The Lawsuits Thread

Discuss the latest Johnny Depp news, his career, past and future projects, and other related issues.
User avatar
Judymac
Posts: 599
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Judymac » Sun Mar 21, 2021 6:11 pm

AdeleAgain wrote:
Sun Mar 21, 2021 6:52 am
I have to say I find it amazing that The Washington Post does get off totally free on this. They allowed her/the ACLU to use their platform and their name. They lent the entire thing their credibility.
They get off because they printed an opinion piece by Amber Heard. Because it is only Amber Heard's opinion they don't have to do any fact checking and they are not held liable. I am positive that when they printed it they had a disclaimer that it was an opinion and it does not necessarily reflect the views of WaPo. Newspapers put that in opinion pieces and letters to the editor so they are not held liable for the opinions of others.

User avatar
Judymac
Posts: 599
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Judymac » Sun Mar 21, 2021 7:00 pm

Inquiring Minds wrote:
Sun Mar 21, 2021 7:20 am
AdeleAgain wrote:

I have to say I find it amazing that The Washington Post does get off totally free on this. They allowed her/the ACLU to use their platform and their name. They lent the entire thing their credibility.
I'm guessing it's some form of safe harbour protection - something that is probably better kept imo. But I'm betting WaPo ran it by their lawyers first, directly advocating or inciting a crime, act of terror etc - even if by an independent, non-staff writer probably wouldn't be immune. Regardless, I think they were probably walking a very fine line. Anything to sell papers, get clicks etc.
WaPo published and opinion piece by Amber Heard. The OP in OP-Ed stands for opinion. Since it is only Amber Heard's opinion they are not liable for anything she says. It is the same for people who write letters to the editor. The newspaper is publishing the thoughts of people (who do not work for them) so they are not liable for content. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are protected by the First Amendment. The protection that a person (like Johnny Depp) has is to file a civil suit. The civil suit will go to the truthfulness of what Amber Heard said and also to whether she committed defamation.

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1564
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sun Mar 21, 2021 8:21 pm

My recollection is that the ex had a friend in the ACLU (or maybe EM had one) with connections to the WAPO. I think it would be interesting if JD's team subpoenaed the WAPO about this.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
RumLover
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 5:02 am
Location: Sydney, AUS
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by RumLover » Sun Mar 21, 2021 10:20 pm

Previously, I had thought Heard had not given much information on her ACLU contact or writing the op-ed.
But she did give names in a VA declaration. From last pages of
09/05/2019 Defendant's Motion for Leave to File Amended Responsive Pleading.

3. Anthony Romero, the executive director of the ACLU, introduced me to Jessica Weitz, who in turn suggested the idea that I might write an Op-ed about how my own experience exemplifies the issues faced by those who speak out about abuse and violence,

4. Over the next few days and weeks, I worked on the phone and by email with Jessica and Robin Shulman, a Communications Strategist at the ACLU, to draft an Op-ed that would explain how victims are often intimidated by institutions and social dynamics that protect abusers, and that these dynamics cause people to question victims who report violence.

5. Throughout the process, Jessica told me that the ACLU would handle the placement of the Op-ed in a newspaper. Based on the understanding that newspapers usually write the headline for any Op-ed, I did not write a headline for the Op-ed, nor did Jessica or Robin
suggest one to me.

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1564
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:37 am

RumLover wrote:
Sun Mar 21, 2021 10:20 pm
Previously, I had thought Heard had not given much information on her ACLU contact or writing the op-ed.
But she did give names in a VA declaration. From last pages of
09/05/2019 Defendant's Motion for Leave to File Amended Responsive Pleading.

3. Anthony Romero, the executive director of the ACLU, introduced me to Jessica Weitz, who in turn suggested the idea that I might write an Op-ed about how my own experience exemplifies the issues faced by those who speak out about abuse and violence,

4. Over the next few days and weeks, I worked on the phone and by email with Jessica and Robin Shulman, a Communications Strategist at the ACLU, to draft an Op-ed that would explain how victims are often intimidated by institutions and social dynamics that protect abusers, and that these dynamics cause people to question victims who report violence.

5. Throughout the process, Jessica told me that the ACLU would handle the placement of the Op-ed in a newspaper. Based on the understanding that newspapers usually write the headline for any Op-ed, I did not write a headline for the Op-ed, nor did Jessica or Robin
suggest one to me.
So if I'm getting this right, she threw ACLU under the bus which does not surprise me.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
Judymac
Posts: 599
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 6:23 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Judymac » Mon Mar 22, 2021 6:53 am

ForeverYoung wrote:
Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:37 am
RumLover wrote:
Sun Mar 21, 2021 10:20 pm
Previously, I had thought Heard had not given much information on her ACLU contact or writing the op-ed.
But she did give names in a VA declaration. From last pages of
09/05/2019 Defendant's Motion for Leave to File Amended Responsive Pleading.

3. Anthony Romero, the executive director of the ACLU, introduced me to Jessica Weitz, who in turn suggested the idea that I might write an Op-ed about how my own experience exemplifies the issues faced by those who speak out about abuse and violence,

4. Over the next few days and weeks, I worked on the phone and by email with Jessica and Robin Shulman, a Communications Strategist at the ACLU, to draft an Op-ed that would explain how victims are often intimidated by institutions and social dynamics that protect abusers, and that these dynamics cause people to question victims who report violence.

5. Throughout the process, Jessica told me that the ACLU would handle the placement of the Op-ed in a newspaper. Based on the understanding that newspapers usually write the headline for any Op-ed, I did not write a headline for the Op-ed, nor did Jessica or Robin
suggest one to me.
So if I'm getting this right, she threw ACLU under the bus which does not surprise me.
She will never accept responsibility for her actions or words. The OpEd was in her name only, she is the one responsible for the content. I believe that people from the ACLU probably helped her write the piece. However, she took credit for the article when it was published, now she can face the repercussions.

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1406
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Tue Mar 23, 2021 8:25 am

It is such a massive pattern that nothing is her fault. She stated she is paying for her friends lawyers because Depp team is so aggressive

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 1564
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Tue Mar 23, 2021 2:16 pm

What a piece of work. I can't wait for the day whoever is paying her legal bills is exposed because that would mean all those persons' legal fees were not getting paid by her. I would love to see the check to John Drew's legal counsel for their fees.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

Inquiring Minds
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:41 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Inquiring Minds » Tue Mar 23, 2021 6:11 pm

I've just been watching The Australian Story profile piece on Jenn Robinson. I'm only a few mins in and am fuming. They had the gall to open the program with a testimonial from Amber Heard. By 2 mins in they had something from Kathy Lette, and at 2:08 there was a party. I thought at first this may have been the notorious mid-trial party, but I doubt it (probably a set up done recently for the biopic).

Of the guests there, I see Kathy again. I don't recognise any of the others there, but maybe some zoners do. I'm not sure if there will be anything of use in there, but Deppheads are very good at extracting evidence from minutiae.

I've included the youtube link so you can mark it down. It should contain a trigger warning imo. Strangely, comments have been disabled.....

Inquiring Minds
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:41 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Inquiring Minds » Tue Mar 23, 2021 8:15 pm

After the opening comments on Johnny and the endorsement by AH, there isn't much (if anything) on JD until 17:33. At 18:26 Robinson passes the lie/misdirection by describing AH as:
a woman who has got a restraining order in respect of domestic violence allegations
Use of tense implies the RO is current, but she could argue she really meant:
a woman who has got a restraining order in respect of domestic violence allegations [back in 2016 that was subsequently withdrawn and was told never to present the allegations in a CA court again, and is now being sued in VA for using these false allegations to extort money as part of a fraud and hoax]
There are other comments that offend me, especially when revealing her own hypocrisy regarding her defense of AH, but I will not labour the issue. I am convinced she was aware of the donations lies well before they were swept under the carpet at trial.

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1406
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Wed Mar 24, 2021 7:43 am

UK appeal judgement tomorrow morning

AdeleAgain
Posts: 1038
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 8:06 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by AdeleAgain » Wed Mar 24, 2021 10:01 am

Thanks Lbock it is almost worse knowing when it is coming than having to keep checking.

At least getting to here has been relatively quick. And if it is a no then it is the end of the line in the UK. Manifestly unfair if they do not allow an appeal hearing but after November's judgement my faith in the system has been shattered.

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 1406
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Wed Mar 24, 2021 10:03 am

I so hope it goes his way.

Granna
Posts: 258
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2019 12:44 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Granna » Wed Mar 24, 2021 10:40 am

After watching the live stream last Thursday, I do have more confidence that the appeal will be approved. Wass & Co., really didn't bring anything to the table. The new evidence and points chosen from Team Depp were on point. I can't recall what Team Depp was referring to, but Justice Underhill asked the barrister for JD's team if he thought that Justice Nicol had this information at the time he made his judgment. When the Barrister said yes he was sure that the Justice had , Underhill and the other Justice just looked at each other with a little bit of astonishment. There were several points that Team Depp brought up that Justice Underhill was making several notes and was a little floored that this information was in the bundles. As Justice Underhill stated in his closing remarks, that the answer would be handwritten and come down shortly because of the seriousness of the matter. The fact that he and the other Justice read all of the information, cutting Wass short, and clarification asked of Team Depp I believe Justice will be served this time. Let's keep the faith. Hopefully, all that believe in justice, will be standing on right side of the roaring rapids, with our gentleman.

justintime
Posts: 1902
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Wed Mar 24, 2021 11:40 am

Thank you, Granna, for those seeds of positivity for us to chew on till tomorrow. You are a dear. I can hear the clocks in my house ticking the seconds away - much too slowly. Enough time, though, for a few more earnest pleas to be sent upward ...
"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