The Lawsuits Thread

Discuss the latest Johnny Depp news, his career, past and future projects, and other related issues.
Granna
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2019 12:44 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Granna » Sat Nov 07, 2020 12:33 pm

I have not posted for several reasons. 1) To let everything settle down a bit; 2) to listen to everyone's interpretation of the events, and 3) a lot of posts on the Zone seem to be overlooked, those in particular, that have been asking questions and received no answers from anyone.

With that being said, I have a few points. 1) This MEDIA lawyer is just that. He would take the side of the tabloids anyway. I believe he did another video, BEFORE the trial started, and he was totally against Johnny Depp, 2) From what I am reading, the judge did not take into account the testimonies of police officers, ,eyewitnesses as well as the tapes. In the Virginia case, 12 independant jurors, will be listening to all of this evidence not just the judge.

As far as what Warner Brothers has done, Johnny Depp , he did the honorable gentlemanly thing. He was good enough to post his letter on his Instagram, so everyone knew the truth. This blocked any possible negative scenario from Warner Brothers.They will be very sorry that they made this step and judgement call.

At the moment, Team Heard feels that they have won, let us all remember they have a long way to go.

PLEASE remember, It is always darkest before the dawn.

Those of us that have been following this case for years know exactly what she is and justice will prevail. It is up to many of us who believe Johnny Depp, to hold him up with positive thoughts, prayers, and give him the strength and support to continue on this journey. We must continue to educate people about the vile, disgusting, lying person Amber Heard . This is not just about Johnny Depp, this is about all domestic violence victims and survivors, (which I am) this is for them. Domestic violence, this crime, everything should not be based on gender, Creed, color, or age. For this reason, if there should ever be a reason, we should double down on our efforts to help Team Depp in any way that we can. We must continue to call her out, along with her partners of crime, her entourage of clowns , the media circus, and her menagerie of very sorry butt kissing attorneys.

Sorry for this rant but I do feel better now.

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1413
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sat Nov 07, 2020 1:02 pm

The judge knew of the recordings. He quoted them. He quoted what she said about admittiing to starting physical fights, throwing pots and pans at him, hitting him, saying she could not promise it won't happen again but still the judge said "In my view no great weight is to be put on these alleged admissions by Ms. Heard to aggressive violent behavior." ALLEGED??? She flat out admitted. The judge was clearly bias.

At least Warner Bros. allowed Johnny to leave gracefully because they probably did not want to do what they did but they made a big mistake, imo, and the fans are out in full force to boycott the film.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

AdeleAgain
Posts: 910
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by AdeleAgain » Sat Nov 07, 2020 1:08 pm

I feel better for your rant too Granna.

Please can no one give any airspace to Mark Stephens he has zero credibility in the UK and is an apologist for the Sun.

Someareborn: you raise some reasonable points but from what my lawyer friends have explained to me, the following should be kept in mind:

- the judge filled in too many gaps eg "he must have chopped his finger on all the glass". No one said that - it is not his job to make those sorts of statement. It is the job of NGN to have proved their case, if there are gaps then the case was not proved;

- Kate James may well have seemed emotional - nothing wrong with that (and likely that story plays well to a jury) but she balanced her desire for revenge with the very reasonable statement that it was all a long time ago and she has a much happier job now. That's what she said and frankly there was no reason to disbelieve her especially as her information tied in to others;

- the judge simply ignored inconsistencies on AH's side. Yes there are always inconsistencies - people see, hear, remember things differently. But the flagrant inconsistencies and over consistencies of the Heard girls statements are ludicrous. How can anyone possibly believe that they both independently believed exactly the same events happened on one day only to suddenly both remember that it actually happened on another day. And use the same vocabulary. It is just not credible.

- the judge may well assume that people working for Johnny are overly loyal to him. Ok that's fine, so discount the body guards, Stephen, Samantha, Isaac, Tara and Hilda (sorry if I have missed anyone out). But you would need to make the same assumption about Amber's friends. At the time they made their 2016 statements (which they HAD to stick to) - they were effectively dependent on Amber who was dependent on Johnny. Why is her sister more credible than a bodyguard?

- so if you take out all of the witnesses on both sides that have a vested interest - you are left believing the third parties: police officers, medical notes, and the building staff. A couple of the building staff were't very helpful so scrap those but what about the others - Trinity was very credible. Most egregious was what he said about the police. Spin that one to a US jury Elaine.

- and then there are just all the details that he simply just decided to ignore. The acting coach confirmed Johnny's witnesses saying she usually went out without makeup. The backless dress in Japan - she claimed he kneed her in the back. The sheer extent of her claimed injuries for the James Corden show and in Australia - it is simply not credible that these would not have been visible. Make up covers marks it does not cover up swelling. And there are many, many more where the judge simply says "I've chosen not to take this into account".

- and I haven't even got to the perjury - where she contradicts previous testimony etc. What she said in her deposition and previous statements mean something. She said she hit him once only in March 2015. Well the incident we heard of the bathroom door was not that incident. And she gave a totally different version of events. Not to mention that she lied in Australia on her form and in her testimony.

He may not be given permission to appeal in which case it is an uncomfortable few months with the Sun being vitriolic.

I keep saying it - I do apologise this is therapy/comforting myself - if they can get the info about the charity donations out from under a protective order it would be amazing. The judge said she wasn't a gold digger because she donated her money. If that is proved untrue - even if it is too late for the appeal - they could launch a complaint against her.

The entire judgement rests on one things: the credibility and honesty of Amber Heard. So that is what has to be attacked - in a legal sense, not in a PR sense.

User avatar
meeps
Posts: 3450
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:13 am
Location: Hiding in my imagination?
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by meeps » Sat Nov 07, 2020 1:20 pm

I agree with all your points. But would like to add one: the blasted judge claimed that his darling little saint Amber had had no previous problems with the law ...
If that's not a whopper - then I am as tentacled as Davy Jones!

User avatar
Newt
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2018 4:22 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Newt » Sat Nov 07, 2020 1:49 pm

One of the actors playing a Grindelwald acolyte posted that she’s really sad about it and that she knows only what is in Johnny’s statement. Also that she shot yesterday until 4 am. So it’s starting to look like WB didn’t tell the cast, that’s what it feels like.

About that Nichols monster who cost Johnny his job (unless WB thinks it over, fingers crossed), it’s useless imo debating his decisions. It was rigged, and there’s just no other way to rationalize it. Johnny didn’t have a shot. But I hope he kicks her butt in Virginia and is restored.

Granna
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2019 12:44 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Granna » Sat Nov 07, 2020 1:55 pm

Newt:

AMEN.

What would happen if Team Depp gets the evidence that she did NOT make those charitable donations - proving she lied.

Do you think the UK court woyld have to reconsider their verdict?

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Sat Nov 07, 2020 2:11 pm

I appreciate reading all this. I feel so defeated not up for the fight today. Come Monday I’ll be refreshed and stronger Poor Johnny

Someareborn
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2020 7:16 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Someareborn » Sat Nov 07, 2020 3:19 pm

Big thank you, AdeleAgain, for taking the time and effort to lay out the details. I keep forgetting some of it, I will go back to the transcripts. But your response cheered me up.

At least this case has taught me how immensly difficult it is to prove that one is a "victim" of DV. Naively I thought that third party witness statements and medical records would be enough, apparently not. Can't wrap my head around that.

I hope that Team Depp will be able to prove every inconsistency in the VA trial to a jury, altough I have to admit that I had more faith in a system with a judge.
As mentioned, her credibility needs to get destroyed. Hopefully the donations in question and the possible investigation in Australia will help.

AdeleAgain
Posts: 910
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by AdeleAgain » Sat Nov 07, 2020 5:20 pm

Lbock you've been an absolute rock and stalwart of wisdom these past four years - if you feel a bit beat up we understand.

Someareborn - bless you - honestly this was the tip of the iceberg of what I could rant about. I forgot to even mention the tapes.

They had an unbelievable amount of evidence - which was ignored. I just don't know enough about the appeal system to understand if some of the judge's comments or omissions are sufficient legal base for appeal.

I believed Johnny would win this in part due to a conversation I had with a very senior UK barrister and part time judge who had done various enquiries for companies into sexual harassment allegations. I asked her what you do in making a judgement where perhaps it is a case of he-said-she-said. And she said to me words to the effect that - well that's what I am paid to do - you as a sensible, intelligent person can tell most of the time when someone is outright lying. Caught in their lies, story not adding up, weird explanations, language, body language etc. I took comfort form that- that the judge would look at AH's performance (not to mention Whitney's fiasco) - and decide that this, on top of the evidence, obviously the Sun had committed libel.

IF you can bear to read the judgement again notice how often the judge says - well I am going to ignore evidence 1,2 and 3 and just accept that AH is being truthful.

User avatar
meeps
Posts: 3450
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:13 am
Location: Hiding in my imagination?
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by meeps » Sat Nov 07, 2020 6:10 pm

Yes, as if all people tell the truth under oath. He didn't even tell the truth himself in his verdict. But maybe he sees a kindred spirit in AH.

AdeleAgain
Posts: 910
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by AdeleAgain » Sat Nov 07, 2020 6:31 pm

And another 100k supporters to his instagram. 7.8 Million now supporting the truth! Night night.

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1413
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sat Nov 07, 2020 6:54 pm

Granna wrote:
Sat Nov 07, 2020 1:55 pm
Newt:

AMEN.

What would happen if Team Depp gets the evidence that she did NOT make those charitable donations - proving she lied.

Do you think the UK court woyld have to reconsider their verdict?
I think it might give JD's team grounds to for permission to do the appeal but I am not sure.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1413
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sat Nov 07, 2020 7:01 pm

Newt wrote:
Sat Nov 07, 2020 1:49 pm
One of the actors playing a Grindelwald acolyte posted that she’s really sad about it and that she knows only what is in Johnny’s statement. Also that she shot yesterday until 4 am. So it’s starting to look like WB didn’t tell the cast, that’s what it feels like.

About that Nichols monster who cost Johnny his job (unless WB thinks it over, fingers crossed), it’s useless imo debating his decisions. It was rigged, and there’s just no other way to rationalize it. Johnny didn’t have a shot. But I hope he kicks her butt in Virginia and is restored.
Judge Nicol gave a really bad decision based on assumptions and lack of proof BUT it is also important to remember this all happened because of her lies. He should have left the moment he caught her recording him. She was planning this for a long time and playing everyone while it was happening, sending pics and texts, etc. and keeping them for years waiting for the right moment to strike and take his homes and his money.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

justintime
Posts: 1873
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Sat Nov 07, 2020 8:17 pm

Thank you, thank you, Ladies, especIally for Granna’s welcome “rants” and to AdeleAgain and Lbock, for your unfailing ability to zero in on those pieces of Nicol’s Judgement that may indeed emerge as the critical points of contention upon which the granting of Johnny’s request for an appeal may rest.

Also, thank you Lbock for posting the Stephens video. I would not have watched it elsewhere after listening to the first couple sentences. But I believe in being prepared and cautious- you know, a “keep your friends close but your enemies closer” sort of thing. If you can grit your teeth and bear the pomposity of this shill for the SUN - I wonder if someone provided him with a script - you realize this clown is in over his head, desperately trying to convince his audience that all is definitively lost for JD.

Typical of the insufferable tabloid media, he is hoping we take his word for it. He makes sure to mention the length of the Judgement (~585§) early on, obviously hoping to send a subliminal message: The judgement is so long, dear plebeians from around the world, you needn’t waste your time reading it yourself, I’ll give you the skinny right here. And so he tries to alternately impress, intimidate, and browbeat us into accepting JD’s now and future fate by slipping back and forth from arrogantly “educating” us to full on shouting:

1. The costs are astronomical (currently about 7.5 million £ for Depp and counting); cut your losses, Depp!

2. We should be impressed by Nicol’s credentials: law professor and (co-)author of the definitive book on libel
law;

3. Postures that since it’s virtually impossible to lose a libel case in London, JD’s case must be unappealable;

4. An appeal would have to go forward on the basis the Judge believed the evidence of AH and did not believe
the evidence of JD. Nicol’s Judgement would have to be a “complete howler” (total mistake) for an
appeal to be granted
;

***5. We are urged to recognize Nicol was exemplary: he “carefully reasoned the judgement”, he “looked at all the evidence”, and he “explained the reasons in detail” (!);***

6. Further bombastic histrionics from Stephens: “I’m here to tell you that verdict is solid, it is unappealable! Depp can ask - it’s his right to ask for an appeal - but he won’t get it and he won’t win it. (ha - quick hedge here: i. e. if he does get it!);

7. Ends by attempting to wrap himself in a cloak of honor with a last ditch plea for all to recognize a twofold political message being promoted by Nicol’s judgement! One, the courts will always protect the vulnerable; and Two, foreign nationals coming to London to be vindicated in a case where they know in their home courts they would not win will think twice before doing so. So insulting and directly, but wrongly, aimed at Johnny

Nicol completely blew it. This Stephens loser is just that and nothing more. He has ultimately drawn attention to Mr. Justice Nicol’s inexcusably personal, flawed judgement, a judgement that now stands on the record as a blatant embarrassment to everything the London High Court stands for.

Johnny’s appeal request must be granted, and this inane, unforgivably self-indulgent, biased misstep of a judgement (that has crucified an innocent man) overturned upon appeal, with or without additional evidence.
"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: 1266
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Sat Nov 07, 2020 8:23 pm

Thank you Justintime for your well reasoned explanation of that idiot