The Lawsuits Thread

[ForeverYoung]

Next week, the ex's testimony will wrap up and then they will calling the sister, Ellen Barkin and JD. Why Ellen Barkin, I have no idea because as far as I know she said that JD was a jealous person and threw a bottle but he did not abuse her and she can't change her story now, but I hear that she is bitter because JD dumped her when he started dating Kate Moss.

Let's see if the sister lies again.

https://ew.com/celebrity/ellen-barkin-a ... ion-trial/

[Judymac]

Ellen Barkin, a washed up celebrity who briefly dated Johnny Depp many years ago. I thought Whitney was not going to testify? We will see after AH's cross examination, who wants to get up on the witness stand and lie.

[Granna]

Barkin has done some questionable things concerning her ex. Putting her on the stand might be more damning than good. As far as Whitney is concerned, it was stated she did not finish her depo. I wonder if the judge gave it a thumbs up with the understanding Team Depp was given some special time/approach to the cross.

[AdeleAgain]

Where has the Whitney and Ellen Barkin story come from? Because I am not sure AH wants Ellen Barkin testifying - surely if the parties can call in exes to discuss previous behaviour- JD can bring up Tasya. Then again maybe AH's DV arrest and Tasya are already in because of the Kate Moss comment - so AH may as well throw in Ellen Barkin. Strikes me as absolutely desperate. And on Whitney - the last we heard was that her testimony was contested because she had not completed her deposition. So this info may not be accurate.

I wish I could get a lawyer to give a comprehensive view on what the Kate Moss comment and Ben's reaction really means - they seem divided as to whether it means Kate can now testify or that JD's side can bring in the DV arrest.

I would have thought JD's side want the latter. Is Kate really going to testify - and would they want her to? It will only bring up the trashed hotel room and the fact they clearly had a volatile relationship. Does she really want to get involved in this? She has said nice things about him in the past but seems to me she has kept well out of it for a long time.

[Judymac]

Where has the Whitney and Ellen Barkin story come from? Because I am not sure AH wants Ellen Barkin testifying - surely if the parties can call in exes to discuss previous behaviour- JD can bring up Tasya. Then again maybe AH's DV arrest and Tasya are already in because of the Kate Moss comment - so AH may as well throw in Ellen Barkin. Strikes me as absolutely desperate. And on Whitney - the last we heard was that her testimony was contested because she had not completed her deposition. So this info may not be accurate.

I wish I could get a lawyer to give a comprehensive view on what the Kate Moss comment and Ben's reaction really means - they seem divided as to whether it means Kate can now testify or that JD's side can bring in the DV arrest.

I would have thought JD's side want the latter. Is Kate really going to testify - and would they want her to? It will only bring up the trashed hotel room and the fact they clearly had a volatile relationship. Does she really want to get involved in this? She has said nice things about him in the past but seems to me she has kept well out of it for a long time.

My take on this is that Benjamin Chew was excited because they can bring up AH's prior domestic violence with Taysa Van Ree.

I have looked at the Fairfax County Court website and Kate Moss is not listed as a witness. Nobody gets to just bring in a surprise witness. Perhaps "they" are getting her ready during this break.

People keep saying that "they" are going to bring in Kate Moss, but nobody says who "they" is.
Johnny's side could have brought in Kate Moss, or Winona Ryder, or Vanessa Paradis any of his old girlfriends as character witnesses in his case in chief. Johnny's team did NOT need AH to mention Kate Moss in order for Johnny's side to bring her in as a witness. If AH's side brings in Kate Moss (as a witness) then they better be sure of what she is going say. You never bring in a witness and ask them a question unless you know exactly what the witness is going to say. It would be foolish for them to bring in Kate Moss unless they know exactly what happened on the stairs. It could backfire on them. Also, every witness gets to be cross examined by the other side. Johnny's team has to be careful that they do not run out of time. If they think that it is necessary, they could bring her in briefly to refute what happened on the stairs. IMO, the *importance* of AH's statement did not have anything to do with Kate Moss and everything to do with Taysa Van Ree. AH in her smug arrogance thought she was getting in some low blows against Johnny and she opened her self up for questioning about prior DV.

I am not a lawyer. US law has been my hobby for the past 10 years.

[AdeleAgain]

Thank you JudyMac I agree if this means anything it is to do with the DV arrest. I watched a lawyer on YouTube this morning talking about Dr Hughes cross examination and she said that it appeared JD's were trying to get the DV arrest in then and that they were at the bench but weren't allowed. That's interesting if true because I've seen alot of criticism of that cross examination for failing to bring in Tasya.

To me there was another moment AH mentioned which is relevant to Tasya - when she said "I know you can't hit a woman".

Well it is going to be an interesting week, do hope Camille or whoever is doing the cross has had some good rest. If it is Camille - she has been on this case for so long she should know every aspect of the evidence intimately. I also love her gentle soft demeanour - going to irritate the heck out of AH.

[DannyPlaysPoker]

I have spent many hours following the Virginia case. I wasn't following this before, until the trial started. I've been catching up about Amber Heard, about the highlights of 2015-2016, the timeline, the time of the fingertip being cut off in Australia, when exactly was the restraining order, etc. I have kind of a 'man in the street' perspective, in that years went by where I didn't really have any knowledge of this whole Johnny Depp-Amber Heard thing. I recall, years ago, seeing the video of Johnny Depp flailing at a kitchen cabinet, and pouring himself a 'mega pint' of wine. Anyways, now I am amazed and totally engrossed. It seems to me that Johnny has a substantive case, that Amber Heard is truly a piece of work, and is now telling such outrageous stories from the stand, these last few days of the trial, that she seems deranged.

I see, up this thread, mention here of the New York Times front page: 'this article on the front page of the New York Times this morning (5/09/22)'

So the mainstream press, it seems, includes some stuff that is hardly making out that Johnny Depp has a case, or that Amber Heard, in my words, seems deranged. Maybe I'm biased? Well, maybe, though I would think it obvious that Amber Heard has been caught in a number of lies, and also that her lawyers have made horrible mistakes, seeming like clowns. These points seem so obviously true to me, that I think the mainstream press will have to catch on. It's true, after all, that I've given this a lot of my time. A closer look at this New York Times piece reveals it to be utterly dippy -- Jessica Bennett, oof. Maybe my idea of utterly dippy is somebody else's idea of punchy or something, but come to think of it, there is nothing ever on any op-ed page that I wouldn't be scoffing at. So, she teaches journalism at New York University. The author of “Feminist Fight Club” and “This Is 18.” Well, I'm just taking all this in for the first time. The phenonenon of people placing material on opinion pages of newspapers, I attend to this more closely since looking at how the ACLU got involved in this, as came out in the Depp-Heard trial. Oof.

It's not like I have to worry for Johnny Depp's press -- I see all the stuff on YouTube, Joe Rogan, really hilarious and voluminous stuff on TikTok. And I *see* what is going on in the trial. But I pause to reflect on the state of the mainstream media, how will this play out?

Further up this thread I find this remark: 'I sincerely doubt that there will be a day where main stream media supports Johnny Depp.'

It seems to me that Amber Heard has, quite unnecessarily, made herself impossible to believe, even for folks who are not tracking closely on the evidence. There is compelling evidence, but you have to want to go through it. The alternative is to just superficially try to judge what the story is here -- 'she looks like an innocent sort, poor girl'. But now she has told these outrageous macabre tales of blood everywhere, of being pulled naked through glass by the hair, of being violated w/a broken bottle. Not to belabor the point -- just, take a step back, is it possible to believe? The question is no longer 'do I believe him or her?' Instead, the question is whether this is remotely possible to believe. It's not simply the slips on Amber Heard's part, like the funny one where she took a bunch of sleeping pills, or not not a bunch, but two, and that's a lot for her! Yeah I caught that, and the whole 'I would never! I would NEVER!' when she was asked about her experience with taking MDMA. Right, and we can debate when the affairs with James Franco ('I had nothing but fun w/her') and Elon Musk started because she would never, but at this point, what does it take to believe all of Amber Heard's stories? Assaulted with a glass bottle? This comes out now? Amber Heard would have to be black and blue, with all the teeth kicked right out of her head, if half of this stuff was true, though of course, she has no evidence for any of it.

Point is, does the mainstream media catch on, with just a bit of delay? She's fake beginning to end. It doesn't take much critical thinking at this point to be coming to a screeching halt if you wanted to suppose that no, this girl ain't messed up in the head, this makes sense, I buy it..

Also up the thread there is discussion of this:

'I wish I could get a lawyer to give a comprehensive view on what the Kate Moss comment and Ben's reaction really means - they seem divided as to whether it means Kate can now testify or that JD's side can bring in the DV arrest.'

Of course I saw this too, and get that public reaction to the celebration has been huge -- where 'the celebration' is Johnny's lawyer, turning to his co-workers and exclaiming "Yes!" Note that also, some have claimed to read Ben's lips here as next stating: "Don't react. This is perfect!" Or that is, whispering something to Depp.

I wonder why Amber Heard would be sticking to this thing about how Johnny supposedly pushed Kate Moss down the stairs. Of course I say that she is now seeming deranged, so that's one reason. I call it 'sticking to this thing', because it came up during the 2020 UK libel trial, that Amber Heard supposedly heard this from people. But I just mention this to get into the minutiae, while we wait for next week. Does this business of the stairs, count as a 'very real rumor'? I think Depp and Kate Moss, their relationship is one that I vaguely recall as having been tumultuous. This takes us back to the mid-90s. But this 'stairs' business, is it an old news item? It's now over two decades after their split. What is up with this claim, this allegation?

[Judymac]

Thank you JudyMac I agree if this means anything it is to do with the DV arrest. I watched a lawyer on YouTube this morning talking about Dr Hughes cross examination and she said that it appeared JD's were trying to get the DV arrest in then and that they were at the bench but weren't allowed. That's interesting if true because I've seen alot of criticism of that cross examination for failing to bring in Tasya.

To me there was another moment AH mentioned which is relevant to Tasya - when she said "I know you can't hit a woman".

Well it is going to be an interesting week, do hope Camille or whoever is doing the cross has had some good rest. If it is Camille - she has been on this case for so long she should know every aspect of the evidence intimately. I also love her gentle soft demeanour - going to irritate the heck out of AH.

I like Camille, too.

It did not seem like Johnny's side was going to bring up prior DV. That is why they did not bring in Tasya. Also, they might think that she still has some loyalty to AH. It would be a disaster if Johnny's side, brought her in and she minimized the DV arrest and said good things about AH. It was significant that AH brought up prior DV. You can only cross examine a witness on subjects that were brought up in direct examination. Dr. Hughes testimony might have been (intentionally) vague so that specific instances (AH's prior arrest) could not be brought in. AH opened up the subject of prior DV.


Ellen Barkin is on AH's witness list that she submitted to the court back in March. AH's side seems determined to bring in prior DV by Johnny. It does not seem like AH's lawyers realize that they are opening the door for Johnny's side to do the same. So, AH's lawyers are going to bring in a former girlfriend to testify about DV, but they did not call Kate Moss. They are choosing to call someone who dated Johnny for a very short time instead of someone who was a significant person in his life. That goes back to the idea that you never bring in a witness unless you know what they are going to say. My guess is that Kate would say that Johnny never pushed her down the stairs and that he was a loving partner. Johnny dated quite a few women in his life. I would say the significant women in his life were Lori Allison, Winona Ryder, Kate Moss and Vanessa Paradis. It is funny that they could only get Ellen Barkin to testify.

Sorry for the rambling!

[nebraska]

I don't think it matters if Kate Moss was pushed down the stairs or not and her testimony probably wouldn't matter. All that matters is what Amber said she thought/believed at the time. It's a total non sequitur. One does not inform the other.

[Lbock]

I am sorry I’ve been away. I was exhausted from attending the trail and then I’ve been following up with all the legal commentators

I don’t see how they can bring Kate Moss she’s not an American resident they can’t force her, she wouldnt volunteer and would just be inundated with drug questions that makes no sense. But it is possible I can use it to open the door I’m prior relationships. Or just the fact that she’s lying about Kate Moss because she lies about everything. And now she’s using the jury To perpetuate her lies it’s a performance

[ForeverYoung]

Speaking of performance - Last night I saw a Tic Toc video of her little show on the stand talking about her dog stepping on a bee. I have no idea how that has anything to do with her testimony or JD. So, I guess it's his fault her dog stepped on a bee?
She tried to make it look like she wanted to cry but of course, it was just another bad acting job for the jury.

Anyway, the video is pretty funny. I have heard that her team is trying to get these videos blocked but it doesn't seem to be working.
What I saw last night was a good laugh.

[Someareborn]

I am starting to feel sorry for AH...she manourvered herself into an ugly corner for years now and nobody helped her. If Dr. Curry is correct with her diagnosis, why didn't her friends help her?

I think the behaviour panel on YouTube analysed her body language on the stand very well. They pointed out that she might have felt insecure and small, and that JD possibly made her feel this way. And I can imagine it to be true, especially considering that he was the experienced actor in his 50s and she a little known 20-something year old actress. I don't think she deserves all the hate she gets but she needs to be held accountable for the violence and get help. Soon.
No need to make extra fun of her.

I don't think Kate Moss will testify, better to not feed the celebrity aspect of the trial. It would only feed the narrative that JD as a powerful white male has more valuable witnesses and therefore should be believed. As mentioned before I would prefer the DV arrest.

Can someone refer me to a good cross exam? What different strategies are possible? What makes a cross a good cross?

[Granna]

Someareborn: I agree to a point. As stated JD is in his 50's & she was in her 20's. Insecure, but only to a point. There are too many other actors and actresses who has stated that JD has gone out of his way to help them with their careers. They listen to what he has to say and what he has to offer. He has stated that in his testimony that her style of dress, some of the roles that she chose were questionable. Giving the category if sex object. To succeed in this industry you must put forth an effort to prove that you are a good actor. She wanted to take the shortcut by wearing revealing clothes, bit-part nudity and that is what she is known for. She did not want to put in the time or the effort or pay her dues to become as a established and loved as JD. She made her choice of taking the easy way out, to make herself a name. She is over 21, she's old enough to know better, it was her choice.

[ForeverYoung]

I'm sorry but I don't feel sorry for her. Not now, not ever. It's because of her that JD has left Hollywood. She ruined his life, reputation and his career on lies all because he would not give into her demands. She was setting him up for years keeping old staged photos of fake injuries and him sleeping. She deserves every bit of backlash she can get because she is pure evil who uses people for whatever she can get and takes hissy fits when things go her way. She is an abusive and I hope we never have to see her face again.

[Judymac]

I'm sorry but I don't feel sorry for her. Not now, not ever. It's because of her that JD has left Hollywood. She ruined his life, reputation and his career on lies all because he would not give into her demands. She was setting him up for years keeping old staged photos of fake injuries and him sleeping. She deserves every bit of backlash she can get because she is pure evil who uses people for whatever she can get and takes hissy fits when things go her way. She is an abusive and I hope we never have to see her face again.