Jury supports Depp in lawsuit and Heard in countersuit

Jury supports Depp in lawsuit and Heard in countersuit

 

 

The jury sided with Johnny Depp on Wednesday in his defamation lawsuit against his ex-wife Amber Heard by awarding the "Pirates of the Caribbean" actor more than $10 million in damages, vindicating his claims. that Heard lied about Depp abusing her before and during their brief marriage.

 

 

 

 

But, in a split decision, the jury also found that Heard was defamed by one of Depp's lawyers, who accused her of creating a detailed hoax that included messing up her apartment to make it look worse for police. The jury awarded him $2 million in damages.

 

 

 

 

 

The verdicts end a televised trial that Depp hoped would help restore his reputation, but turned into a spectacle that gave insight into a flawed marriage.

 

 Heard, who stood stoic in the courtroom as the verdict was read, said she was devastated.


“I am even more disappointed in what this verdict means for other women. It's a throwback. Turn back the clock to a time when women who spoke up and spoke out could be publicly humiliated. It sets back the idea that violence against women should be taken seriously,” she said in a statement posted on her Twitter account.

 

 

 

 

 

Depp, who was not in court on Wednesday, said: "The jury gave me my life back. I am truly honored."

"I hope that my quest for the truth to be told has helped others, men and women, who find themselves in my situation, and that those who support them never give up," he said in a statement posted on Instagram.

 

 

 

 

 

Depp sued his ex-wife for defamation in Fairfax County Circuit Court over a 2018 Washington Post op-ed in which Heard described herself as "a public figure representing domestic abuse." . Her lawyers said the article defamed him even though it never mentioned her name.

The jury found in Depp's favor on all three charges about specific excerpts from the article.

 

 

 

 

In evaluating Heard's counterclaim, the jury considered three statements from Depp's attorney, who called the actress's allegations a hoax. They concluded that she was defamed by one of her lawyer's statements, in which she claimed that she and her friends "spilled some wine and messed up the place so her stories would be correct" and called the policeman.

 

 

 

 

The jury ruled that Depp should receive $10 million in restitution and $5 million in punitive damages, but the judge noted that state law caps punitive damages at $350,000, meaning Depp was awarded $10.35. millions of dollars.

 

 

 

 

Although the case was ostensibly about defamation, most of the testimony focused on whether Heard had been physically and sexually abused, as she claimed. Heard listed more than a dozen alleged abuses, including a fight in Australia, where Depp was filming a movie for the "Pirates of the Caribbean" series, in which the actor lost the tip of his middle finger and Heard claims to have been abused. sexually with a bottle of liquor.

 

 

 

 

Depp said he never hit Heard and that she was actually the abuser, though Heard's lawyers showed Depp text messages from years ago apologizing to Heard for his behavior, as well as profanity messages the actor sent to a friend. in which he said he wanted to kill Heard and desecrate her corpse.

As the verdict was read, dozens of Depp fans gathered outside the courthouse and erupted in cheers, chanting "Johnny, Johnny!" They also cheered her lawyers when they left the court.

 

 

 

 

Throughout the trial, fans, overwhelmingly on Depp's side, queued overnight for one of the coveted seats in court. Those who couldn't get in gathered in the street to cheer Depp and boo Heard when one of them appeared outside the courtroom.

In a sense, the trial was a repeat of a lawsuit brought by Depp in Britain against a British tabloid that described him as a "beating husband." The judge in that case ruled in favor of the newspaper, noting that Heard was telling the truth in the abuse descriptions of her.

In the Virginia case, Depp had to prove not only that he never attacked Heard, but that Heard's article, which focused primarily on public policy on domestic violence, defamed him. And to claim compensation, he had to show that the article caused his reputational damage compared to any number of articles published before and after Heard's text, which detailed the allegations against him.

 

 

 

The case captivated millions through its television coverage and passionate followers on social media.is that they analyzed everything, from the gestures of the actors to the possible symbolism of the clothes they wore. Both artists emerge from the trial with their reputations in tatters and unclear career prospects.

 

 

 

 

Erick Rose, a crisis management and communications expert in Los Angeles, called the trial a "classic murder-suicide."

“From a reputation management standpoint, there can be no winners,” he said. “They have bloodied each other. Now it becomes more difficult for studios to cast either because you're potentially alienating a large segment of the public that may not like the fact that you cast Johnny or Amber for a specific project because the emotions run so high."

 

 

 

 

Until a few years ago, Depp, who has been nominated three times for an Oscar, was a bankable star. His portrayal of Captain Jack Sparrow in "Pirates of the Caribbean" helped make the franchise a worldwide sensation, but he lost out on that role. He was also replaced in the third "Fantastic Beasts" film, "The Crimes of Grindelwald."

 

 

 

 

Despite testimony at trial that he could be violent, abusive and lose control, Depp received a standing ovation Tuesday night in London after appearing for nearly 40 minutes with Jeff Beck at the Royal Albert Hall.

Heard's acting career has been more modest, with the only two roles coming her way are in a small movie and the sequel to "Aquaman," which opens next year.

 

 

 

Depp's attorneys fought to keep the case in Virginia, in part because state law provided some legal advantages compared to California, where they both reside. A judge ruled that Virginia was an acceptable forum for the case because the Washington Post's press and online servers are in the county.