Johnny DEPP v Amber HEARD (The Sun UK)- Will Johnny Win His Libel Claim?

hi everyone welcome back to my channel thank you so much for stopping by for those of you who don't know I am a lawyer by profession and in this video we will be looking into Johnny Depp's libel case against the Sun newspaper in the UK specifically I'll be sharing with you the structure of a libel case so what each party has to prove in order to win their case and the issues that a court will take into consideration when arriving at a final decision the first step is to look at the source off the claim in this case it is an article published by the Sun newspaper in the UK written by Dan Wooten if that's how you pronounce his last name he is the second named defendant in this case the online version of the article was published on the 27th of April 2018 and it was published in print a day later the headline of the article reads how can JK Rowling be genuinely happy to cast wife-beater depp in film and the word wife-beater in reference to Johnny Depp is the main issue in this case so what is libel libel is a permanent form of defamation so I'll first explain to you what defamation is before we understand what libel is defamation is the publication of a false statement that is likely to cause or has indeed caused serious harm to an individual's reputation in the UK a distinction is drawn between permanent and more temporary forms of defamation libel is the permanent form where a slander is a temporary form an example of slander is a defamatory speech so verbal spoken words and an example of libel is the article in question so a written form of defamation however it's not restricted to just written form a video can also be a form of libel in the UK the burden of proof and defamation cases shifts from claimant to defendant so initially the claimant being Johnny Depp in this case has the burden of proving that the defamatory statement has caused him or is likely to cause him serious harm to his reputation the onus then shifts on to the defendants to prove that the statements are indeed true because truth as you will see is an absolute defense to defamation as defamation is a civil case the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities meaning that the court needs to be at least 51% sure that the claimants allegations are true this differs from the criminal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt which is an incredibly high standard to meet however Johnny's legal team argued that because johnny has been alleged to have committed a crime physical assault is a crime after all then there is a presumption of innocence that usually applies in criminal cases but also applies in civil cases where the claimant has been accused of criminal conduct in such situations the evidence presented by the defendants must be cogent or compelling in order to rebut this presumption of innocence and prove guilt on Johnny's part in order to prove defamation three main elements must be satisfied firstly publication which in this case is very easy to satisfy since the article was published in a national newspaper secondly the statement must be false which is the main issue in this case and thirdly that it has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the claimants reputation the court will first need to consider the natural meaning of the article now in this case both parties actually agree that the natural meaning of the article is that Johnny Depp has physically assaulted Amber Heard during their relationship on multiple occasions and so much so that he caused her to fear for her life and therefore he is not fit to continue to work as an actor in Hollywood the defendants have even gone so far as to compare him to Harvey Weinstein since the meaning of the article is agreed upon I don't anticipate that there will be much debate about it in court so we can move on to the next issue that the court will consider which is that of serious harm as I mentioned the onus is on Johnny to prove this element now when you consider the fact that he's being accused of physically assaulting his own wife it's not difficult to argue that this has the potential to seriously harm his reputation as an actor and even as a public personality separate from his acting and in the midst of the me2 movement where this issue of violence against women has become such an important and dominant issue in Hollywood and in the world it really won't take much to argue how this article could have a devastating effect on Johnny Depp's career furthermore his career has already suffered drastically at least initially when Amber's allegations first surfaced and when the evidence that support Johnny still hadn't come to light people had already started to boycott Johnny's movies as a direct result of Amber's allegations so it's no longer a hypothetical situation it can already be demonstrated that such content has the potential and has indeed had a devastating or negative effect on Johnny's reputation so I believe that he won't have many issues with proving the serious harm element the next issue and most importantly is whether the allegations are substantially true section 2 of the defamation Act 2013 states that it is a defense to an action for defamation for the defendant to show that the imputation conveyed by the statement complained of is substantially true and this can be met by simply showing that the gist of the article or the gist of the statement is substantially true so not every single allegation mentioned needs to meet this requirement so the defendants in this case have argued that even if one incident of physical assault can be proven as true then that would be enough to satisfy the defense of substantial truth in the same vein Johnny's team claims that if amber is found to have invented any of the allegations then it is inherently unlikely that her other allegations are true now if you don't know already I have two videos each over half an hour long in which I painstakingly go through each and every one of Amber's allegations against Johnny and either disprove them by using opposing evidence or demonstrate how weak they are due to a complete lack of supporting evidence on her part so she's just giving us her word I also have a third video in which I once again use evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Johnny was the one who was indeed physically assaulted and a victim of domestic violence at the hands of Amber Heard throughout their relationship when you consider these three videos in tandem or all the evidence discussed in these videos it becomes overwhelmingly clear that Amber's allegations have no basis whatsoever and that she is indeed making false claims against Johnny and then add on top of that the fact that not only is she lying but she was the one who was actually physically abusive towards Johnny so because I do have these three extremely detailed and thorough videos on the topic I won't be rehashing anything here that would demonstrate why the defense of substantial truth should fail I also want to mention that amber was completely fine with being alone with Johnny and even begged him for a hug in July of 2016 in San Francisco when the temporary restraining order that she took out against Johnny was still active johnny was the one who called her nuts and refused to touch her are those really the actions of someone who has been victimized and terrorized and abused by their partner I think the answer is clear and I hope the court will see that too another defense the defamation is that of honest opinion as per Section three of the defamation Act I mentioned this because the defendants do state that they will be relying on this defense with regards to a particular section of the article the section they're referring to is where they call JK rowling a hypocrite for casting Johnny in fantastic beasts they state that this is a comment on JK rowling not Johnny but if the court was to find that it was indeed a comment on Johnny's fitness to work in the movie industry then they rely on the defense of honest opinion so basically they're just saying that it's our opinion that he's not fit to work in Hollywood we're not stating it as a matter of fact and a statement can only be defamatory if it can be shown to be false and that is only applicable to statements of fact not opinion now of course that doesn't mean you can just throw in in my opinion and then allege a fact it has to clearly be an opinion so you can't just cover yourself by using the word opinion as a guise just bear in mind in case you um everyone to publish anything defamatory against someone an example is calling someone an idiot it's your opinion you can't necessarily prove that someone is an idiot or that someone is not an idiot but saying someone is a wife-beater is a statement of fact not an opinion having said that the defendants are not claiming that it's their opinion that Johnny is a wife-beater know they're using the defense of truth for that particular statement and for all the allegations within the article the defense of honest opinion would solely be restricted to the imputation that Johnny is not fit to work in Hollywood I also want to quickly mention the available witnesses for each party Johnny's list is extensive it definitely surpasses amber's list and while Johnny's list is comprised of employees of his it also contains purely independent people such as the two police officers who responded to the call that was made on a 21st of May 2016 and the employees at the Eastern Columbia building where amber and Johnny used to live I mention this because this is in stark contrast to Amber's list of witnesses which is basically comprised of her best friends and her sister now I'm not saying that her best friends and her sister are automatically not credible witnesses because they are close to her and they're biased but that does play into it when someone is independent such as a police officer or an employee it's a lot easier to see their evidence as impartial or unbiased because they don't necessarily have any personal connection to the party that they are testifying for another thing is the fact that a lot of Johnny's witnesses namely his security guards were physically present during the fights so they directly witnessed what was going on whereas only Whitney and Raquel have actually directly witnessed anything with regards to physical fights the rest of them only know whatever amber told them so it's hearsay they never directly witnessed anything in fact even the ones who were there in the fight so Raquel Pennington for example never directly witnessed Johnny hitting amber her sister Whitney was present in March 2015 during a fight that broke out between the two and in this fight amber even admits to punching Johnny in the face in defense of her sister I talk about this in my rebuttal of Amber's evidence videos so if you're interested in knowing more about that make sure to watch them it's important to note that Johnny was in a cast because his finger had just been severed maybe a week or two ago at that point and he was in no position to punch or pull or yank anyone he couldn't even use his hand which immediately discredits Whitney and whatever it is that she's alleged in her witness statement so clearly I cannot predict the future all I can do is consider the evidence that is before me as a member of the public so there may be a lot more evidence that I am not privy to but based on the evidence that is available it is difficult for me to see how the court will be convinced that the article was substantially true judging from the first week of the trial and Johnny's testimony it seems that the defendants are hell-bent on painting him as a drug addict who loses absolute control of himself and in the midst of that abuses his partner either that or he's a pathological liar they say but it's just interesting to me that we've gone an entire week fixating on Johnny's drug use when they could have used all that time cross-examining him about Amber's allegations of physical assault in detail because it is a civil case the standard of proof isn't too high but because the onus of proof or the burden of proof shifts between the parties that means they both don't have to meet an incredibly high standard of proof so the court needs to find that on the balance of probabilities the article has caused serious harm to Johnny but then the onus shifts to the defendants as I said which means the court only needs to be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the statements are substantially true but then again comes the presumption of innocence that is being argued by Johnny's lawyers purely because he is being accused of criminal conduct so because the onus is shifting it's a double-edged sword don't forget we have tapes of her admitting that she hit him tapes of her telling him that she can't promise him she'll stop she never once accuses him of hitting her she accuses him of doing the exact opposite I hate it when you split you always split she says so he runs away and that's entirely consistent with what he says he's not confrontational he hates fights so he retreats he locks himself up in different rooms or he leaves the house or he locks himself in the bathroom she even admits to kicking the door in his face and punching him in one incident when he was hiding in the bathroom all of that evidence has been admitted into this case amongst a vast array of other evidence so when you look at it purely from that perspective it becomes difficult to see how Johnny can lose the case now I'm not saying that it is a guaranteed win because nothing is guaranteed in the law nothing it is the greatest area that I have ever come across there's always ways to argue things there's always ways to shape things to help your case and to diminish the opposing party's case and the better you are at doing that the better of a lawyer you are so that's why there's just no definitive answer and I don't want to be unnecessarily optimistic but I just struggle to see how the defendants can win this case that's it for this video I hope you found it informative and if anything I hope it puts your minds at ease and helps you understand the process that goes on in libel cases the screenshots that you see in this video of the statements made by each party have been acquired through Nick Wallace's website now he is a journalist who has been keeping us all updated with regards to this libel case he's been doing an excellent job I will link his website down below so I do want to thank Nick Wallis for doing this it's incredibly helpful and of course the entire Twitter community that has been actively following this case and sharing information this week we get into week two of the libel trial and I believe Johnnie is still on the witness stand so they're going a little bit over time I want to thank everyone out there who's been helping me keep myself updated because I have been getting a few useful links that I hadn't come across by myself so thank you so much for doing that and I really appreciate it as always let me know what you think in the comments below thank you so much for watching stay safe and I will catch you in a future video you [Music]

Channel: Lost Beyond Pluto

Views: 32,490

Rating: 4.9626389 out of 5

Keywords: johnny depp, amber heard, johnny depp amber heard audio, johnny depp amber heard fight, johnny depp amber heard recording, johnny depp amber heard court, johnny depp amber heard case, johnny depp defamation, amber heard defamation, johnny depp amber heard defamation case, johnny depp amber heard court case, johnny depp amber heard trial, johnny depp amber heard defamation trial, johnny depp amber heard abuse, johnny depp amber heard domestic violence, amber heard abuse

Id: j6T_Gh4R9yA

Length: 17min 15sec (1035 seconds)

Published: Mon Jul 13 2020