VA - Johnny Depp's defamation case against ex Amber Heard, who countersued #13

Status
Not open for further replies.
Can you imagine...

going to the media with a fantastic story of violence and SA,
then being sued for defamation because your story was a full on lie,
then losing in court, the jury agreeing that your evidence is lame, and your testimony is unconvincing,
then going right back to the media, and repeating the very same defamation lies all over again?

These are not the actions of a mentally balanced person.

jmo
Unbelievable to us, but this is classic AH … you are so right!
 
Here’s the video from GMA about the juror interview…

Transcript of video. Juror's comments in quotation marks.

...
This morning we have exclusive insight into what the jury was thinking. Now, we agreed not to reveal his identity or juror number so you won't see his face or hear his voice, but he revealed a lot about how these multi-million decisions were made...

"A lot of Amber's story didn't add up...

"The majority of the jury felt she was more the aggressor."

The juror, one of 5 men on the 7 person jury said Heard's emotional testimony was not realistic.

"The crying, the facial expressions that she had, the staring at the jury. All of us were very uncomfortable....she would answer one question and she would be crying and two seconds later she would turn ice cold...Some of us used the expression 'crocodile tears.'"

On Depp's side...

"A lot of the jury felt what he was saying at the end of the day was more believable. He just seemed a little more real in terms of how he was responding to questions. His emotional state was very stable throughout"

The juror said the revelation Heard had not donated her 7 million divorce settlement to charity was...

"...a fiasco for her."

"She goes on a talk show in the UK. The video shows her sitting there telling the host that she gave all that money away. And the terms she used in that video clip were 'I gave it away,' 'I donated it,' 'It's gone,' but the fact is she didn't give much of it away at all."

He also disputed Heard's attorney's claim the jury was influenced by social media...

"We followed the evidence...Myself and at least two other jurors don't use Twitter or Facebook. Others who had it made a point not to talk about it."

He said ultimately...

"What I think is truthful...was that they were both abusive to each other. I don't think that makes either of them right or wrong. But to rise to the level of what she was claiming, there wasn't enough or any evidence that really supported what she was saying."

He added that he believed that Johnny did not hit Amber.

And he also revealed the jury was given no guidance on the amount of money that both stars were awarded. He said each juror threw out a number that they thought was fair. And notably about the attorneys...he said he thought Depp's team were sharp, while Heard's team had sharp elbows, meaning they were abrupt, they frequently interrupted.
...
 
A bit more detail about what the juror said in this written article from GMA that was not disclosed in their video shown this morning.

I don't think in these kind of cases expert witnesses are that effective. Yes they are paid by both sides. (to sway the jury). Now if this was a murder trial it becomes more effective. Blood splatter DNA evidence etc. As far as family. I personally know of a custody case where the judge wouldn't hear testimony from either side of the family for character witnesses. Only ones in current household older siblings. . jmo.
 
YES, YES, YES!!

She hates it when he splits. :D

As he refuses to even look her in the eye, or waste any more of his life in contact with her, this antagonism and public defamation is really the only way she can get his attention.

She had it all in the courtroom - televised viewing world-wide of her pathetic bad acting ( and lies) on the stand, him in near proximity to him, 24/7 media coverage of it all, open displays of photos, videos, tapes played over and over with him in really compromised substance abuse situations.

And this is exactly what she wants back: Televised viewing of HER on the stand, of HER acting in front of the work, of HIS public humiliation, with him in the room forced to answer embarrasing questions.

But she is not going to get any of that. If there is an appeal, it is dull dry lawyer discussions away from the cameras and no running commentary on her outfits, her hair, her makeup, her behaviours, her friends.

Time to shut this all down. She lost, bigtime. She will also lose on appeal, I believe. She is going to be out of money soon and if Warner wizes up and dumps her footage from Aquaman 2, she has no career left in family entertainment.
 
I've never seen a film with AH in it. Since the trial I've seen a couple of clips of her in Aquaman. That film genre isn't really my thing, but I can watch and enjoy movies that aren't exactly my taste and actually enjoy them. I'd give her a passable grade based on the clips I've seen. Not great, but not terrible, either.

What baffles me, though, is why she was such a truly bad actress while on the witness stand. She was consistently awful. If she had turned in a similar performance for a screen test or audition, she would never work in film. She was far more convincing as a mythical comic book character than she was "being herself". It's almost like her deepest inner self prevented her from doing any better than she did. It was the performance of her lifetime, yet her acting was substandard.

JMO
 
I've never seen a film with AH in it. Since the trial I've seen a couple of clips of her in Aquaman. That film genre isn't really my thing, but I can watch and enjoy movies that aren't exactly my taste and actually enjoy them. I'd give her a passable grade based on the clips I've seen. Not great, but not terrible, either.

What baffles me, though, is why she was such a truly bad actress while on the witness stand. She was consistently awful. If she had turned in a similar performance for a screen test or audition, she would never work in film. She was far more convincing as a mythical comic book character than she was "being herself". It's almost like her deepest inner self prevented her from doing any better than she did. It was the performance of her lifetime, yet her acting was substandard.

JMO
I think it's because she over-rehearsed testimony. She stuck to her "script" so it didn't feel real, raw or genuine, let alone believable. IMHO
 
I've never seen a film with AH in it. Since the trial I've seen a couple of clips of her in Aquaman. That film genre isn't really my thing, but I can watch and enjoy movies that aren't exactly my taste and actually enjoy them. I'd give her a passable grade based on the clips I've seen. Not great, but not terrible, either.

What baffles me, though, is why she was such a truly bad actress while on the witness stand. She was consistently awful. If she had turned in a similar performance for a screen test or audition, she would never work in film. She was far more convincing as a mythical comic book character than she was "being herself". It's almost like her deepest inner self prevented her from doing any better than she did. It was the performance of her lifetime, yet her acting was substandard.

JMO
She appeared able to portray more emotion with Channing Tatum in the final dance scene in Magic Mike XXL.
JMO
 
A bit more detail about what the juror said in this written article from GMA that was not disclosed in their video shown this morning.

From your article. Parts that were not included in the video.

.......
Heard, the juror said, was considered the aggressor in the relationship by the majority of the jury. "If you have a battered wife or spouse situation, why would you buy the other person, the ‘aggressor,’ a knife? If you really wanted to help Johnny Depp get off drugs, why are you taking drugs around him?" he asked.
.......
"If you mix alcohol and marijuana, that’s where you usually end up -- passed out," he said. "We discussed at length that a lot of the drugs she said he used, most of them were downers. And you usually don’t get violent on downers. You become a zombie, as those pictures show."
.......
They believed the accusation by Depp’s team that one photo was edited to artificially redden Heard’s face to suggest bruising. Heard testified the photos looked different because of a "vanity light."

"Those were two different pictures. We couldn’t really tell which picture was real and which one was not," the juror told "GMA."

The juror also said the defense failed Heard by telling them that the actress "never goes outside without make-up on," he said. "Yet she goes to file the restraining order without make-up on. And it just so happens her publicist is with her. Those things add up and starts to become hard to believe," he said.
.......
He blamed Heard’s legal team for giving her poor advice, such as looking directly at the jury when responding to questions. "All of us were very uncomfortable" at that, he said.
.......
"They would cut people off in cross because they wanted one specific answer without context. They were forcing people to just answer a very narrow question ... which was obvious," he said.
.......
"If she didn’t do any of this stuff with the op-eds, Johnny Depp could have helped her out in her career. They didn’t leave things on a nasty turn," when they divorced, he said. "It turned nasty after the op-ed."
.......
While he admitted he knew of Depp more than Heard, he hadn’t seen many of his films. "None of us were really fans of either one of them," he said.
.......
 
Interviewer: “There's a text message where Johnny promises total global humiliation for you. Do you feel like that came true?”

It really bothers me that the interviewer puts words in JD’s mouth. He did not “PROMISE total global humiliation” for Amber. He said she was asking for that if she continued to push the false narrative of domestic abuse, in the public domain.

Read the actual text message and get your facts straight NBC.
 
Last edited:
From your article. Parts that were not included in the video.

.......
Heard, the juror said, was considered the aggressor in the relationship by the majority of the jury. "If you have a battered wife or spouse situation, why would you buy the other person, the ‘aggressor,’ a knife? If you really wanted to help Johnny Depp get off drugs, why are you taking drugs around him?" he asked.
.......
"If you mix alcohol and marijuana, that’s where you usually end up -- passed out," he said. "We discussed at length that a lot of the drugs she said he used, most of them were downers. And you usually don’t get violent on downers. You become a zombie, as those pictures show."
.......
They believed the accusation by Depp’s team that one photo was edited to artificially redden Heard’s face to suggest bruising. Heard testified the photos looked different because of a "vanity light."

"Those were two different pictures. We couldn’t really tell which picture was real and which one was not," the juror told "GMA."

The juror also said the defense failed Heard by telling them that the actress "never goes outside without make-up on," he said. "Yet she goes to file the restraining order without make-up on. And it just so happens her publicist is with her. Those things add up and starts to become hard to believe," he said.
.......
He blamed Heard’s legal team for giving her poor advice, such as looking directly at the jury when responding to questions. "All of us were very uncomfortable" at that, he said.
.......
"They would cut people off in cross because they wanted one specific answer without context. They were forcing people to just answer a very narrow question ... which was obvious," he said.
.......
"If she didn’t do any of this stuff with the op-eds, Johnny Depp could have helped her out in her career. They didn’t leave things on a nasty turn," when they divorced, he said. "It turned nasty after the op-ed."
.......
While he admitted he knew of Depp more than Heard, he hadn’t seen many of his films. "None of us were really fans of either one of them," he said.
.......
AH wanted from JD.

She even used extortion through her atty (which Camille brought out in the trial).

 
People keep comparing her to JA but I see some Betty Boderick in there. Betty still refuses to admit she did anything wrong and is very vocal about it.

I wonder if they get an injunction against AH if she will willing to to jail for speaking her truth to the power?
 

The bladed glove worn by Johnny Depp in Edward Scissorhands is up for auction and expected to sell for up to $50,000.

The mechanical prop was used in the movie's iconic scene when character Edward used his blades to turn an ice angel into a snow flurry for Kim, played by Winona Ryder.

The glove on sale is described as showing 'extensive wear and aging on the foam rubber element', but already three online bids have been placed - the highest at $20,000.

It is up sale with auction house Propstore and will be going under the hammer in Los Angeles on June 21.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
168
Guests online
1,312
Total visitors
1,480

Forum statistics

Threads
591,780
Messages
17,958,715
Members
228,606
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top