The Lawsuits Thread

Discuss the latest Johnny Depp news, his career, past and future projects, and other related issues.
justintime
Posts: 1730
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Fri May 08, 2020 5:36 pm

AdeleAgain wrote:
Fri May 08, 2020 7:56 am
§1. I am sorry I keep on saying this but there is no way Amber wants to testify in the Sun case.

§2. She said she was keen to do her 2016 deposition but did everything to drag her heels. She said she would file a police report yet didn't. Like many narcissists she says things with authority and confidence and many times gets away with it because most people tend to believe authoritative, confident statements.

§3. If she had wanted to testify for the Sun she would have been in London on that Friday. Her plane ticket would have been long since booked (we had loads of notice it was due to be heard 23 March so the people involved definitely did). She would have turned up to court on that Friday in a dramatic - here I am, I am ready - especially as Johnny had already appeared in court. She would also have spent that previous week with the Sun's lawyers - in the UK you are not allowed to do the same amount of witness 'coaching' as you are in the US, but they would have met, ensured the Sun's barrister had the right questions to ask her etc. For something so important surely you would want to be well rested and ready

§4. Isn't it remarkable the lengths her side is going to just to avoid being questioned. It seems to me, Johnny has easily been able to gather people together to make witness statements. There is simply no explanation for iO and Raquel, along with Amanda de Cadet and whoever else claims to have relevant testimony -not to have already made witness statements for the VA case unless there is something to hide. Take for example the present and former employees of JD or Samantha McMillen. No need to speak to the press - sit down - give your testimony, that gets filed and if the press wants to pick it up they can. So COME ON. If iO were to do the same - all of the media would pick it up and report it.

§5. The fact is - iO was happy to speak to the media where there are no legal consequences but doesn't seem to want to commit to court. Well that is plain crazy if he was telling the truth. So much more powerful and legally proper to say what he has to say through a court process.

§6. I think the Sun (1) desperately needs a dramatic, front page story (2) will claim that they relied on her testimony - whether or not she spoke to them directly. Their defence will be that they believed she was a victim. It won't help but they will have to put up a defence and that's what it will be I guess.

§7. (And please don't forget that article was not just a swipe at Johnny - they were going for JK Rowling - darling of the UK liberal establishment and hated by the right wing press. They could have just written that JD was a 'wife beater' they didn't have to bring her into it. At the time, the UK was deeply mired in Brexit recriminations and JK Rowling was a bit proponent of Remain - so a real target for the right.)

§8. AH"s entire strategy from day one has been to put pressure on Johnny knowing how much he hates publicity. I think her miscalculation was that she took his 'splitting' to thinking he would also run away from this fight. But over the divorce he didn't back down and she got the minimum settlement she was entitled to. And then when she made her speeches etc, he didn't react so she became emboldened. And then she went to far - forgetting that fundamentally he is a person of principle.

§9.I feel that court is the thing she really fears - on that recording of the two of them it was remarkable how her tone completely changed and she became desperate at the point he said 'fine I'll see you in court'.
Excellent thoughtful, right-on-the-money post, AdeleAgain. Thanks for deftly touching on so many key points.

§1. §2. §3. Agreed. The police report fiasco was the one that, if filed timely, could have buried AH back in 2016, newly available evidence or not. And every :censored: tabloid and moderately respectable media source took Spector’s word that her client filed one and “jumped the gun” with headlines proclaiming same. Headlines they could never recant with the same ferocity once they realized they’d been played. I get chest pains every time I revisit that particular sequence of lies.
She has tried for dismissal of JD’s case against her three (4?) times now. This will be different - it’s not her case. But, as I’ve held before, a plane ticket as well as hotel arrangements would have been bought and paid for long before the (anticipated) shut down made it possible to put on a show of going to all lengths to secure that last flight across the pond IF she truly wanted to make an appearance . . . What a joke she is!

§4.& §5. Yeah, mouthy despicable cowards the lot of them, until they each have to raise their right hand...

§6. Wow. Do you really think the Sun will turn up for this showdown with nothing but a plaintive “We believed she was a victim.” Ha! Geez - A hideous rag that deserves to be ground into dust throwing their case on the pity of the Court for having been betrayed by the very scum they were so stalwartly defending? Of course, the Court would not be faulted for firing back with a resounding, WHY? Why did you believe she was a victim? What research did you do and evidence did you find to drive you to that conclusion without receiving any confirmation from her?? At about that point (if not sooner) I would think the courtroom would be in an uproar of uncontrollable laughter.

§7. Yes - the J.K. Rowling angle. I hadn’t really considered how odd - and risky - it was for the Sun to drag her into the fray until you mentioned it. It was such a low blow. I guess a political swipe of that magnitude was just too irresistible to ignore. Glad Johnny didn’t let it go.

§8 & §9. Agreed. A costly miscalculation on AH’s part - and a lazy one on Kaplan’s part. And a bottomless pit of arrogance and wheel-spinning on both parts. I know the Sun case is not Kaplan’s terrain, but I hope she’s starting to sweat.
"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

MaryS
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue May 05, 2020 8:16 am
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by MaryS » Fri May 08, 2020 5:56 pm

Justintime,
I think that Kaplan first started sweating when she kept *losing* all the motions she put forward.
And then when she had a good read of the notes on her client Heard which read like Gone Girl.
The Sun trial is just icing on the cake to make Kaplan's worst fears come alive.

And Heard's flying monkeys twitter-ers are out and about so something is going down.

User avatar
Judymac
Posts: 351
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Judymac » Fri May 08, 2020 6:32 pm

meeps wrote:
Fri May 08, 2020 3:16 pm
Yes, it does sound complicated, but thanks a billion for explaining :airkiss2:
:daisyforyou

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1088
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Fri May 08, 2020 7:59 pm

Sorry, I mean no disrespect but I disagree that Amber does not want to testify for The Sun. This is her last chance to save her "reputation" even though she is done in Hollywood. Her lawyers tried to get Johnny to lift the NDA some time ago so that she could testify. She has not been subpoenaed to testify, that I know of, so if she didn't want to do it she doesn't have to appear.

Someone on Twitter who works in Hollywood said she heard from different sources that AH was fired from Aquaman, so now, more than ever she needs to stay relevant.

“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 903
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Online

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri May 08, 2020 8:17 pm

Judymac wrote:
Fri May 08, 2020 10:51 am
meeps wrote:
Fri May 08, 2020 3:18 am
JUDYMAC: The reason why I say "might" is that pleading the fifth is not supposed to be taken as an admission of guilt of a crime.

ME: OK, I only know about "taking the fifth" from movies, but there they usually say something like "I decline to answer because it could incriminate myself"
Is that a movie invention?
Because if it isn't I would say that it is sort of admission of guilt. Or what :love: ?
No, it is not a movie invention, it is true. It's hard to explain but I will try. In American criminal law, a defendant is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty in court. Just because a person takes the fifth does not automatically make them guilty. The judge will actually tell jurors that just because someone refused to testify that it is not an admission of guilt. A judge tells a jury to weigh all of the facts before deciding if a defendant is guilty. It is supposed to be a protection against innocent people being convicted of a crime. I do not know of any innocent person who would take the fifth. I am sure it sounds strange but it is the way American law works.
Hey Judymac, I posted this before and here is a reminder.
Inference to be drawn

While in a criminal procedure, the court must instruct the jury that it cannot draw an inference of guilt from a defendant’s failure to testify about facts relevant to his case, (Griffin v. California (1965) 80 U.S. 609). In civil cases, “the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them.” (Baxter v. Palmigiano (1976) 425 U.S. 308, 318.)
So in a Civil Trial, if AH pleads the 5th to any question, the jury CAN assume anything, including that she is lying or guilting of whatever they are asking.

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 903
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Online

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri May 08, 2020 8:29 pm

As a reminder, here is the response filing Johnny did in The Sun Case. This was an amended response
https://dam.tmz.com/document/db/o/2018/ ... fc5f89.pdf

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1088
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Fri May 08, 2020 8:45 pm

Frankly, I don't think the VA case will ever go to trial. If she refuses to file the Answer she goes into default. " Except in suits for divorce or annulling a marriage, the court shall, on motion of the plaintiff, enter judgment for the relief appearing to the court to be due." Now..of course we know she doesn't have $50 Mil and she's done in Hollywood so even if Johnny really wanted her money he could go after future earnings from the little things she is doing but I doubt he would and he's not going to leave her homeless but in the end her lies and all the things he could have come out with in the press will have been exposed through a court of law.

Of course, this is only my opinion but from what I can see it's her only way out.


Rule 3:http://www.courts.state.va.us/courts/sc ... nges.pdf19. Default.

(a) Failure Timely to Respond. — A defendant who fails timely to file a responsive pleading
as prescribed in Rule 3:8 is in default. A defendant in default is not entitled to notice of any further
proceedings in the case, including notice to take depositions, except that written notice of any further
proceedings shall be given to counsel of record, if any. The defendant in default is deemed to have
waived any right to trial of issues by jury.
11
(b) Relief from Default. — Prior to the entry of judgment, for good cause shown the court may
grant leave to a defendant who is in default to file a late responsive pleading. Relief from default
may be conditioned by the court upon such defendant reimbursing any extra costs and fees, including
attorney's fees, incurred by the plaintiff solely as a result of the delay in the filing of a responsive
pleading by the defendant.
(c) Default Judgment and Damages. —
(1) Except in suits for divorce or annulling a marriage, the court shall, on motion of
the plaintiff, enter judgment for the relief appearing to the court to be due.
When service of
process is effected by posting, no judgment by default shall be entered until the requirements
of Code § 8.01-296(2)(b) have been satisfied.
(2) If the relief demanded is unliquidated damages, the court shall hear evidence and
fix the amount thereof, unless the plaintiff demands trial by jury, in which event, a jury shall
be impaneled to fix the amount of damages.
(3) If a defendant participates in the hearing to determine the amount of damages such
defendant may not offer proof or argument on the issues of liability, but may (i) object to the
plaintiff's evidence regarding damages, (ii) offer evidence regarding the quantum of damages,
(iii) participate in jury selection if a jury will hear the damage inquiry, (iv) submit proposed
jury instructions regarding damages, and (v) make oral argument on the issues of damages.
(d) Relief from Default Judgment. —
(1) Within 21 Days. — During the period provided by Rule 1:1 for the modification,
vacation or suspension of a judgment, the court may by written order relieve a defendant of a
default judgment after consideration of the extent and causes of the defendant's delay in
tendering a responsive pleading, whether service of process and actual notice of the claim
were timely provided to the defendant, and the effect of the delay upon the plaintiff. Relief
from default may be conditioned by the court upon the defendant reimbursing any extra costs
and fees, including attorney's fees, incurred by the plaintiff solely as a result of the delay in
the filing of a responsive pleading by the defendant.
12
(2) After 21 Days. — A final judgment no longer within the jurisdiction of the trial
court under Rule 1:1 may not be vacated by that court except as provided in Virginia Code §§
8.01-428 and 8.01-623.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
myfave
Posts: 6127
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: South
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by myfave » Fri May 08, 2020 9:28 pm

MaryS wrote:
Fri May 08, 2020 5:31 pm
Well there may not be too much movement on the lawsuit front.
But there are reports that Heard has been fired from Aquaman.
And this time for real.
We will see.

Heard's flying monkeys are out in full force.
So there might be some truth.
Flying monkeys! :santahoho: Love that!
"Hello South Carolina" ...............*swoon*

User avatar
meeps
Posts: 3351
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:13 am
Location: Hiding in my imagination?
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by meeps » Sat May 09, 2020 3:01 am

ForeverYoung - are you, and the law, saying, that Johnny can sort of win the VA case by default if she doesn't answer?
If I have understood that correctly I am not sure, that I would like that outcome.
That would, in my eyes, make it all too easy for her fans and the media on her side to make a martyr out of her, claiming that she is so afraid of the big bad monster - our actually sweet Johnny - that she didn't dare face him in open court ...

gipsyblues
Posts: 379
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 11:36 am
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by gipsyblues » Sat May 09, 2020 5:19 am

meeps wrote:
Sat May 09, 2020 3:01 am
ForeverYoung - are you, and the law, saying, that Johnny can sort of win the VA case by default if she doesn't answer?
If I have understood that correctly I am not sure, that I would like that outcome.
That would, in my eyes, make it all too easy for her fans and the media on her side to make a martyr out of her, claiming that she is so afraid of the big bad monster - our actually sweet Johnny - that she didn't dare face him in open court ...
I agree , that she shouldn't be a martyr, but three years in prison with her devilish helpers. For all the criminal acts she's done to Johnny in last years.

AdeleAgain
Posts: 510
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by AdeleAgain » Sat May 09, 2020 5:51 am

ForeverYoung wrote:
Fri May 08, 2020 7:59 pm
Sorry, I mean no disrespect but I disagree that Amber does not want to testify for The Sun. This is her last chance to save her "reputation" even though she is done in Hollywood. Her lawyers tried to get Johnny to lift the NDA some time ago so that she could testify. She has not been subpoenaed to testify, that I know of, so if she didn't want to do it she doesn't have to appear.

Someone on Twitter who works in Hollywood said she heard from different sources that AH was fired from Aquaman, so now, more than ever she needs to stay relevant.

ForeverYoung we will have to agree to disagree and if she turns up in court I will owe you a large, virtual drink! Which I will happily buy for you.

Although she desperately needs to save herself, answering questions under oath is not going to do that. The difference between now and 2016 is that JD's side have a lengthy testimony plus all her other stories to hold up against four years of building evidence to the contrary. Any decent lawyer will advise her to continue what she is doing and avoid court at all costs. I also think she will pull some excuse and blame Johnny for the Sun case ("he wouldn't lift the NDA, I couldn't speak freely') and ignore the VA case and claim she was too traumatised to face him.

My only chink of doubt is that she has incredible arrogance so she may believe she can talk her way out of it, from everything we've heard of her speaking on tape she certainly seems to think that people should accept her version of events as facts.

But overall I just think if she and her hoaxers were willing to face court they would have long since sat and done their depositions - indeed they don't need to wait for Johnny's side. Why doesn't iO just do a witness statement like Johnny's witnesses have? As I said, that way he could get his message into he public domain without anyone accusing him of playing the media. Hmmmm now why wouldn't her side be doing that I wonder????

MaryS
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue May 05, 2020 8:16 am
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by MaryS » Sat May 09, 2020 6:45 am

ForeverYoung for someone to save their reputation, they had to have a good one to start with.
Heard both in her professional and personal life never had a good one.
And the public now and then never warmed to her.
Her taking the stand in the UK is going to compound the fact she's a liar and golddigger.
Yep, if she takes the stand, it's because she's under duress from The Sun.
Because she sure has no reputation to save.

But I do agree with you this isn't going to trial in the US.
But it does hinge on the reply.
Let's see if they reply. And how they do that without perjurying themselves further.

MaryS
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue May 05, 2020 8:16 am
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by MaryS » Sat May 09, 2020 8:26 am

Yep, Heard is desperate. She's trying to resurface the *edited* video of Johnny and the cabinets.
Let's see Heard, nope, Johnny did NOT abuse in that video.
Indeed, you were gaslighting him.

So what does this mean? I think she's trying to get a few PR shots at him before she confesses.
And yeah, I doubt she's going to reply to the complaint.
We will see.

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 903
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Online

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Sat May 09, 2020 11:08 am

I think AH has allot of pressure from her lawyers to participate in The Sun trial. Up until end of 2019 they believed her, who knows what they believe now. I mean, come on, she’s been in the activist podium tour, and now she is shy.

So first it was I can’t testify unless Johnny lifts the entire NDA agreement, which she knew Johnny would never do, and he didn’t, But the U.K. judge accepted that Johnny would allow her to testify to matters relating to this lawsuit, oops

IMO, There was some negotiations behind the scene for months, because it took forever to get her to publicly agree to testify. Speculating, she has a deal I think that the Sun won’t countersue her if they lose. That’s reasonable but still a guess on my part. This is pretty common between lawyers to negotiate some kind of immunity for important witnesses (and Sun has stated she is their key witness)

But I think the big tell was the last minute new claim of a sexual abuse issue. In U.K. she should automatically get a private testimony order on that alone, and I think she counted in that. I think her UK lawyer who is a huge human rights lawyer convinced her this would happen. So she figures what can go wrong, just a judge and lawyers and no one can report in it. Here testimony remains secret whichever way it goes. The public knows I went through this terrible ordeal for justice, as a victim I had to relive it all. But oops, the judge is only allowing that small portion of her testimony in private, not her entire testimony,

For that reason, I think she will do everything possible to get out of it. But based on what’s happened so far, the judge will compel her as he did with he other witnesses.

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1088
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

Re: The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sat May 09, 2020 11:29 am

gipsyblues wrote:
Sat May 09, 2020 5:19 am
meeps wrote:
Sat May 09, 2020 3:01 am
ForeverYoung - are you, and the law, saying, that Johnny can sort of win the VA case by default if she doesn't answer?
If I have understood that correctly I am not sure, that I would like that outcome.
That would, in my eyes, make it all too easy for her fans and the media on her side to make a martyr out of her, claiming that she is so afraid of the big bad monster - our actually sweet Johnny - that she didn't dare face him in open court ...
I agree , that she shouldn't be a martyr, but three years in prison with her devilish helpers. For all the criminal acts she's done to Johnny in last years.
The way I read it, yes Johnny could win and yes, her fans might do what you said but most people will see is that she refused to admit that she lied and took the coward's way out. W will see what happens.

As for the perjury charges, the State would have to do that and there is no guarantee they will.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."