The Lawsuits Thread

[Judymac]

You are only seeing their side of the story. Please wait until you hear the closing arguments by Johnny's barrister's. I have read all of the testimony and I think it looks very good for Johnny.

[Justme]

Yeah, now I know who said this and I think it looks very good for him. It only shows how delusional and pathetic team Heard is.

[justintime]

After reading through most of the 198(?) pages of twisted truths and complete fabrications I’m going to rely on the words of wisdom and comfort below, written in the wee hours this a.m.:

....Today will be horrific and the headlines will follow but tomorrow will be poetic. If you do follow along and read up tonight, remember a good British barrister could convince you of anything - luckily this is decided on points of law which the judge knows intimately and not on fancy, diverting words. And gloriously David Sherborne has the chance to counter anything worthwhile the NGN QCs have come up with tomorrow....

Thank you, AdeleAgain. Maybe Johnny saw your post, as well . . .

[meeps]

Maybe this can help a bit

[AdeleAgain]

A pleasure - I actually don't think I'll read it - I read their written closing summary and honestly, all they have is incomplete out of context snippets or suggestions. No actual evidence that JD beat her. I could have taken it apart - indeed anyone of us could.

I thought this was an interesting point (ok, I've seen a few bits on twitter) the judge said today that IF (and he stressed if) JD could only be shown to have been violent towards her in defending himself, then that would not help the defendants prove their case, eg NGN cannot rely on the claim that he 'head butted' her if it can be shown, or if it seems reasonable, that this was the result of his defending himself. He said all of this in the context of asking about violence conducted by her on him.

So I think that's incredibly helpful - he twice owns up to throwing a can at her after she'd thrown loads of stuff in Australia and in the other audio says "I pushed you" when she claims he hit back.

It also puts into context where he says things like "there can be no more physical violence on each other" or however he phrased it. Because I've always had the sense that anytime he had to push or hold her back, he would have felt awful about himself and blamed himself.

I am looking forward to David Sherborne's poetry tomorrow.

And check this out - now this is how to deal with her - no booing, this will have irritated her far more - apparently it's not added onto the footage - this was actually blaring out.

[reindeermoon]

Hello to all of you. I must admit I came here just to read and was a lot on twitter. But I think it might be interesting that the Sun's side wanted Depps side to speak on Monday and they could listen to it and then be on on Tuesday. But Sherborne just said that it is a long tradition that the defendant goes first. The Suns lawyer wanted to hear Johnnys side to twist it. Now Sherborne has his time tomorrow. The media is just covering her side, even here in Switzerland. I do hope the judge is a good one.
Now we might have to wait till the end of September. I do wish a good time and patience to all of you. I know that I will be nervous.

[stroch]

I read somewhere on Twitter that the judge wrote a book with the ex husband of Amber's angles party giver, and was the mentor and teacher of the lawyer of AH. Just tossing it out , no source given. I can't open the Nick docs on my phone, laptop died, so here and Twitter is all I have for info. Nervous wreck.

[nebraska]

The only thing is that this is a case against the newspaper, so it doesn't matter if she lied, it only matters if they had cause to believe her when they published their story. I am not sure how much further investigation they would be required to do. In order for it to be libelous would they have to think she was lying but published it anyway? Or would it be libelous if they didn't investigate far enough to verify her story?

[Lbock]

All of your posts have been inciteful.

Anyway, it is so easy to twist Johnny's texts in many ways.
1) He has learned not to call her out directly, he starts to say her fault, then our fault, or if I did

2) Much of what Wass is trying to say Johnny admits to harming her, he refers to violence=argument, or physicality=he threw something back, or pushed her to leave, or accidentally knocked her head.

3) There are credibility issues on both sides with correcting mistakes after they other side filed - like with the painting argument dates, and the mix up somehow of Sean's photo, and whatever actually happened on the plane.

4) It's not about drugs or alcohol, but its about drugs or alcohol. As far as the plane, Johnny was drinking before and on the plane. If you read his text to Paul (obviously an exageration, he cannot drink 1,000 red bulls alone, yet with vodka) he said what he did was the night prior - he was probably suffering from a terrible hangover and put him in a bad gloomy mood (Drank all night before I picked Amber (Heard)). After a verb al argument and the attempted tap on her bottom, he locked himself in the bathroom. He may have taken booze in there, Stephen came back to talk to him and could have given some more. If he was in pain and sick in there, it was not violent abuse toward Amber.

5) And when he refers to "i went to far in the fight" etc. I believe he is saying, I should have walked away sooner. I stayed to long. As in the text to Kipper, "I knew better to get into it with her"

[justintime]

I read somewhere on Twitter that the judge wrote a book with the ex husband of Amber's angles party giver, and was the mentor and teacher of the lawyer of AH. Just tossing it out , no source given. I can't open the Nick docs on my phone, laptop died, so here and Twitter is all I have for info. Nervous wreck.

I think this second paragraph (Odette’s) is what you may have come across, stroch:


So sorry, I just don’t know how to clean this up properly without deleting the whole thing .

Thank you, Laura B and Odette.

---------
I cleaned it up for you
~Theresa

[AdeleAgain]

Nebraska: my understanding is that it doesn't work that way. NGN has relied on a truthful defence ie that the story was true. If you could get away with saying "terribly sorry I thought at the time it was true" - then anyone could publish anything and there would be no libel I guess because everyone would say that.

I hope that the argument can be made we all loosely use words, exaggerate, things get taken out of context. You are right there was a mistake on JD's side over the Sean Bett photograph but that seems of a different magnitude to AH's mistakes. Sean got a real picture but the wrong date. Didn't matter because it was already established that there were incidents on both dates. AH did something quite different - she told a story to conveniently fit some 'evidence' she thought she had. But oh whoops, wrong date. Ok maybe, maybe you can see that would happen - but her sister just so happened to make exactly the same mistake?

And then the painting - oh no it was two paintings. And once again her sister, entirely independently because they absolutely didn't collude, made the same mistake.

Lost Beyond Pluto made another video on AH and her witnesses but to me she missed out the big red flags of this whole case - (1) the was she or wasn't she there when the finger severed. This isn't some picture being argued over, this is her own words repeatedly contradicting herself. (2) an entirely different story over the hitting him in the head with the door - completely different to the one she told on camera in original deposition.

I am so sorry for coming on here every night (and morning and afternoon) and ranting but I am so frustrated that the entire thing wasn't stopped right there and then. She told two different stories about the same incident both times under oath. This wasn't an exaggeration or more detailed account - it was entirely different. And she can sit there and say black is white.

Whatever else the judge thinks he has to conclude that she has lied and messed around with evidence/dates. And he has to have seen something of what she is like from her being on the stand - maddening not to be able to see her - but read her answers, shut your eyes and you can see it right?

[justintime]

Don’t stop, please. You are infusing much needed bits of clarity into a multitude of tangled questions in my mind!

[Lbock]

I am so sorry for coming on here every night (and morning and afternoon) and ranting but I am so frustrated that the entire thing wasn't stopped right there and then. She told two different stories about the same incident both times under oath. This wasn't an exaggeration or more detailed account - it was entirely different. And she can sit there and say black is white.

Whatever else the judge thinks he has to conclude that she has lied and messed around with evidence/dates. And he has to have seen something of what she is like from her being on the stand - maddening not to be able to see her - but read her answers, shut your eyes and you can see it right?

Completely agree. I pray David Sherborn is as good as he reputation says - he needs to hit a home run tomorrow. I saw at the end of the transcript, he seemed to be trying to get more time, that he had too much for one day, but the judge wasn't budging.

[RumLover]

I think many of the top legal people know each other. That doesn't mean there is a conspiracy among them.
I think it more likely that Amber's PR arranged with AH's lawyer to have have Amber attend Kathy Lette's party as Jen Robinson's guest.
Kathy Lette denied the article.

[justintime]

Thank you, Theresa.