofthecomplaint

Odds are they will. Juries make mistakes sometimes, but overall juries tend to take their responsibilities seriously and really do their best to get the correct answer from a legal standpoint. Those verdicts are sometimes dissatisfying to the public, but more often than not it’s because the public did not properly understand the law and the process rather than because the jury got it wrong based on the evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Amber is cray cray. Why did he ever marry her??

Because he had a midlife crisis in the middle of a bender. But hey! It's all her fault righ!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if you approached this trial with a truly open mind, listened to all of the testimony, weighed the evidence presented by both sides and based on that came to the conclusion that you did not believe Ms. Heard you are discrediting ALL victims of DV?

Think that one through. I believe DV is a horrific crime. My heart hurts for any victim of it and I believe that anyone guilty of DV should be punished. That said, each case has to be faced without prejudice for our legal system to work. Every single victim of DV should be heard and they deserve justice, but not everyone who claims DV is telling the truth. That's a sad fact and, as I said, we can't presume anything--we have to weigh the facts of every single case, every single time.

I honestly don't understand how anyone could understand the legal issues at play, listen to this entire trial, come to the conclusion that Johnny Depp is a blameless victim, and not be a misogynist.

Because they didn’t. So much evidence against Depp. Heard countered every gotcha moment the plaintiffs threw at her. This isn’t a case about who lied the most or at all. If it was, then every witness testimony would be questionable. This isn’t a DV case, although it certainly will influence the jurors. The jury must decide a few very simple line items:

1. Did Heard REPUBLISH the Op Ed with any edits changing the original WAPO Op Ed? No
2. Did the original OP Ed cause Depp to lose income and job offers? No, testimony on both sides provided evidence that Depp was a risk years prior to Op Ed
3. Did Depp file the defamation case in retaliation? Yes, “global humiliation”, “ruin her”, “karma should take the breath out of her body”, “set her corpse on fire and f**k her to make sure she’s dead”

If the jury decides no to 1 or 2, Depp loses. If the jury decides yes to 3, Depp loses. They then determine damages.

You forgot the most important fact: is he abusive? If she republished it AND are those 3 statements from article false, then…

If she didn’t republish the article with new info OR if he is an abuser, he loses.

Pp above you responding. Since it’s not a domestic violence case (as hard as this is to believe), they first must rule on the defamation suit— did the OP Ed do harm to Depp’s career. He didn’t file a DV suit against her, only a defamation suit. Then the jury proceeds from there. If they rule in favor of Depp, they’ll determine damages awarded to him. What happens after that, I just don’t know. Her counterclaim may circle the drain. Maybe an attorney can help here. If they rule against Depp’s defamation claim, then I think Heard will win the counterclaim that Depp intended to harm her emotionally, psychologically, and physically or he didn’t. If the former, she will be awarded damages. I don’t think this is gonna be a wash, and if the verdict is in fact happening today, this was a cut and dry case for the jury.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amber is cray cray. Why did he ever marry her??

Because he had a midlife crisis in the middle of a bender. But hey! It's all her fault righ!

Because he is also cray!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if you approached this trial with a truly open mind, listened to all of the testimony, weighed the evidence presented by both sides and based on that came to the conclusion that you did not believe Ms. Heard you are discrediting ALL victims of DV?

Think that one through. I believe DV is a horrific crime. My heart hurts for any victim of it and I believe that anyone guilty of DV should be punished. That said, each case has to be faced without prejudice for our legal system to work. Every single victim of DV should be heard and they deserve justice, but not everyone who claims DV is telling the truth. That's a sad fact and, as I said, we can't presume anything--we have to weigh the facts of every single case, every single time.

I honestly don't understand how anyone could understand the legal issues at play, listen to this entire trial, come to the conclusion that Johnny Depp is a blameless victim, and not be a misogynist.

Because they didn’t. So much evidence against Depp. Heard countered every gotcha moment the plaintiffs threw at her. This isn’t a case about who lied the most or at all. If it was, then every witness testimony would be questionable. This isn’t a DV case, although it certainly will influence the jurors. The jury must decide a few very simple line items:

1. Did Heard REPUBLISH the Op Ed with any edits changing the original WAPO Op Ed? No
2. Did the original OP Ed cause Depp to lose income and job offers? No, testimony on both sides provided evidence that Depp was a risk years prior to Op Ed
3. Did Depp file the defamation case in retaliation? Yes, “global humiliation”, “ruin her”, “karma should take the breath out of her body”, “set her corpse on fire and f**k her to make sure she’s dead”

If the jury decides no to 1 or 2, Depp loses. If the jury decides yes to 3, Depp loses. They then determine damages.

You forgot the most important fact: is he abusive? If she republished it AND are those 3 statements from article false, then…

If she didn’t republish the article with new info OR if he is an abuser, he loses.

Pp above you responding. Since it’s not a domestic violence case (as hard as this is to believe), they first must rule on the defamation suit— did the OP Ed do harm to Depp’s career. He didn’t file a DV suit against her, only a defamation suit. Then the jury proceeds from there. If they rule in favor of Depp, they’ll determine damages awarded to him. What happens after that, I just don’t know. Her counterclaim may circle the drain. Maybe an attorney can help here. If they rule against Depp’s defamation claim, then I think Heard will win the counterclaim that Depp intended to harm her emotionally, psychologically, and physically or he didn’t. If the former, she will be awarded damages. I don’t think this is gonna be a wash, and if the verdict is in fact happening today, this was a cut and dry case for the jury.

No, you’re incorrect. They do NOT first make a finding as to whether the piece harmed him. The reason is this: truth is an absolute defense to defamation. They don’t even get to harm and damages if the republishing of the article is true. Period, end of story. His case ends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if you approached this trial with a truly open mind, listened to all of the testimony, weighed the evidence presented by both sides and based on that came to the conclusion that you did not believe Ms. Heard you are discrediting ALL victims of DV?

Think that one through. I believe DV is a horrific crime. My heart hurts for any victim of it and I believe that anyone guilty of DV should be punished. That said, each case has to be faced without prejudice for our legal system to work. Every single victim of DV should be heard and they deserve justice, but not everyone who claims DV is telling the truth. That's a sad fact and, as I said, we can't presume anything--we have to weigh the facts of every single case, every single time.

I honestly don't understand how anyone could understand the legal issues at play, listen to this entire trial, come to the conclusion that Johnny Depp is a blameless victim, and not be a misogynist.

Because they didn’t. So much evidence against Depp. Heard countered every gotcha moment the plaintiffs threw at her. This isn’t a case about who lied the most or at all. If it was, then every witness testimony would be questionable. This isn’t a DV case, although it certainly will influence the jurors. The jury must decide a few very simple line items:

1. Did Heard REPUBLISH the Op Ed with any edits changing the original WAPO Op Ed? No
2. Did the original OP Ed cause Depp to lose income and job offers? No, testimony on both sides provided evidence that Depp was a risk years prior to Op Ed
3. Did Depp file the defamation case in retaliation? Yes, “global humiliation”, “ruin her”, “karma should take the breath out of her body”, “set her corpse on fire and f**k her to make sure she’s dead”

If the jury decides no to 1 or 2, Depp loses. If the jury decides yes to 3, Depp loses. They then determine damages.

You forgot the most important fact: is he abusive? If she republished it AND are those 3 statements from article false, then…

If she didn’t republish the article with new info OR if he is an abuser, he loses.

Pp above you responding. Since it’s not a domestic violence case (as hard as this is to believe), they first must rule on the defamation suit— did the OP Ed do harm to Depp’s career. He didn’t file a DV suit against her, only a defamation suit. Then the jury proceeds from there. If they rule in favor of Depp, they’ll determine damages awarded to him. What happens after that, I just don’t know. Her counterclaim may circle the drain. Maybe an attorney can help here. If they rule against Depp’s defamation claim, then I think Heard will win the counterclaim that Depp intended to harm her emotionally, psychologically, and physically or he didn’t. If the former, she will be awarded damages. I don’t think this is gonna be a wash, and if the verdict is in fact happening today, this was a cut and dry case for the jury.

This is incorrect on multiple levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like the relatively short deliberation time is good news for AH. The facts do not help him much, so unless a couple people were really digging in their heels because they sided with him emotionally, it seems clear he should definitely lose. I think it is doubtful she will win her countersuit, but considering she only filed that as a response to the suit, a loss for him in any respect is a win for her.

You have spammed this thread literally hundreds of times. Are you the AH friend who was kicked out of the courthouse?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like the relatively short deliberation time is good news for AH. The facts do not help him much, so unless a couple people were really digging in their heels because they sided with him emotionally, it seems clear he should definitely lose. I think it is doubtful she will win her countersuit, but considering she only filed that as a response to the suit, a loss for him in any respect is a win for her.

You have spammed this thread literally hundreds of times. Are you the AH friend who was kicked out of the courthouse?

DP. Huh? Why are accusing this poster of spamming the thread hundreds of times?

[Anonymous]

He will lose the suit but will proclaim he "won" because he finally got to tell his side of the story to the public without the filter of PR reps, the media, etc.

He will be shooting a new film by the end of the year. I guarantee it. The entire point of the lawsuit was to resuscitate his career.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He will lose the suit but will proclaim he "won" because he finally got to tell his side of the story to the public without the filter of PR reps, the media, etc.

He will be shooting a new film by the end of the year. I guarantee it. The entire point of the lawsuit was to resuscitate his career.

After a trial that laid bare all of the reasons why he unreliable as an actor (drinking/drug use, lack of preparation, etc.) and his recent non-Pirates films largely bombed? Maybe some very indie film that no one sees that he films for peanuts, but I would be very surprised if he were cast in a major studio film any time soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He will lose the suit but will proclaim he "won" because he finally got to tell his side of the story to the public without the filter of PR reps, the media, etc.

He will be shooting a new film by the end of the year. I guarantee it. The entire point of the lawsuit was to resuscitate his career.

After a trial that laid bare all of the reasons why he unreliable as an actor (drinking/drug use, lack of preparation, etc.) and his recent non-Pirates films largely bombed? Maybe some very indie film that no one sees that he films for peanuts, but I would be very surprised if he were cast in a major studio film any time soon.

He's still a big name in overseas markets. They still play his dumb fragrance commercials every holiday season!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like the relatively short deliberation time is good news for AH. The facts do not help him much, so unless a couple people were really digging in their heels because they sided with him emotionally, it seems clear he should definitely lose. I think it is doubtful she will win her countersuit, but considering she only filed that as a response to the suit, a loss for him in any respect is a win for her.

You have spammed this thread literally hundreds of times. Are you the AH friend who was kicked out of the courthouse?

DP. Huh? Why are accusing this poster of spamming the thread hundreds of times?

Because the Johnny stans have a collective screw loose, the two or three of them who have spammed the thread hundreds of times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if you approached this trial with a truly open mind, listened to all of the testimony, weighed the evidence presented by both sides and based on that came to the conclusion that you did not believe Ms. Heard you are discrediting ALL victims of DV?

Think that one through. I believe DV is a horrific crime. My heart hurts for any victim of it and I believe that anyone guilty of DV should be punished. That said, each case has to be faced without prejudice for our legal system to work. Every single victim of DV should be heard and they deserve justice, but not everyone who claims DV is telling the truth. That's a sad fact and, as I said, we can't presume anything--we have to weigh the facts of every single case, every single time.

I honestly don't understand how anyone could understand the legal issues at play, listen to this entire trial, come to the conclusion that Johnny Depp is a blameless victim, and not be a misogynist.

Because they didn’t. So much evidence against Depp. Heard countered every gotcha moment the plaintiffs threw at her. This isn’t a case about who lied the most or at all. If it was, then every witness testimony would be questionable. This isn’t a DV case, although it certainly will influence the jurors. The jury must decide a few very simple line items:

1. Did Heard REPUBLISH the Op Ed with any edits changing the original WAPO Op Ed? No
2. Did the original OP Ed cause Depp to lose income and job offers? No, testimony on both sides provided evidence that Depp was a risk years prior to Op Ed
3. Did Depp file the defamation case in retaliation? Yes, “global humiliation”, “ruin her”, “karma should take the breath out of her body”, “set her corpse on fire and f**k her to make sure she’s dead”

If the jury decides no to 1 or 2, Depp loses. If the jury decides yes to 3, Depp loses. They then determine damages.

You forgot the most important fact: is he abusive? If she republished it AND are those 3 statements from article false, then…

If she didn’t republish the article with new info OR if he is an abuser, he loses.

Pp above you responding. Since it’s not a domestic violence case (as hard as this is to believe), they first must rule on the defamation suit— did the OP Ed do harm to Depp’s career. He didn’t file a DV suit against her, only a defamation suit. Then the jury proceeds from there. If they rule in favor of Depp, they’ll determine damages awarded to him. What happens after that, I just don’t know. Her counterclaim may circle the drain. Maybe an attorney can help here. If they rule against Depp’s defamation claim, then I think Heard will win the counterclaim that Depp intended to harm her emotionally, psychologically, and physically or he didn’t. If the former, she will be awarded damages. I don’t think this is gonna be a wash, and if the verdict is in fact happening today, this was a cut and dry case for the jury.

No, you’re incorrect. They do NOT first make a finding as to whether the piece harmed him. The reason is this: truth is an absolute defense to defamation. They don’t even get to harm and damages if the republishing of the article is true. Period, end of story. His case ends.

Ok. So if I understand correctly, you are saying they rule solely on whether or not her claims of abuse are true? If so, republication is moot and he loses?

responsible for the headline right?

[Anonymous]

Heard’s career is done so I wonder who she will be screwing next to pay her bills. I expect she’ll also be suing Elon for child support soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He will lose the suit but will proclaim he "won" because he finally got to tell his side of the story to the public without the filter of PR reps, the media, etc.

He will be shooting a new film by the end of the year. I guarantee it. The entire point of the lawsuit was to resuscitate his career.

After a trial that laid bare all of the reasons why he unreliable as an actor (drinking/drug use, lack of preparation, etc.) and his recent non-Pirates films largely bombed? Maybe some very indie film that no one sees that he films for peanuts, but I would be very surprised if he were cast in a major studio film any time soon.

He's still a big name in overseas markets. They still play his dumb fragrance commercials every holiday season!

Overseas appeal can be enough when you’re not quite beloved in the US but casting you won’t trigger major outcries domestically and you can be counted on so your job professionally. Tom Cruise is a good example of this - alienated a lot of people in the US with the Scientology stuff, but still a decent domestic draw and does bonkers overseas, and is a consummate professional who shows up every day on time and ready to work. Cruise is a machine, so the studios still love him.

Depp, on the other hand, is virtually uninsurable and threatens to derail any production he’s involved with. International appeal won’t help much with that because the risk is too great. Depp would need to have a big supporter go to bat for him, like how Mel Gibson paid Robert Downey Junior’s bond to get a studio to hire him again.