Lawyer Reacts: Johnny Depp v. The Sun UK | The Ruling | The Get Legit Podcast Episode 65

welcome to the video version of the get legit launch hit podcast full transparency this is our behind the scenes kind of of the podcast and you get to see me record it but it is definitely a different style of video than some of my others because it's a podcast episode today i'm talking about something i've been asked a lot about and i got about 10 minutes in and was like no i hate everything we're re-recording it so everything just went in the trash and now i am going to start over because i felt like i was being long-winded and that happens sometimes and for me it's just easier to re-record than try to edit it back together i'm i like to do these in a very free flow form i have an outline of course but a free flow form and really try not to repeat myself too much but i tend to do that so we're just starting over we're just starting over so i'm gonna go hit record i record this in a separate program from the audio only version so we're gonna hit record on that and then we'll hit record on this and then we'll just jump right in that's that's how i see that going in my head like right in we're gonna jump just right on in hey there i got a lot of requests to cover this particular legal case and there's a lot here so we are going to talk about all things johnny depp amber heard and the sun uk now that there is some ruling there is and it's always so much easier after ruling because there's not as much speculation the judge wrote a very very long and thorough explanation of his reasoning and i think it's helpful to jump into that talk about the surrounding circumstances and what comes next because this isn't the end of the legal stuff between johnny depp and amber heard so buckle up we're going to be here a minute i i say that every week now but there's a lot here it was over 130 pages of legal reasoning it was well laid out though so you know it wasn't spicy but it was well laid out so let's just get into it hey there this is get legit law and [ __ ] and i'm emily d baker badass lawyer for online business i've been a licensed attorney for over 15 years and i'm a former prosecutor so yeah i know some [ __ ] and we're gonna talk about the legal [ __ ] you need to know but don't worry this is not another boring business podcast so let's get started this week's episode is sponsored by the law nerd shop and as i'm recording this i am wearing my fax defined sweatshirt that says facts not [ __ ] it is your place for all your lawnerd needs stickers t-shirts sweatshirts and more coming soon we have your i love cursi words your facts not [ __ ] and all the things with as i said more coming this was designed by me and my team and i am so thrilled with how everything turned out so if you're ready to ride it dawn head over to lawnerdshop.com i've got you covered i also want to share two of the newer reviews on the podcast because i just love seeing what you have to say the podcast really opened all the doors i know a lot of you found me through my youtube channel but the podcast is really where the legal commentary meeting modern day news stories and pop culture came together to really be what you see on both the podcast and youtube today so i have so much love for the podcast because it's really where my content shifted and dialed into this space that i love so much so the first one is from mandy yes emily hell yes i like you thanks for breaking down complexities with humor and intelligence mandy i like you too and thank you for that amazing review and then from jeanette love emily discovered her on youtube and just had to check out her podcast she's phenomenal at explaining the law in simple terms and just fun to listen to thank you so much i hope this episode is fun to listen to even though it is going to be a little bit on the longer side i am going to disclaim things before we jump in because lawyer what would an episode about a sensitive topic be without a disclaimer from the attorney first of all i practice in the united states i'm licensed in california i am familiar with our federal laws the law in the uk is not my area of expertise but again the judge laid this out really well so i will be relying on the judge's statement of the law because i assume that it's a correct statement of the law and there's nothing to indicate in any of the reporting that it's not so we're going with it second this deals with a lot of very very sensitive topics with regard to domestic violence there are very explicit descriptions i'm not going to get into all of them i will get into some as they pertain to this ruling so just a fair warning there are descriptions of violence there are descriptions of injuries there are descriptions of somebody literally [ __ ] on a bed actually came up in this court case and domestic violence is something that impacts far too many lives and far too many relationships domestic violence does not just impact women it impacts men as well it impacts gay couples and straight couples it impacts fluid couples it impacts older couples wealthy couples not as wealthy couples young couples teenagers yes teenagers again yes teenagers so if anything um learning from what happened in this case talking to your kids about the fact that it doesn't matter if you're one of the biggest celebrities in the world or just them that you can find yourself in an unhealthy relationship where somebody does not treat you with the love and grace and kindness that you deserve and it doesn't matter how much you love them no relationship should hurt and that in relationships hurt is not always just physical it can't also be emotional and it can also show up in ways of control so with that said there will be domestic violence resources down in the comments below if you or a loved one ever need them do not let shame of judgment hold you back it's just it's such a hard thing it's such a hard thing to talk about because the complexities of domestic violence are something that you deal with as a district attorney something i've dealt with as a district attorney and there's a lot that goes into people finally bringing something like this to court and we have not seen a criminal case in this and i don't think that we will what we're seeing is johnny depp defending himself against defamation and in the sun case in the well in both cases they're liable because they're printed not slander which is spoken but we're seeing johnny depp defend himself against allegations in the sun case the judge found that those allegations were substantially true and we'll get into what that means and why it came up in this libel case but i couldn't jump into this without a reminder that domestic violence can happen across any age race gender orientation socioeconomic status it is something that can be pervasive and sometimes can be hard to see not only just if you're in it but if you know someone who's in it so with that let's talk about what happened over in london with johnny depp well john christopher depp ii versus news group newspapers limited which is really hard to say more than once it is the group that owns the sun uk we're going to call them the sun and then dan wooten's the author the article in question was published in 2018 the title gone potty how can jk rowling be genuinely happy casting wife beater johnny depp in the new fantastic beasts film that headline has since been altered and was re was amended to say gone potty how can jk rowling be genuinely happy casting johnny depp in the new fantastic beasts film after assault claim so those are two very different titles but the libel case comes from that first title on 27 april 2018 because again you can't put the [ __ ] back in the horse and it was said the original title was up for what looks like just about 24 hours because the amended title happened by 7 58 a.m the next day so let's do a quick background of johnny depp and amber hurd then into this case and all 103 pages of this decision but don't worry i'm going to give you the cliffs notes version we're not going to read all 130 pages it is quite a lot so for all of you that don't follow this relationship super closely i didn't either so i totally get it johnny depp and amber heard met in 2009 on the rubbin diaries they were both in other relationships at the time they both split from their other significant others in 2012 when they started dating they were married in 2015. amber filed for divorce and a temporary restraining order on may 23 2016. the incident leading up to those filings is very thoroughly detailed in this ruling by the judge after the 2016 tro was filed on august or in august 2016 there was a seven million dollar settlement reached the temporary restraining order was then resolved amber heard rescinded her request for spousal support and did not seek a permanent domestic violence restraining order prior to that those in depths camp had said that amber was attempting to secure a premature financial resolution to the divorce by alleging abuse after the seven million dollar settlement which amber heard donated to charity there was a joint statement from the couple well ex-couple at the time that said quote our relationship was intensely passionate and at times volatile but always bound by love neither party has made false accusations for financial gain there was never any intent of physical or emotional harm then in 2017 the divorce was finalized there was a non-disparagement clause signed not unusual in a divorce not unusual in any kind of settlement truly in 2018 amber heard posted an op ed in the washington post where she alludes to herself as a survivor of sexual assault and perhaps domestic violence she was then sued by johnny depp for 50 million dollars in the state of virginia then the uk public well in between the two in between the op-ed piece and the suit in virginia this gone potty article was published in the uk and johnny depp sued the sun uk for libel so the virginia defamation case is still ongoing it is a whole separate ball of worms and that has been going and is continuing to go and looks like it should be coming up for trial sometime in the beginning of 2021 according to the judge in the uk defamation case so in that case depp is suing amber heard for 50 million dollars some of the depositions that have been taken in the virginia case did come in to the sun uk case because in the sun uk case it is a defense if the statements are true so if the statement and the statement being sued for here is that headline wherein depp is called a wife beater that is what he took issue with that is the basis of this libel case and if it is proven to be substantially true which is what the judge ultimately found then the sun uk is not liable for libel so let's talk about how the judge got there and what he said about it and what the standard is anyway next steps on this the judge in this case has denied dep's side the appeal that doesn't mean the dep can't appeal to the higher court whether the higher court will grant that appeal like going directly to their appellate court will happen or not we will see but in this case the judge said you are not appeal you are not what we're not gonna do is come all up in here at my 130 page decision and appeal this [ __ ] that's not what's happening and the judge ordered johnny depp to pay about 840 000 in legal cost because when he lost he is now owing the legal costs to the sun uk that doesn't mean he can't still appeal there is one left one appeals court left that he can appeal but it would need to be on the ground that the judge aired in principle or in law and we'll see what the appeals court said johnny depp did release a statement on november 6th saying quote in light of recent events i would like to make the following short statement well yes johnny you're making this statement so we know you'd like to make a statement you know how we know you're making a statement because you're making this statement contemporaneously anyway this was posted on he posted it on his instagram and it actually wasn't like a notes app apology so i appreciate that it was an actual like typed and signed statement on like an old school typewriter so it was visually very different than what we're used to seeing at this point which is like a notes app like this happened anyway back to what he said quote firstly i'd like to thank everyone who has gifted me with their support and loyalty i have been humbled and moved by your many messages of love and concern particularly over the last few days secondly i wish to let you know that i have been asked to resign by warner brothers from my role as grindelwald in fantastic beasts and i have respected and agreed to that request he he acquiesced to their request i know i know emily are we making pirates of the caribbean joke yes we're making pirates of the caribbean jokes sorry back back to a statement quote finally i wish to say this the surreal judgment of the court in the uk will not change my fight to tell the truth and i confirm that i plan to appeal my resolve remains strong and i intend to prove that the allegations against me are false my life and career will not be defined by this moment in time thank you for reading sincerely johnny depp so that is his position that he is going to continue to fight and that these allegations are false and there are a lot of them the reason there are so many of them is because the sun is saying we relied on information regarding these incidents in making the determination about what was said so yeah there's instances of domestic violence which means when we call you a wife-beater it's because we believe you to be a wife-beater let's talk about the standard that the judge has to apply here the judge broke this down in a way that i truly think anyone could read there's a link to the full unedited from the judge decision in this case it's long sure is but i think it is very well parsed lots of people don't agree with this decision i have seen the derision online it's not uncommon of most cases involving domestic violence and sexual assault a lot of cases are met with the same how do we know she's not lying how do we know this how do we know that there are a lot of emotions with this case we are going to go through what the judge said what the judge believed and the judge's perspective on this because that's really what we're here for and how an appeals court would look at this which is did the judge misapply the law because the judge is the fact-finder in this not there's no jury the judge determines the fact so let's get let's get into the law [ __ ] the statutory defense of truth and it it hurts my poor brain the defense is spelled differently in the uk and so every time i looked at it i was like it doesn't sit right it looks the word looks wrong i don't read a lot of cases written in the uk so when things are spelled slightly differently it makes me think i'm reading something wrong you know add dyslexic problems so the defense of truth the defense of truth is defined in the defamation act of 2013 section 2 paren one which says one 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 that's basically what the judge has to decide is the statement complained of substantially true and the judge breaks down the burden of proof the burden of proof in the uk is not super different from some of the civil standards for burden of proof here i was surprised to find there are only two standards of proof and the judge broke down that there are only two standards of proof in the uk i was like oh all right i see you okay only two that's kind of nice it keeps it kind of clear the judge explains that the standard of proof is a balance of probabilities and says i.e is it more probable than not that the article was substantially true in the meaning that it bore in this case is it more likely than not that the claimant did what the articles alleged the common law knows only two standards of proof beyond a reasonable doubt like in criminal law and the balance of probabilities which in civil law means quote a court is satisfied an event occurred if the court considers on the evidence the occurrence of the event was more likely than not and the more likely the not standard plays out in the u.s as well the judge found numerous instances of domestic violence that had happened or had more likely than not happened there were very few where the judge was like i do not have enough to determine whether this instant happened there were 14 instances that the defense needed to prove so the sun needed to prove their defense not johnny depp's side johnny depp's side needed to say that's liable you can't say that i'm a wife beater and then the sun has to prove that it's more likely than not that when they said that it was true so the sun had to bring 14 i mean they didn't have to bring that many but if one gets kicked out you still need to prove you still need to prove that you had reason to believe so the son brought 14 different instances that they presented to the court saying these 14 different instances show that when we said johnny depp was a wife-beater it was more likely than not substantially true that's where we're at and the court agreed with the sun's defense which is why johnny depp has now been ordered to pay 840 000 in legal which is why when you go into something like a defamation suit knowing what the other side has knowing what you did or didn't do becomes critical to legal strategy johnny depp maintains that these are not true his side used the word hoax quite substantially quite completely quite frequently i think it's the worst that we're looking for here and the legal theory from his side seems to be that amber heard has created a vast hoax to damage johnny depp's reputation and to take him down if you will the judge did not find merit in those arguments or that theory and did find merit in amber heard's testimony in the 14 instances the judge went through each incident and pointed out what was stated by defendant the son what was stated by claimant depp what evidence the judge considered and how the judge determined that evidence to fall for each of the 14 allegations and then also for some of the ancillary allegations so when i say someone actually [ __ ] on a bed it's because it's one of the ancillary allegations that was determined by the judge in this case and was discussed in this case at length so for each of the 14 instances the judge went through and said this person said this this was presented these text messages were here this testimony was taken i find this to be convincing i find this not to be convincing the evidence i'm giving weight to is this my take away from all of it is that the judge believes truly that johnny depp has a significant substance abuse problem with both drugs and alcohol and that when those things come into play that he is abusive towards amber heard that's how this reads because every single instance when the judge goes through why he believes amber heard a lot of it gets into i find that mr depp was under the influence of drugs and alcohol and then points out inconsistent testimony and there was inconsistent testimony from johnny depp in this in instances where he was saying no i remember everything about that and then on cross-examination was like oh well i blacked part of that out so when you have the combination of drugs and alcohol plus these instances there are times when johnny depp does not seem to remember everything that happened so that i think is part of what's led to this you know is amber heard just making it all up taking advantage of the fact that he is altered and doesn't remember i don't know if that's what's leading into that argument but the judge didn't want any bit of that argument and really doesn't seem to give a lot of weight to those around depp either and a lot of the evidence that contradicts amber heard comes from depp's very close employees and the judge points out that these employees are inextricably loyal to johnny depp and so doesn't give them quite the weight that he gives to some others though some of the others he gives way to are employees of amber heard but the judge um went through why he believed some of those statements to be more credible and the surrounding evidence with them the incidents we're talking about are going all the way back to 2013 and it seems very clear that amber depp kept notes a diary and and other ways to remember these instances happening though when things happen in your life that are big like some of these i imagine that she remembers pretty well a lot of these claims are also bolstered by text messages conversations and other things so the first instant is in early 2013 in los angeles the sun is stating that at that time depp and heard were in los angeles and they were in a point at their relationship where johnny had been sober but then was started to drink and use drugs again they had a conversation about a tattoo that's later the winona ryder versus wino forever he had the tattoos that said winona forever and then changed it to wino forever and they were having a conversation about that tattoo heard according to this laughed at something that he had said and thought that he was making a joke he then slapped her in the face and slapped her in the face repeatedly and knocked her to the floor after hitting her he then cried apologized and said that he would do better but that sometimes he snaps he called the other part of his personality the monster and promised that he would never do it again for anyone familiar with domestic violence that kind of summarizes that whole circle right there in one instant dep's side responded to that saying that he does not recall ever having a conversation with amber heard about that tattoo does not know if that conversation took place he confirmed that he had been drinking wine and using marijuana in that evening and that he denied that he ever slapped her across the face and so each incident is broken out with what the son is alleging had happened what the son's alleging that they knew had happened then johnny depp's response to it and then as it gets back into the meat of this decision then it goes through what is alleged what is the evidence and how the judge determines it because going through all of that would take forever i'm going to go through these instances and then briefly talk about them and then talk about the things that the judge put quite a lot of weight into as a way to help understand that if one of these if one of these is true not even true if one of these is more likely than not to be true then that's enough to prove that the sun had um truth on their side because it's more likely than not that the instant happened and so therefore the claim that he's a wife beater is substantially true so that we're going more likely than not that it's substantially true and that's the standard this is not a criminal standard this is not a standard for civil liability this is a defense standard to show that the sun is not responsible for libeling johnny depp based on that headline that was up for a day so the second incident was what was called the painting incident on march 8 2013. amber heard's ex-wife is a artist and apparently johnny depp attempted to set fire to a painting and then there was a instant of domestic violence and later he sent her a text saying that there was actually a book called disco bloodbath and she responded is that about friday and he said something like yeah i [ __ ] love you you [ __ ] [ __ ] like that that was the response text there's a lot of that in here so it was it was it was a lot to read i'm just i'm just saying uh depp's side stated that he didn't recall whether he was at her home that he did remember that there was this painting that he never tried to set fire to it that he did in fact send that text but that doesn't indicate that the any instant of violence had happened uh the third one is from sometime in june 2013 in hicksville they were actually in a place called hicksville usa with a group of friends there was an argument that allegedly turned violent their um depp's team on that one says everybody was doing mushrooms mdma which is ecstasy and drinking quite a lot so you know things happen but they did get in an argument but it didn't get physical and they got into an argument because another woman at the party was being very handsy with miss heard and johnny depp did not appreciate that number four is a 2014 incident on a private plane flying from boston to los angeles there was a fight it escalated and got physical depp said he locked himself in the bathroom to get away from her she said the sun said she said that you know they knew that she was alleging that he went into the bathroom and passed out and these this is how this plays out throughout this entire ruling is that they're saying a thing happened and he's saying yes we were on that plane but no this incident didn't happen that way for just about every single one and he paints a picture that he is being you know verbally assaulted by her regularly in this particular defense they said it is a verbal barrage and that she is constantly screaming at him that when he tries to walk away she follows him that he doesn't do the things that she's alleging that he does and in fact she instigates the fights those are the nature of the defenses for each of these incidents there was a bahamas incident where he went down to his private place in the bahamas in 2014 to try to detox a bit they ended up flying in a private doctor she says that he was assaultive towards her he says that she was interfering with his detox and withholding medication there was an incident in los angeles in december 2014 with a bunch of text messages this is a particular one that the judge was like there's just there's not enough alleged or proven with regards to this for me to determine what even happened so i don't find that this was and more likely than not to have happened with regards to a physical altercation and it was one of the very few there was an incident in tokyo 2015 this is another one and i think the only other one that the judge said there's just not enough here for me to even decide more likely than not so i find that this is not more likely than not true so this is not going to give that substantial truth but there are 14 incidents there is a particularly lengthy incident in australia in march 2015. a lot went down in australia depp was there to film one of the pirates of the caribbean movies and amber heard had or depp had somebody had smuggled in the dogs and it became like an international incident with the dogs being smuggled into australia and it came up in this that heard was trying to get people to lie to make it seem like they had gotten maybe the paperwork for the dogs or not gotten the paperwork for the dogs and the judge determined that depp was the one who really was his team was making the arrangements for the dogs so kind of passing the buck onto herd ended up being more of a political thing so that johnny depp could continue to work in australia and it wouldn't be a big problem not that it was evidence that she was a liar which is how depp's camp made it out to seem that she did all this and she lied on these documents and she smuggled the dogs into australia and the judge was like um it was his responsibility he was the one in charge of doing it his employees were the ones doing this and it seemed like she was the one who took the heat for it so it wouldn't affect him filming in australia so the judge kind of didn't really want to hear a lot about the dog incident but also there was a particularly um violent and destructive argument between the two of them in australia that ended up with depth losing part of a finger and things written all over this rental house in blood and then in like lacquer paint that took like 15 hours to clean up just a particularly horrible fight with the absolute trashing of a rental property so that's the australia incident then an incident in los angeles march 2015 this there have been media clips of this particular incident discussed in deposition from both amber heard and johnny depp heard alleges that she hit up because he tried to push her sister down the stairs depp alleges that she instigated violence with him again and this is just a continuum in the pattern of violence against him heard says she thought her sister was going to fall down the stairs and so she put herself between him and her sister there was a incident 10 is on a train where they had another fight that turned violent very late at night other people heard it that was apparently part of their honeymoon november 2015 in los angeles not a particular detailed incident but detailed enough there was a december 2015 and in 2015 you really see quite a lot of incidents like monthly incidents uh towards this point leading up to the filing for divorce the december 15th incident was one of the most detailed in this there was lots of evidence lots of conflicting evidence including the fact that amber heard after alleging that she was head-butted was on the james corden show her makeup artist was like no that was all taken care of by makeup but then other people are like i saw her and i didn't see you know bruising her black eyes or anything on her nose and the judge went through for pages of the conflicting evidence to find that in this incident she had sought medical help she had used makeup to cover up bruises and a split lip the next incident was in los angeles in april 2016 during amber heard's birthday party johnny depp arrived late he said it was due to a business meeting she said he arrived late drunk and high on drugs the evening deteriorated into an argument the next day she left for coachella with her friends this is when the [ __ ] on the bed literally literally poop on the bed this is when that happened she left for coachella um the housekeeper came in to clean and there was just feces on the comforter and that was discussed i mean of all the things it's one of the things that is the is the most juvenile and johnny depp's team is alleging that she said it was just a harmless prank and that means that she did it but the weight of everything else the judge didn't find that to be uh very illustrative of these incidents or of amber's aggression towards johnny depp and the last incident alleged is from may 21 2016. this was an incident where the police were called though no police report was made she declined to make one but this after this incident is when she spoke to her attorney her publicist and decided that she was going to be filing for divorce and for that temporary restraining order this is definitely the one the judge gave the most length to but there was also quite a lot of evidence with regard to that last incident and things that went back and forth text messages and all the like so when the judge broke all of these down he talked about all the different people that testified he talked about all of the facts the text messages the emails for each alleged incident and goes through to find if there is substantial truth to that statement and he found that there was substantial truth to most of these statements and because most of these incidents were substantially true therefore the statement by the sun was defensible because it was substantially true and that's why the judge denied essentially the libel case for johnny depp and at the end of this the judge points out a text message and it's interesting to me the way it's pointed out towards the end that it felt to me like the judge gave it particular weight to point out what he believed to be johnny depp's attitude towards amber heard and i think that's why it came towards the end of the ruling and though i love the cursey words this one has all the courtesy words in it all of the cursing words but august 15 2016 and the judge says before including this quote something of mr depp's feelings towards misheard can be seen in a text that he sent to christian carino on 15 august 2016 in which he said and then lays out the entire text message wherein it seems that johnny depp is pissed that amber heard may or may not have had an affair with elon musk so i'm just going to read you the text because this is one of the few things that is really put into light in this um considering the evidence of a whole section of this ruling and i haven't seen it widely reported i'll also talk about what the judge weighed with regard to misheard and the things that kind of had happened to her subsequent to making these allegations and making these statements of what happened to her public but the text message quote she's begging for total global humiliation she's gonna get it i'm gonna need your texts about san francisco brother i'm even sorry to ask but she sucked mollusks and then it says in paren i assume a reference to elon musk crooked dick and he gave her some shitty lawyers i have no mercy no fear and not an ounce of emotion or what i once thought was love for this gold digging low level dime a dozen mushy pointless dangling overused flappy fish market i'm so [ __ ] happy she wants to fight this out she will hit the wall hard three exclamation points and i cannot wait to have this waste of a [ __ ] guzzler out of my life three exclamation points i met [ __ ] sublime little russian here which makes me realize the time i blew on that 50 cent stripper i wouldn't touch her with a goddamn glove i could only hope that karma kicks in and takes the gift of breath from her sorry man but now i will stop at nothing let's see if mollusk has a pair come see me face to face i'll show him things he never seen before like the other side of his dick when i slice it off that that was that was a text that was a lot of a text but the judge definitely pointed out other texts like this from depp regarding herd some of which were light-hearted um to her but with very coarse language and he said we're light-hearted and she didn't seem to press or her side didn't seem depressed but some that were like this and it seems that when considering the totality of the evidence as i said at the beginning the judge regards johnny depp as somebody who abuses drugs and alcohol and and gets physically violent when he fights he didn't say that amber heard never also rises to the occasion but when examining this the judge said if amber hurd was always the aggressor and johnny depp was in fact defending himself then the statement that he's a wife beater is not appropriate because really he's the one defending himself so when the judge marched through each of these allegations he was keeping an eye towards that as well because if it was proven that amber heard was the aggressor in these instances then the defense of truth would not apply here the judge says quote i have found that the great majority of alleged assaults of misheard by mr depp have been proved to the civil standard bearing in mind what has been said about the evidence necessary to satisfy the standard when serious allegations are an issue the exceptions are incidents 6 11 and the additional confidential allegation regarding hicksville i do not regard the defendant's inability to make good on these allegations as of importance in determining whether they have established the substantial truth of the words that they published in the meanings which i have held those words to bear it goes on to say that a reoccurring theme in mr depp's evidence was that miss heard has constructed a hoax and that she had done this as an quote insurance policy presumably in the event that the marriage broke down the judge goes on to say that i accept that ms heard's allegations have had a negative effect on her career as an actor and activist she said in her fourth witness statement made on 19 march 2020 that her allegations had attracted considerable publicity and quote following this publicity i have been subjected to a campaign of targeted online abuse on social media as well as online petitions calling for me to be removed from any future sequel to aquaman and from my associations with l'oreal this has not been limited to my professional and commercial projects it had also been aimed at what is most important to me my humanitarian work including my partnership with the united nations and other non-governmental organizations like the aclu and many others this part of miss herd's evidence was not challenged either and i accept it the judge finally concludes that the claim is dismissed at the end of the day and we are we are at the end of the episode as well but at the end of the day the judge found that enough of these incidents were incidents of violence by johnny depp perpetrated on misheard that the claim could be proved substantially true now one of depp's camp's biggest arguments is that they essentially had to litigate a case against amber heard without litigating a case against amber heard so they did not have all of the disclosures that you might have if you're directly litigating against someone in the virginia case we will see that johnny depp has sued her directly for statements she made in that washington post article but in this case johnny depp is against the sun but the sun is using amber herd as the basis to prove that what they said was substantially true so she is not subject to the same disclosures and treatment as a party to the case because she's not exactly a part of the case but is exactly a party to the case but isn't a party to the case and that is one of johnny depp's largest or his side's largest complaints about this is that they were put in a very difficult position to defend against all of these allegations but given that that temporary restraining order was filed for they would have then known that this is what they were stepping into um because i can't imagine that the attorneys didn't know the depth of these kind of incidents that she would be claiming and they are dealing with this in the virginia case as well where depp is saying it is defamation what she published and she is saying it is true and therefore it is not defamation because truth is a defense it is going to be very interesting to see what happens with this um appeal do i think it has substantial weight with the us case not substantial it has to be very frustrating of course but when you have one court litigating internationally there's a different standard plus amber herdside was not subjected to being essentially a party in that case so i expect we will see more come up regarding her in johnny depp's case against her it doesn't seem that these are going to stop it seems that johnny depp will continue litigating these to resurrect his reputation it does seem that he has had substantial damage he was removed from the fantastic beasts but it also seems that amber hurt has had reputational damage from this she talks about in her article to the washington post that she has been um her roles have been reduced and things she has been dropped from projects so it seems that this continued ongoing fight has damaged both of their careers and the problem with allegations like this not being played out in a criminal court is that the standard is very different and the amount of damage that they will do to uh each other is substantial it feels like they're entering the litigation equivalent of like mutually assured destruction but i do think text messages like those will come back to continue to haunt johnny depp however there are recordings of amber heard that the judge did not give a tremendous amount of weight to where she did um indicate that she had been the aggressor in some of these instances so what happens in the u.s case we are yet to see at the end of the day we have one judge's opinion of all the evidence the judge saw the live witnesses heard substantial evidence and then took months to parse through it all and make this finding i don't think this was rushed it seemed very clear to me that most of these incidents had drug and alcohol use in common by one if not both parties and that's that's a huge huge factor in this case and it came up over and over and over again and i think that that will play out also in the us version of the johnny depp versus amber heard defamation case that should be coming up for trial in early 2021 and we will be talking about that as it does so like all like all lawsuits there are always two sides in this case they are wildly divergent on a lot of these instances and the judge time and time again sided with the evidence presented by miss heard and others supporting her side of events hopefully that cleared up some of what happened in this case and what the judge decided and the standard that the judge used to decide there was a pretty low bar i hate to say low bar but the threshold of more likely than not for substantially true means that a diligent paper doing its work that isn't just making wild accusations is going to win a case like this because they're going to be able to say it's more likely than not that this is you know mostly true so that is a difficult hurdle to overcome we will see when we apply the u.s standard what happens next and because we are still in the middle of a global pandemic raise a glass may your wi-fi be strong may your toilet paper be plentiful may your family be well and may the odds be ever in your favor i will see you in the next one friend cheers this week's episode of the get legit lawn chip podcast is sponsored by the lawnerd shop over at lawnerdshot dot shot not throwing away my shot no i'm not throwing away my shot shot on his insta insta insta book jesus

Channel: Emily D. Baker

Views: 25,916

Rating: 4.7659416 out of 5

Keywords: lawyer, emilydbaker, johnny depp, amber heard, johnny depp defamation lawsuit, johnny depp amber heard, johnny depp amber heard trial, johnny depp amber heard court, johnny depp defamation, johnny depp libel case, johnny depp vs the sun, the sun, lawyer reacts, court, justice for johnny depp, johnny depp amber heard defamation trial, johnny depp amber heard defamation case, johnny depp verdict, johnny depp vs amber heard, johnny depp the sun, johnny depp loses libel

Id: 8AV-qK7Q8uw

Length: 53min 21sec (3201 seconds)

Published: Wed Dec 02 2020