“She Has Some Excellent Grounds For It,” the attorney of Amber Heard tells about Heard’s desire to challenge the jury’s decision in favor of Johnny Depp.
Amber Heard’s lawyer stated on NBC Today on Thursday that her client “definitely” wants to appeal a Virginia jury’s judgment finding her accountable for slandering Johnny Depp in a Washington Post op-ed alleging domestic violence.
“The devastation I feel tonight is beyond words,” Amber Heard said in a statement in response to the ruling. I’m saddened that the mountain of evidence was insufficient to overcome my ex-enormous husband’s power, influence, and persuasion.
“I’m much more dissatisfied with the implications of this decision for other women.” It’s a stumbling block. It turns the clock back to a time when a woman who spoke up and spoke out could be publically humiliated and shamed. It undermines the notion that women’s violence should be regarded seriously.
“From the start, the purpose of pursuing this case was to uncover the truth, regardless of what happens,” Depp stated. I owed it to my children and all those who have remained strong in their support for me, to tell the truth. I’m relieved that I’ve finally completed that task.”
Elaine Bredehoft told Savannah Guthrie, “She has very strong reasons for it.”Bredehoft criticized a variety of circumstances for Heard’s loss in the interview, including factual choices and the effect of social media.
“She was vilified here,” claimed Bredehoft. “A couple of factors were permitted in this court that should not have been permitted, and the jury was confused as a result.” She referenced a contrary decision in the United Kingdom, where a court found against Depp when he sued The Sun for calling him a “wife-beater.”She stated that Heard’s side was permitted to speak before the jury about “the UK judgment.” As a result, the losses have been completely skewed. There are no losses to report. It came to an end on November 2, 2020, when the UK’s ruling was handed out.”
Depp was awarded $10 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive penalties by a Virginia jury. The punitive damages were quickly lowered by Judge Penney Azcarate to a maximum of $350,000.
“Oh no,” Bredehoft answered when asked if Heard can afford to pay roughly $10.4 million. “Without a doubt.” The jury also granted Amber Heard $2 million in damages for one of her allegations, which she and her pals staged the scenario of one of the couple’s confrontations in their downtown Los Angeles apartment, and that the actresses’ claims were a “fake story, “Depp’s counsel added.
One of the first things Amber Heard said after the verdict, according to Bredehoft, was, “I am very ashamed to all those ladies out there.” This is a setback for all women, both within and outside of the courtroom, and she bears the brunt of it.”
“Really, what occurred here is a tale of two trials,” she added. They were not entitled to say the jury that a UK court “determined that Mr. Depp had perpetrated at least 12 incidents of domestic violence, including sexual abuse, against Amber,” according to her. So, what did Depp and his crew take away from this? Amber should be demonised and the proof should be suppressed. We had a huge amount of material in this case that was withheld in the UK case.”
“We were effective in suppressing the medical records, which were very, very important because they revealed a pattern,” she said. Amber first reported this to her therapist in 2012, for example. ‘When I informed him he kicked you, he cried,’ we received a substantial number of SMS, even from Mr. Depp’s aides. He apologises sincerely. “It didn’t make it in.”
Bredehoft also indicated that jurors, who were instructed not to look at media coverage of the trial, were undoubtedly aware of what was going on on social media, where support for Depp was largely positive.
“Every night, they returned home.” They have families of their own. Social media is used by families. Because of a Judicial Conference, we had a 10-day vacation in the midst. That’s impossible that they weren’t impacted by it, and it was terrible. It was incredibly unbalanced… The way they perceive this case is akin to the Roman Colosseum.” Bredehoft also expressed her opposition to allowing cameras in the courtroom, claiming that it would turn the trial into a “zoo.”
According to Bredehoft, the jury’s decision in favor of Depp sends “a bad message… Because that is precisely what it signifies, it is a big setback. You won’t be accepted until you take out your phone and record your husband or significant other assaulting you.”
Meanwhile, an editor’s note was added to the online version of the op ed by The Washington Post, noting the jury’s decision in the case. The newspaper was not named as a respondent in the case.