The Lawsuits Thread

Discuss the latest Johnny Depp news, his career, past and future projects, and other related issues.
justintime
Posts: 1846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:51 am

I thought all personal information of subpoenaed individuals - in this case Mr. Bettany’s and Ms. Barkin’s addresses - was to be redacted. It was not. Obviously, these are two JD supporters subpoenaed by the Defense. If I were a cynical person, I might be inclined to think this was an all too convenient oversight designed to make the process more distasteful than it already is (and thereby, unfairly, leaving a subtle, lingering annoyance with Johnny).
ForeverYoung wrote:
Fri Nov 08, 2019 10:21 pm
New AH subpoenas. Boy, her team is getting really pathetic.
Yeah, “pathetic” works.
"Stay low." ~ JD
"I don't like it in here . . . it's terribly crowded." ~ Hatter
"There's something about Johnny that breaks your heart." ~ John Logan, ST
"Tear deeper, Mother." ~ Wilmot

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1337
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:56 pm

Item ii for the date range on the subpoena (3/7/13 -3/21/13) for Paul doesn't even make any sense because the time frame falls within item i (8/1/12 - 5/1/13). Besides, who would keep any of these documents going back six years anyway???

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/circuit/s ... 6-2019.pdf
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
SnoopyDances
Posts: 52797
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:12 pm
Location: Tashmore Lake
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by SnoopyDances » Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:27 pm

:thanks!: For all the updates and explanations, ladies!

User avatar
nebraska
Posts: 30354
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 8:15 pm
Location: near Omaha
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by nebraska » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:36 pm

This whole thing is insane! :jester:

User avatar
Ruby Begonia
Posts: 254
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2017 1:31 pm
Status: Online

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Ruby Begonia » Sat Nov 09, 2019 5:50 pm

justintime wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:51 am
I thought all personal information of subpoenaed individuals - in this case Mr. Bettany’s and Ms. Barkin’s addresses - was to be redacted. It was not.
I thought the same when I saw the addresses of Musk, Josh Drew and Pennington on their subpoenas issued after the judge's protective order decision. I thought addresses would be redacted. :perplexed2:

:thanks!: to ForeverYoung for updating us with the links to recent court docs.

For anyone interested, here's a link to an informative article about subpoenas "11 Tips in Responding to a Subpoena." You need to object within 7-14 days after receiving a subpoena if you don't plan to comply as directed, e.g.

And here's a paragraph re requests for documents:
Some subpoenas are quite broad and may seem to call for hundreds or even thousands of documents. You may not have to provide all of the documents requested, and you may not have to testify. Your general counsel or outside attorney can help you understand your obligations and narrow the scope of the subpoena through negotiations with the attorney who issued the subpoena while still complying with court rules.

User avatar
Chocolat
Posts: 10142
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 11:52 am
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Chocolat » Sat Nov 09, 2019 6:24 pm

ForeverYoung wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:56 pm
Item ii for the date range on the subpoena (3/7/13 -3/21/13) for Paul doesn't even make any sense because the time frame falls within item i (8/1/12 - 5/1/13). Besides, who would keep any of these documents going back six years anyway???

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/circuit/s ... 6-2019.pdf
Agree. It's a ridiculous request and only goes to show that Amber Heard and Kaplan want to make more work for Johnny and his council. In my opinion, no amount of extra paperwork they have Johnny's team go through will outweigh the mountain of evidence (photos, videos and witnesses) Johnny has to prove his innocence and defamation against him by Amber Heard's OpEd in The Washington Post. That is the main point to his lawsuit. Amber Heard publicly defamed Johnny Depp and lied about her hoax. All she has is the attempt to deflect her guilt away from herself. Johnny has the proof, Amber Heard has nothing.
~ MAGICK HAPPENS ~
Through the years, for the many xoxo's, giggles & kindness...
thank you & love you Johnny.

justintime
Posts: 1846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:24 pm



Thank you, Eric Karnes.
"Stay low." ~ JD
"I don't like it in here . . . it's terribly crowded." ~ Hatter
"There's something about Johnny that breaks your heart." ~ John Logan, ST
"Tear deeper, Mother." ~ Wilmot

User avatar
Ruby Begonia
Posts: 254
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2017 1:31 pm
Status: Online

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Ruby Begonia » Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:45 pm

justintime wrote:
Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:24 pm


Thank you, Eric Karnes.
Great article by Mr. Karnes for The Blemish, Justintime! Can't give this one enough clicks!

Last paragraphs only:
I’ve maintained that everything we’ve heard about this case points to Heard, and not Depp, being the abuser. She took a s**t in his bed and we all saw that gnarly photo of his fingertip being filleted.

I really fail to see what Heard is trying to accomplish with this other than further tormenting Depp. It certainly doesn’t seem relevant to the case at hand.
:loveshower:

User avatar
meeps
Posts: 3429
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:13 am
Location: Hiding in my imagination?
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by meeps » Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:13 pm

Amber Heard wants to prove, that Johnny is crazy, because he does have “32 eyewitness statements, 87 surveillance videos and a multitude of photographs showing beyond any doubt that Ms. Heard is a serially violent abuser” ... She doesn’t have any defense, so thinks that attack is the best defense.
And sometimes it is. But sometimes it results in blowback or downright totally defeat.

hollyberry
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 3:01 am
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by hollyberry » Wed Nov 13, 2019 3:19 am

Heard is getting desperate.
But her lawyers know that if she backs down now it'll prove she's a lying :censored:
The evidence is mounting against her. As it should.

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1173
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Online

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:17 am

Took a much needed break this weekend.

Even with this Demurrer/Dismissal on the horizon, all deadlines for the jury trial continue and are enforced. Although either side can ask for extensions, I'm sure Kaplan will fight tooth and nail for anything asked by Johnny. If either is late: Johnny can compel ask for sanctions & legal fees as we’ve seen her do. AH can do same but also claim Johnny is in contempt of court(sanctions & legal fees could apply) & demand a dismissal.

That’s why they’re burying Johnny with motions and hearings. It’ll be hard to meet 11/15 deadline with all judge allowed. That’s also why Waldman jumped at getting the HIPPA updated. They were already late and didn’t want to piss the judge off. It was due Oct 25 they didn’t send it until Oct 31 and Kaplan filed an emergency to compel.

Johnny must submit all discovery he has per the judge's order. If he doesn’t submit something (He doesn’t have it) and she presents something he could have countered with, he can’t later use that document “if he suddenly finds it”. If he is found to withhold anything, AH can file contempt (sanctions & legal fees could apply) and request a dismissal.

A big part of defense discovery is what can AH claim and get away with that he didn’t keep the evidence/document to prove her wrong. What smoking guns can I raise? It’s years ago, no one keeps everything. That’s why their side isn’t publicly reporting any of her evidence yet. IMO
Last edited by Lbock on Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

justintime
Posts: 1846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:34 am

But they were married. She’d literally been planning this for years, as we’ve seen and she was probably in their home more than he - also with access to the Castle. If she were to magically come up with the originals or copies of something she demanded he submit - but can’t because she has them . . . well, who’s on first?

Not only that, all his medical records were held by/turned over to TMG (!) for a period of time. Johnny’s life is everywhere but in his own hands.
Last edited by justintime on Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Stay low." ~ JD
"I don't like it in here . . . it's terribly crowded." ~ Hatter
"There's something about Johnny that breaks your heart." ~ John Logan, ST
"Tear deeper, Mother." ~ Wilmot

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1173
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Online

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:38 am

justintime wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:34 am
But they were married. She’d literally been planning this for years, as we’ve seen and she was probably in their home more than he - also with access to the Castle. If she were to magically come up with the originals or copies of something she demanded he submit - but can’t because she has them . . . well, who’s on first?

Not only that, all his medical records were held by/turned over to TMG (!) for a period of time. Johnny’s life is everywhere but in his own hands.
Sorry I'm lost here. Anything turned over to Bloom or TMG or Rocky, etc will have been in electronic format and they will still have all the originals and the electronic files. She knows the truth. But at the same point, we are talking years. Not everyone keeps texts or emails that long (for example). Shoot, after things were supposed to be all said and done, he may not have kept photos just to rid himself of her. There could be texts that he claims she hit him, and that he didn't hit her. But if he didn't keep them, this is how she will find out. She isn't going to claim a lie that he can disapprove. So her defense will come in AFTER she gets the discovery. Then the Plea in Bar and she will formulate her defense (lies)

If you think she raided his files, I can't answer that?

justintime
Posts: 1846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Wed Nov 13, 2019 4:07 pm

I guess where I was going by posing such a simplistic scenario was to, selfishly, vent my layperson’s frustration with what appears to be, in this case, a broad, hands-off policy by the Court through its day-to-day soft decisions, punctuated with far-reaching critical rulings of an excessive, intrusive, almost impossible-to-satisfy nature.

Despite pending motions presenting challenges to the contrary, this defamation lawsuit was initially found to have merit as it was presented. Embedded in that finding of merit, and by extension granting permission to proceed, is the promise encased within our legal system of a fair and ethical dissemination of the relevant facts.

To date, each party involved - the Court, the Plaintiff, and the Defense - has contributed to the suffocation of that promise, whether by indulging palpable exasperation with actions carrying irrevocable consequences, through insufficient preparation/presentation, or in relentlessly pursuing a rabid truth-be-damned m.o. Not okay. That’s not justice. Yes, it happens everyday. But it needn’t. More importantly, it shouldn’t.

The only “party” in a position to ensure this merit-driven lawsuit has any chance of eventually dispensing some semblance of justice to its Plaintiff, or is fairly found lacking, is of course, the Court. Time for the circus to end, time for the parties to be reminded what the lawsuit is about, and time for the Court to reclaim its reins.
"Stay low." ~ JD
"I don't like it in here . . . it's terribly crowded." ~ Hatter
"There's something about Johnny that breaks your heart." ~ John Logan, ST
"Tear deeper, Mother." ~ Wilmot

User avatar
Ruby Begonia
Posts: 254
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2017 1:31 pm
Status: Online

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Ruby Begonia » Wed Nov 13, 2019 9:18 pm

3 new docs from the 11/8 motions hearing have appeared on the court site today, all by Poopy's side related to this:
Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Expert Disclosures and for Bifurcation Praecipe
Esssentially, Poopy & Co are demanding that Johnny's key experts be prevented from testifying because they claim Johnny's side hasn't provided enough information about what these experts are goingvto say to give Poopy's side enough time to make up her response and produce rebuttal experts. Once you read about the experts, you know that Poopy knows darn well what they'll be talking about.

The most interesting part is the top 2 documents, which on fact lists JD's experts and what they plan to testify about; very long but interesting. My brief summary:

Richard Marks, long-time entertainment industry exec who will opine as to what criteria studios use to hire an actor for a film role and to market their merchandise; the impact claims of domestic and physical abuse would have on an actor's career; the impact a positive jury verdict would have on an actor's career.

Bryan Neumeister, forensics expert who will obviously opine on the validity of Poopy's videos, texts, photos, etc.

Michael Spindler, CPA and Economic Damages Expert, who will testify that the OpEd resulted in damages to JD in excess of $50 million.

Jack Whigham and Christian Carino, Johnny's theatrical agents at Creative Arts Agency, who will opine as to the damage the OpEd has caused from an agent's perspective.

Edward White and Robin Baum will each opine as to how the OpEd has damaged Johnny from their perspectives as his accountant and publicist.

Poopy's side also is demanding bifurcation, which seems to be a request to separate (move to a post-trial date?) arguments about damages (this is where the big $$ is) from the initial trial argument over the OpEd. Someone else can probably explain this better.

link to court docs