FAIRFAX, Va. –
A seven-person civil jury in Virginia will resume deliberations Tuesday in Johnny Depp’s defamation suit against Amber Heard. What the jury considers will be very different from the public debate that has surrounded the proceedings of great projection.
For six weeks, the testimony focused on the details of the alleged abuse Heard says he suffered at the hands of Depp. Heard has described more than a dozen specific cases in which she says she was assaulted by Depp.
Depp has denied any physical or sexual abuse and says Heard invented the allegations to destroy Depp’s reputation. Depp’s legions of online fans have focused on his belief that Heard has been fake and that this will determine the outcome.
But the case itself is a defamation suit. Depp sued Heard over $ 50 million in defamation at Fairfax County Circuit Court for an opinion piece he wrote in December 2018 in The Washington Post describing himself as “a public figure which represents domestic abuse. “
That article doesn’t even mention Depp by name, but his lawyers say he was defamed nonetheless. Most of the article deals with public policies related to domestic violence, and Heard’s lawyers say he has the right to the First Amendment to intervene.
In the final arguments, however, Depp’s lawyer, Camille Vasquez, argued that Heard’s rights to free speech have limits.
“The First Amendment does not protect lies that hurt and defame people,” he said.
Depp’s lawyers point to two passages in the article that they say clearly refer to Depp.
In the first passage, Heard writes that “two years ago, I became a public figure representing domestic abuse and felt the full force of the wrath of our culture.” Depp’s lawyers say this as a clear reference to Depp, since Heard publicly accused Depp of domestic violence in 2016, two years before he wrote the article.
In a second passage, he states, “I had the very rare view of seeing, in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse.” (Depp’s lawyers are also seeking damages for a headline that appeared above the online version of the article, although Heard did not write it).
The jury, which must make a unanimous decision for a verdict, must decide whether these passages from the Post are defamatory. And the verdict form gives them step-by-step instructions on how to determine it.
Heard’s lawyers say they have presented a wealth of evidence that Heard was abused. But they say that even if the jury believed in some way that it was never abused even once, it should still prevail in the lawsuit.
This is because the defamation law details several factors that need to be considered. First, the alleged defamatory statements must be about the plaintiff. Heard’s lawyers said the article was not about Depp at all. It’s not mentioned, and they say the focus is on Heard’s experience on the consequences of speaking up. Her lawyers claim that these statements remain objectively true even if in fact she was not mistreated.
Depp’s lawyers, however, say the two passages are clear references to Depp, given the publicity surrounding his 2016 divorce process.
Also, since Depp is a public figure, Heard can only be found guilty of defamation if the jury decides that Heard acted with “real malice,” which requires clear and convincing evidence that she knew what she was writing was false or that she acted with reckless contempt for the truth.
Heard’s attorney, J. Benjamin Rottenborn, said during Friday’s final arguments that Heard carefully revised the draft articles: the first draft was not written by her, but by the American Civil Liberties Union, with his lawyers to make sure that what had been written was approved. legal meeting. Rottenborn said just that fact is enough evidence that he did not act with real malice.
As for the abuse itself, Depp’s attorneys tried to suggest to the jury that if they believe Heard is lying or embellishing any of his allegations of abuse, that he cannot be trusted and that all of his claims abuse should be dismissed as unreliable.
“Either you believe everything or nothing,” Vásquez said. “Either she’s the victim of horrible and ugly abuse, or she’s a woman willing to say absolutely anything.”
At the closing of Heard, Rottenborn said evidence of Heart’s abuse ignores the fact that there is overwhelming evidence on her behalf and sends a dangerous message to victims of domestic violence.
“If you didn’t take pictures, it didn’t happen,” Rottenborn said. “If you took pictures, they’re fake. If you didn’t tell your friends, they’re lying. If you told your friends, they’re part of the deception.”
And she rejected Vasquez’s suggestion that if the jury believes Heard could embellish a single act of abuse they should ignore everything she says. He said Depp’s defamation suit must fail if Heard suffered even a single incident of abuse.
“They’re trying to trick you into thinking that Amber has to be perfect to win,” Rottenborn said.