Johnny Depp trial in Fairfax County

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shambolic jury decision
1. Male dominated jury obviously biased
2. They find both were abusive and defamatory and yet award him more than five times as much in damages
3. The jury did not consider all the evidence carefully as reached decision way too quickly
4. JD said he brought trial because AH ruined his career - Disney testified he did that all by himself through beinf late, drunk, high, unprofessional and ill
Prepared for lines.
5. Tons of evidence he was also an abuser, drunk and drug addict and his texts contained violent vulgar and creepy threats against her and yet social media exclusively focussed on her bad behavior.

Did we watch the same trial?
1. While there were more women and men, I don't know about "obviously biased."
2. The jury didn't find "both were abusive." While each prevailed on defamation claims, Heard's defamation claims against Depp were for statements made by Depp's attorney, not Depp. AH prevailed on 1/3 defamation claims. JD prevailed on 3/3.
3. How do you know this? How is "way too quickly" defined? Couldn't they have been viewing the evidence during trial, as it was introduced?
4. Did JD say the sole reason for bringing the claim was because AH "ruined his career"? He actually did not have to prove damages as the statements were considered defamatory "per se."
5. There was evidence that he drank and did drugs, and he admitted this. A causal connection between that and the alleged abuse was not established. The texts containing outlandish statements also didn't establish this. Neither one can control social media, though I guess they can attempt to. There is no evidence of which I am aware that the jury was influenced by social media, only an opinion based on speculation from AH's attorney.

1. Majority of men in civil jury: panel of five men and two women found that Heard defamed Depp in an op-ed for the Post, in December, 2018.

The jurors were selected after being questioned about their views on topics including the MeToo movement, domestic abuse and sexual assault, alcohol and drug use, victim shaming, celebrity social media postings, police believability, the use of foul language and angry destruction of property.

The bias was obvious because JD got a cart Blanche for his many counts of bad behavior that touched on all these topics.

2. During the trial, users of TikTok and Twitter vilified Heard in memes and videos, some using court footage. The social media content, viewed billions of times, blasted her as a liar, an abuser, and a "fake" crier. #AmberIsALiar and other hashtags became popular search terms.

TikTok has tallied nearly 20 billion views for the hashtag #JusticeForJohnnyDepp, compared with some 78 million for #JusticeForAmberHeard. That amounts to more than 250 posts supporting Depp for each one supporting Heard.

3. The seven-person civil jury heard closing arguments Friday before last and deliberated for about two hours before leaving for the long Memorial Day weekend. Jurors then deliberated another seven hours last Tuesday.they took 15 Minutes to decide lop sided awards.

4. Agree with MNBC - The Depp-Heard trial devolved into a spectacle with real-world consequences for survivors This trial was supposed to be about the law, but it has devolved into a tawdry reliving of a couple’s dysfunctional relationship via memes.

5. Will Be watching the Marilyn Manson case. The rocker is a friend of Depp and brought a defamation lawsuit against his former girlfriend, actor Evan Rachel Wood. Wood has alleged that Manson raped and abused her during the course of their contentious relationship. Let’s hope she is treated much better than AH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shambolic jury decision
1. Male dominated jury obviously biased
2. They find both were abusive and defamatory and yet award him more than five times as much in damages
3. The jury did not consider all the evidence carefully as reached decision way too quickly
4. JD said he brought trial because AH ruined his career - Disney testified he did that all by himself through beinf late, drunk, high, unprofessional and ill
Prepared for lines.
5. Tons of evidence he was also an abuser, drunk and drug addict and his texts contained violent vulgar and creepy threats against her and yet social media exclusively focussed on her bad behavior.

We need to advise our children and youth to not get their news from social media but from credible news sources with editors and fact checkers.

Also this dude is old enough to be a grandfather and was a dating a woman half his age but has never accepted responsibility for his share of wrong doing. Not healthy at all.

That woman dated a man twice her age, far more famous with a larger net worth. Why?

In what other context do we presume that the substantially younger, less experienced, less powerful and lesser resourced person must be the perpetrator and the older, more powerful, better resourced and more influential person must the victim?

Exactly -
And his failure to acknowledge ANY wrong doing despite mountains of evidence he also behaved very badly smacks of delusional narcissism … plus his rationale for bringing this case is not credible -
Disney testified he was fired due to his own lack of professionalism, lateness, intoxication and failure to learn lines. So much easier for his giant ego to blame All his bad decisions on his mother and AH.

[Anonymous]

If the majority of the jury had been women, people would argue they were all smitten with JD and obviously biased...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shambolic jury decision
1. Male dominated jury obviously biased
2. They find both were abusive and defamatory and yet award him more than five times as much in damages
3. The jury did not consider all the evidence carefully as reached decision way too quickly
4. JD said he brought trial because AH ruined his career - Disney testified he did that all by himself through beinf late, drunk, high, unprofessional and ill
Prepared for lines.
5. Tons of evidence he was also an abuser, drunk and drug addict and his texts contained violent vulgar and creepy threats against her and yet social media exclusively focussed on her bad behavior.

Did we watch the same trial?
1. While there were more women and men, I don't know about "obviously biased."
2. The jury didn't find "both were abusive." While each prevailed on defamation claims, Heard's defamation claims against Depp were for statements made by Depp's attorney, not Depp. AH prevailed on 1/3 defamation claims. JD prevailed on 3/3.
3. How do you know this? How is "way too quickly" defined? Couldn't they have been viewing the evidence during trial, as it was introduced?
4. Did JD say the sole reason for bringing the claim was because AH "ruined his career"? He actually did not have to prove damages as the statements were considered defamatory "per se."
5. There was evidence that he drank and did drugs, and he admitted this. A causal connection between that and the alleged abuse was not established. The texts containing outlandish statements also didn't establish this. Neither one can control social media, though I guess they can attempt to. There is no evidence of which I am aware that the jury was influenced by social media, only an opinion based on speculation from AH's attorney.

1. Majority of men in civil jury: panel of five men and two women found that Heard defamed Depp in an op-ed for the Post, in December, 2018.

The jurors were selected after being questioned about their views on topics including the MeToo movement, domestic abuse and sexual assault, alcohol and drug use, victim shaming, celebrity social media postings, police believability, the use of foul language and angry destruction of property.

The bias was obvious because JD got a cart Blanche for his many counts of bad behavior that touched on all these topics.

2. During the trial, users of TikTok and Twitter vilified Heard in memes and videos, some using court footage. The social media content, viewed billions of times, blasted her as a liar, an abuser, and a "fake" crier. #AmberIsALiar and other hashtags became popular search terms.

TikTok has tallied nearly 20 billion views for the hashtag #JusticeForJohnnyDepp, compared with some 78 million for #JusticeForAmberHeard. That amounts to more than 250 posts supporting Depp for each one supporting Heard.

3. The seven-person civil jury heard closing arguments Friday before last and deliberated for about two hours before leaving for the long Memorial Day weekend. Jurors then deliberated another seven hours last Tuesday.they took 15 Minutes to decide lop sided awards.

4. Agree with MNBC - The Depp-Heard trial devolved into a spectacle with real-world consequences for survivors This trial was supposed to be about the law, but it has devolved into a tawdry reliving of a couple’s dysfunctional relationship via memes.

5. Will Be watching the Marilyn Manson case. The rocker is a friend of Depp and brought a defamation lawsuit against his former girlfriend, actor Evan Rachel Wood. Wood has alleged that Manson raped and abused her during the course of their contentious relationship. Let’s hope she is treated much better than AH.

I would bet my life savings the outcome will be different. MM isn't as loved as JD. Most people see him as a devil worshipping creepy perverted man. He's never been charming or loved by the general public. It's easier to believe he would rape and abuse because isn't that what his music is all about? I know a little more about ERW than I did AH, but not much, so I can't comment on how well liked either woman was to begin with. But the little I know, I think ERW was a little younger than AH, which makes me think she'd be more easily influenced and willing to suffer abuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shambolic jury decision
1. Male dominated jury obviously biased
2. They find both were abusive and defamatory and yet award him more than five times as much in damages
3. The jury did not consider all the evidence carefully as reached decision way too quickly
4. JD said he brought trial because AH ruined his career - Disney testified he did that all by himself through beinf late, drunk, high, unprofessional and ill
Prepared for lines.
5. Tons of evidence he was also an abuser, drunk and drug addict and his texts contained violent vulgar and creepy threats against her and yet social media exclusively focussed on her bad behavior.

We need to advise our children and youth to not get their news from social media but from credible news sources with editors and fact checkers.

Also this dude is old enough to be a grandfather and was a dating a woman half his age but has never accepted responsibility for his share of wrong doing. Not healthy at all.

That woman dated a man twice her age, far more famous with a larger net worth. Why?

In what other context do we presume that the substantially younger, less experienced, less powerful and lesser resourced person must be the perpetrator and the older, more powerful, better resourced and more influential person must the victim?

Exactly -
And his failure to acknowledge ANY wrong doing despite mountains of evidence he also behaved very badly smacks of delusional narcissism … plus his rationale for bringing this case is not credible -
Disney testified he was fired due to his own lack of professionalism, lateness, intoxication and failure to learn lines. So much easier for his giant ego to blame All his bad decisions on his mother and AH.

He admitted to his drug use. He didn’t admit to abusing Heard. There’s a difference. I believe him.

[Anonymous]

DIsney didn’t testify to ANY of that., The woman trotted out basically said she didn’t know anything about anything.

Get., Your. Facts. Straight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shambolic jury decision
1. Male dominated jury obviously biased
2. They find both were abusive and defamatory and yet award him more than five times as much in damages
3. The jury did not consider all the evidence carefully as reached decision way too quickly
4. JD said he brought trial because AH ruined his career - Disney testified he did that all by himself through beinf late, drunk, high, unprofessional and ill
Prepared for lines.
5. Tons of evidence he was also an abuser, drunk and drug addict and his texts contained violent vulgar and creepy threats against her and yet social media exclusively focussed on her bad behavior.

Did we watch the same trial?
1. While there were more women and men, I don't know about "obviously biased."
2. The jury didn't find "both were abusive." While each prevailed on defamation claims, Heard's defamation claims against Depp were for statements made by Depp's attorney, not Depp. AH prevailed on 1/3 defamation claims. JD prevailed on 3/3.
3. How do you know this? How is "way too quickly" defined? Couldn't they have been viewing the evidence during trial, as it was introduced?
4. Did JD say the sole reason for bringing the claim was because AH "ruined his career"? He actually did not have to prove damages as the statements were considered defamatory "per se."
5. There was evidence that he drank and did drugs, and he admitted this. A causal connection between that and the alleged abuse was not established. The texts containing outlandish statements also didn't establish this. Neither one can control social media, though I guess they can attempt to. There is no evidence of which I am aware that the jury was influenced by social media, only an opinion based on speculation from AH's attorney.

1. Majority of men in civil jury: panel of five men and two women found that Heard defamed Depp in an op-ed for the Post, in December, 2018.

The jurors were selected after being questioned about their views on topics including the MeToo movement, domestic abuse and sexual assault, alcohol and drug use, victim shaming, celebrity social media postings, police believability, the use of foul language and angry destruction of property.

The bias was obvious because JD got a cart Blanche for his many counts of bad behavior that touched on all these topics.

2. During the trial, users of TikTok and Twitter vilified Heard in memes and videos, some using court footage. The social media content, viewed billions of times, blasted her as a liar, an abuser, and a "fake" crier. #AmberIsALiar and other hashtags became popular search terms.

TikTok has tallied nearly 20 billion views for the hashtag #JusticeForJohnnyDepp, compared with some 78 million for #JusticeForAmberHeard. That amounts to more than 250 posts supporting Depp for each one supporting Heard.

3. The seven-person civil jury heard closing arguments Friday before last and deliberated for about two hours before leaving for the long Memorial Day weekend. Jurors then deliberated another seven hours last Tuesday.they took 15 Minutes to decide lop sided awards.

4. Agree with MNBC - The Depp-Heard trial devolved into a spectacle with real-world consequences for survivors This trial was supposed to be about the law, but it has devolved into a tawdry reliving of a couple’s dysfunctional relationship via memes.

5. Will Be watching the Marilyn Manson case. The rocker is a friend of Depp and brought a defamation lawsuit against his former girlfriend, actor Evan Rachel Wood. Wood has alleged that Manson raped and abused her during the course of their contentious relationship. Let’s hope she is treated much better than AH.

*Sorry, meant more men than women. Both sides had an opportunity to do voir dire, right? Your social media references mean nothing unless AH can prove that the jury was influenced by them. You don't know if they took "15 minutes to decide lop sided awards." You don't know what the jury left blank and what the jury had already filled in. You don't know if the jury had already decided the damages but just neglected to complete part of the form(s).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DIsney didn’t testify to ANY of that., The woman trotted out basically said she didn’t know anything about anything.

Get., Your. Facts. Straight.

It's weird how people make false statements on here that can be easily disproved. Almost like...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DIsney didn’t testify to ANY of that., The woman trotted out basically said she didn’t know anything about anything.

Get., Your. Facts. Straight.

Disney’s rep did testify that the op-Ed wasn’t part of discussions of dropping Depp from the Pirates franchise. News reports that Pirates 6 was in trouble started more than a year before the op-Ed, so it’s silly to assume that everything was just fine with the movie and Depp’s role in it until the op-Ed was published.

Separately, Depp’s former manager testified that he had become harder and harder to place in roles because his reputation for drug/alcohol use, lateness and unreliability had become so well known.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DIsney didn’t testify to ANY of that., The woman trotted out basically said she didn’t know anything about anything.

Get., Your. Facts. Straight.

Disney’s rep did testify that the op-Ed wasn’t part of discussions of dropping Depp from the Pirates franchise. News reports that Pirates 6 was in trouble started more than a year before the op-Ed, so it’s silly to assume that everything was just fine with the movie and Depp’s role in it until the op-Ed was published.

Separately, Depp’s former manager testified that he had become harder and harder to place in roles because his reputation for drug/alcohol use, lateness and unreliability had become so well known.

Yes I am PP who was told to get facts straight and I admit that was a valid point. And yes, thank you it was hardly some random woman who testified about his unprofessional conduct but his former agent who represented him to Disney and other movie studios. Disney had been widely reported in mainstream media for years as unhappy with JD’s unprofessional behavior.

1. Johnny Depp’s Former Agent Tracey Jacobs who Testified That Movie Studios Were “Reluctant” To Hire Him Because Of His “Unprofessional Behavior” On Set

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ellendurney/johnny-depp-agent-unprofessional-testimony

Depp’s reported drinking and lateness to set also caused an argument between Producer Jerry Bruckheimer and Depp’s then-agent Tracey Jacobs on the "Pirates" set.

Depp's lateness to the set of the latest pirate movie reportedly led to hundreds of extras waiting hours for the star to show up, causing the movie’s producer Jerry Bruckheimer and Disney production chief Sean Bailey to huddle to figure out how to shoot around him. Though production staff raised the matter of Depp’s tardiness with the star, he reportedly never changed his habits.

2. Depp claimed he had lost tens of millions of dollars worth of career earnings because of her allegations against him. Yet he was the one brought both libel suits. If he had not done that in the first place, he would not have been dropped from the Fantastic Beasts franchise. (Although he had already been dropped from the Disney pirates Franchise). In 2020, Depp was dropped by Warner Bros. from the “Fantastic Beasts” franchise after losing his 2020 libel trial in the U.K. - the one he inflicted on himself.

Numerous Hollywood insiders testified in the defamation trial. Most challenged the perception that negative press played any part in decisions affecting the actors' careers.

3. There have been stories for years about JD’s highly unprofessional behavior while filming pirates movies.
https://www.businessinsider.com/johnny-depp-pirates-movie-set-crisis-2017-5

The stories about Depp’s behavior while making the latest “Pirates” movie, “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales,” were made by credible sources. The Hollywood Reporter reported reckless spending over the years and revealed allegations that he was constantly late to set and drank excessively while making “Dead Men Tell No Tales”

4. Similar to blaming his mother and AH for all his bad decisions, he blamed his former management group that he spent all his money on booze, drugs and crazy stuff like spending $5 million to shoot the ashes of his friend Hunter S. Thompson out of a cannon. Depp sued The Management Group — who claimed that despite JD earning more than $650 million in 13-plus years, there wasn't enough liquid cash to cover Depp's "$2 million in monthly bills," due to his out of control spending habits.

5. Not all former girl friends testified on his behalf. The actress Ellen Barkin, who dated Depp in 1994 and starred with him in 1998's Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas testified on Heard's behalf last week.



The mostly male jury was definitely biased based on the evidence presented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shambolic jury decision
1. Male dominated jury obviously biased
2. They find both were abusive and defamatory and yet award him more than five times as much in damages
3. The jury did not consider all the evidence carefully as reached decision way too quickly
4. JD said he brought trial because AH ruined his career - Disney testified he did that all by himself through beinf late, drunk, high, unprofessional and ill
Prepared for lines.
5. Tons of evidence he was also an abuser, drunk and drug addict and his texts contained violent vulgar and creepy threats against her and yet social media exclusively focussed on her bad behavior.

Did we watch the same trial?
1. While there were more women and men, I don't know about "obviously biased."
2. The jury didn't find "both were abusive." While each prevailed on defamation claims, Heard's defamation claims against Depp were for statements made by Depp's attorney, not Depp. AH prevailed on 1/3 defamation claims. JD prevailed on 3/3.
3. How do you know this? How is "way too quickly" defined? Couldn't they have been viewing the evidence during trial, as it was introduced?
4. Did JD say the sole reason for bringing the claim was because AH "ruined his career"? He actually did not have to prove damages as the statements were considered defamatory "per se."
5. There was evidence that he drank and did drugs, and he admitted this. A causal connection between that and the alleged abuse was not established. The texts containing outlandish statements also didn't establish this. Neither one can control social media, though I guess they can attempt to. There is no evidence of which I am aware that the jury was influenced by social media, only an opinion based on speculation from AH's attorney.

1. Majority of men in civil jury: panel of five men and two women found that Heard defamed Depp in an op-ed for the Post, in December, 2018.

The jurors were selected after being questioned about their views on topics including the MeToo movement, domestic abuse and sexual assault, alcohol and drug use, victim shaming, celebrity social media postings, police believability, the use of foul language and angry destruction of property.

The bias was obvious because JD got a cart Blanche for his many counts of bad behavior that touched on all these topics.

2. During the trial, users of TikTok and Twitter vilified Heard in memes and videos, some using court footage. The social media content, viewed billions of times, blasted her as a liar, an abuser, and a "fake" crier. #AmberIsALiar and other hashtags became popular search terms.

TikTok has tallied nearly 20 billion views for the hashtag #JusticeForJohnnyDepp, compared with some 78 million for #JusticeForAmberHeard. That amounts to more than 250 posts supporting Depp for each one supporting Heard.

3. The seven-person civil jury heard closing arguments Friday before last and deliberated for about two hours before leaving for the long Memorial Day weekend. Jurors then deliberated another seven hours last Tuesday.they took 15 Minutes to decide lop sided awards.

4. Agree with MNBC - The Depp-Heard trial devolved into a spectacle with real-world consequences for survivors This trial was supposed to be about the law, but it has devolved into a tawdry reliving of a couple’s dysfunctional relationship via memes.

5. Will Be watching the Marilyn Manson case. The rocker is a friend of Depp and brought a defamation lawsuit against his former girlfriend, actor Evan Rachel Wood. Wood has alleged that Manson raped and abused her during the course of their contentious relationship. Let’s hope she is treated much better than AH.

I would bet my life savings the outcome will be different. MM isn't as loved as JD. Most people see him as a devil worshipping creepy perverted man. He's never been charming or loved by the general public. It's easier to believe he would rape and abuse because isn't that what his music is all about? I know a little more about ERW than I did AH, but not much, so I can't comment on how well liked either woman was to begin with. But the little I know, I think ERW was a little younger than AH, which makes me think she'd be more easily influenced and willing to suffer abuse.

The difference is MM has a history of domestic violence, JD does not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DIsney didn’t testify to ANY of that., The woman trotted out basically said she didn’t know anything about anything.

Get., Your. Facts. Straight.

Johnny Depp trial: Amber Heard op-ed had no impact on 'Pirates,' Disney says | LiveNOW from FOX

https://youtu.be/Sv6lwUF0skE

Amber Heard’s 2018 Washington Post op-ed was not among the factors that led to Disney firing Johnny Depp from the “Pirates of the Caribbean” film franchise.

As the defamation trial between Heard and Depp resumed on Thursday, Tina Newman, a production executive at the Walt Disney Studios, denied the piece was the reason the actor was left out of the sixth film.

https://www.ibtimes.com/amber-heards-op-ed-didnt-get-johnny-depp-fired-pirates-disney-executive-says-3514187

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DIsney didn’t testify to ANY of that., The woman trotted out basically said she didn’t know anything about anything.

Get., Your. Facts. Straight.

Disney’s rep did testify that the op-Ed wasn’t part of discussions of dropping Depp from the Pirates franchise. News reports that Pirates 6 was in trouble started more than a year before the op-Ed, so it’s silly to assume that everything was just fine with the movie and Depp’s role in it until the op-Ed was published.

Separately, Depp’s former manager testified that he had become harder and harder to place in roles because his reputation for drug/alcohol use, lateness and unreliability had become so well known.

Yes I am PP who was told to get facts straight and I admit that was a valid point. And yes, thank you it was hardly some random woman who testified about his unprofessional conduct but his former agent who represented him to Disney and other movie studios. Disney had been widely reported in mainstream media for years as unhappy with JD’s unprofessional behavior.

1. Johnny Depp’s Former Agent Tracey Jacobs who Testified That Movie Studios Were “Reluctant” To Hire Him Because Of His “Unprofessional Behavior” On Set

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ellendurney/johnny-depp-agent-unprofessional-testimony

Depp’s reported drinking and lateness to set also caused an argument between Producer Jerry Bruckheimer and Depp’s then-agent Tracey Jacobs on the "Pirates" set.

Depp's lateness to the set of the latest pirate movie reportedly led to hundreds of extras waiting hours for the star to show up, causing the movie’s producer Jerry Bruckheimer and Disney production chief Sean Bailey to huddle to figure out how to shoot around him. Though production staff raised the matter of Depp’s tardiness with the star, he reportedly never changed his habits.

2. Depp claimed he had lost tens of millions of dollars worth of career earnings because of her allegations against him. Yet he was the one brought both libel suits. If he had not done that in the first place, he would not have been dropped from the Fantastic Beasts franchise. (Although he had already been dropped from the Disney pirates Franchise). In 2020, Depp was dropped by Warner Bros. from the “Fantastic Beasts” franchise after losing his 2020 libel trial in the U.K. - the one he inflicted on himself.

Numerous Hollywood insiders testified in the defamation trial. Most challenged the perception that negative press played any part in decisions affecting the actors' careers.

3. There have been stories for years about JD’s highly unprofessional behavior while filming pirates movies.
https://www.businessinsider.com/johnny-depp-pirates-movie-set-crisis-2017-5

The stories about Depp’s behavior while making the latest “Pirates” movie, “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales,” were made by credible sources. The Hollywood Reporter reported reckless spending over the years and revealed allegations that he was constantly late to set and drank excessively while making “Dead Men Tell No Tales”

4. Similar to blaming his mother and AH for all his bad decisions, he blamed his former management group that he spent all his money on booze, drugs and crazy stuff like spending $5 million to shoot the ashes of his friend Hunter S. Thompson out of a cannon. Depp sued The Management Group — who claimed that despite JD earning more than $650 million in 13-plus years, there wasn't enough liquid cash to cover Depp's "$2 million in monthly bills," due to his out of control spending habits.

5. Not all former girl friends testified on his behalf. The actress Ellen Barkin, who dated Depp in 1994 and starred with him in 1998's Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas testified on Heard's behalf last week.



The mostly male jury was definitely biased based on the evidence presented.

The jurors are biased because they didn't agree with your characterization of the evidence? OK. Could it be that the jurors, who sat through the entire trial and weighed the evidence and the parties' credibility, may have come to a different conclusion than you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DIsney didn’t testify to ANY of that., The woman trotted out basically said she didn’t know anything about anything.

Get., Your. Facts. Straight.

Johnny Depp trial: Amber Heard op-ed had no impact on 'Pirates,' Disney says | LiveNOW from FOX

https://youtu.be/Sv6lwUF0skE

Amber Heard’s 2018 Washington Post op-ed was not among the factors that led to Disney firing Johnny Depp from the “Pirates of the Caribbean” film franchise.

As the defamation trial between Heard and Depp resumed on Thursday, Tina Newman, a production executive at the Walt Disney Studios, denied the piece was the reason the actor was left out of the sixth film.

https://www.ibtimes.com/amber-heards-op-ed-didnt-get-johnny-depp-fired-pirates-disney-executive-says-3514187

JD didn't have to prove that the Op Ed led to Disney "firing" him from the franchise in order to prove his claims, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DIsney didn’t testify to ANY of that., The woman trotted out basically said she didn’t know anything about anything.

Get., Your. Facts. Straight.

Johnny Depp trial: Amber Heard op-ed had no impact on 'Pirates,' Disney says | LiveNOW from FOX

https://youtu.be/Sv6lwUF0skE

Amber Heard’s 2018 Washington Post op-ed was not among the factors that led to Disney firing Johnny Depp from the “Pirates of the Caribbean” film franchise.

As the defamation trial between Heard and Depp resumed on Thursday, Tina Newman, a production executive at the Walt Disney Studios, denied the piece was the reason the actor was left out of the sixth film.

https://www.ibtimes.com/amber-heards-op-ed-didnt-get-johnny-depp-fired-pirates-disney-executive-says-3514187

JD didn't have to prove that the Op Ed led to Disney "firing" him from the franchise in order to prove his claims, though.

No but that was his false narrative about why he brought the case … more self delusion lapped up by social media …