Even though the article did not name him, the “Pirates of the Caribbean” actor, Johnny Depp claims that it tarnished his reputation and cost him potentially millions of dollars. Heard, 36, retaliated with a $100 million countersuit, alleging that Depp’s lawyer, Adam Waldman, ruined her career and made her life a living misery by informing the press in 2020 that she had made up her domestic abuse charges.
Jurors must decide who defamed whom, and they may rule in favor of one, neither, or both of them. Depp traveled to England immediately after closing arguments on Friday, and on Sunday, he performed renditions of John Lennon’s “Isolation,” Marvin Gaye’s “What’s Going On,” and Jimi Hendrix’s “Little Wing” at Sheffield City Hall with his pal rocker Jeff Beck, 77.
Not every juror knew Johnny Depp and Heard’s case well
The jurors arguably didn’t know much about the case before being chosen — just around a dozen possible jurors claimed to know anything about Depp and Heard’s acrimonious relationship during jury selection — and the work ahead of them isn’t simple. Two claims will be decided by the jury. Depp sued Heard for $50 million in defamation after she wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post in 2018 in which she referred to herself as a public figure who represents domestic abuse. Despite the fact that he isn’t mentioned in the article, he claims it has harmed his career.
The jury will consider seven factors in his case, including whether Heard produced or published three different assertions in the op-ed, including the title; whether they hint or infer anything about Johnny Depp; and, if so, whether they were untrue and/or done with actual malice.
Related – ‘Why Double Standards’: Amber Heard Fans Go to War as Kevin Spacey Sexual Assault Charges Surface
Heard’s $100 million complaint claims that three remarks made in the media by an attorney working for Depp, Adam Waldman, damaged her image and career by disregarding her allegations as fake. The jury must resolve six points, including whether Waldman made the remarks while acting on Depp’s behalf, and if they were untrue and/or made with real intent.
The trial was observed by journalist Kenzie Bryant in a Vanity Fair piece. Bryant noted that the decision will be “almost perfunctory. If they rule that Heard did not defame her ex-husband, she loses, because she had to be here, forced to endure untold abuse online as well as relive what was, by both accounts, a toxic marriage for many more years than the relationship lasted. If they rule that Heard did defame Depp with actual malice and caused the damages he claims, then Depp would get money on top of satisfaction.”
