@Gee R not necessarily as goal of this (as I think) was not to prove Johnny misbehaved or was playing bad but that newspapers were publishing about him badly b4 Heard went there with her story. Which is kind of bs, because tabloids usually do it.
Imagine being a junior lawyer talking to a practicing attorney of 50 years like this. Man that must be embarrassing, Amber's career isn't the only one she ruined, this defense team won't see another trial anytime soon.
I cannot believe how absurd this lawyer is!!! Almost trying to force the witness to make a claim/statement based on articles written by others?? I mean, is he REALLY a lawyer??? If HE is, I TOO can be a lawyer!!!
This lawyer could argue, based on Marks’ responses, that articles are irrelevant to ruining one’s reputation and extrapolate that argument into Amber’s case.
@The Amber Heard Playlist!! Hunting for clicks again eh? Don't bother, the algorithm doesn't distinguish between 100 and 120 views. And then, if "the only video you need to watch" turns out be an unintelligeble audio tape that you put in the wrong context, calling it the ultimate proof that AH is right, and saying that anyone opposing this is a misogynist... Then, viewers will only leave dislikes. Not good for your algorithm shananigans.
I love this guy. The lawyer is using tabloids, literal pieces of teen gossip, and this guy is just dealing with him like he's a snarky child (which, at this point, all of AH's lawyers are).
Can’t believe this guy is a professional lawyer. He doesn’t even let the person finish their answer before asking another question. Every time he asks a question you can tell he doesn’t even know if he should be asking it.
This specific lawyer is a professional troll. No boundaries, no ethics, no honor, but most importantly no shame. The ultimate internet troll except he's IRL.
@ORDINARY MEMER the goal is to get the jury to see your side of the situation, then add to the fact that this guy needs to make an impact cause it ain't gonna be telivision recordings for the jury 6wks from this testimony, there's sooooo much more complexity than a guy being mean and rude cause he feels like a sore loser only a week into a 2month trial lol you know how much these ppl slept? Would yall ppl be this nasty to a firefighter or a police officer? these ppl defend you and yeah amber sucks I bet this dude will tell you amber sucks but you gotta help your client win the jury that's US Court, jury of your peers, interpretation of the law.
I now have a different opinion about her lawyers it’s not just that they’re bad lawyers it’s that her case is so full of inconsistencies & lies it’s impossible to get a clear side across and not look insane.
-Come over here and see this content whereI I have got a transcribed recording from the 7th day of the trial, of Johnny Depp chasing Amber Heard with a blade
@Rita Snow You’re right. He certainly tried his best - that’s for certain. There’s a couple of clips where she turns, looks at him, smiles and right when she turns back, he looks down at her notepad, closes his eyes and shakes his head. The man truly did not want to be there.
The lawyer was trying to make him lose his temper and say something like: "Well, articles are articles and whatever they said isn't really that important" therefore implying that what AH wrote wasn't that meaningful to JD career after it was published. Glad he didn't fall for it.
Whether he wins or loses, his and his legal team's demeanor has won the internet and he can live in peace. If there is any justice in this world, he should win handily. But knowing how the law works, they may even screw this over
@Jayneet Chheda lmfao... She fired her first PR team too. Probably cause they demanded that she pay their salaries instead of donating them..I mean pledging them to charity.
Their entire case is built on tabloids, hearsay and bullying tactics; only allowing their narrative to be filled when questioning, but letting their "psychologist" spread rumors and drone on for hours regurgitating Amber's story. If she wins I give up
Never paid much attention to JD before this whole saga.. but must say, becoming a huge fan of how he’s been able to put up with this crap throughout his life. All those complaining about his drug addiction should be put up on trial for causing it in the first place.
Come over here and see this content whereI I have got a transcribed recording from the 7th day of the trial, of Johnny Depp chasing Amber Heard with a blade
@Moodle Oowada you can if you are trying to make the point that those articles were the main reason for Johnny Deep to be fired from Disney, they are not trying to prove tha what the articles said was true or not but that they had a mayor impact on Disney decision; they knew they lost the defamation case already they are trying to minimize the economic compensation that Amber Heard would have to pay Johnny;
It’s painfully obvious that, in society, there is a difference between self destructive behavior such as occasionally being too drunk and looking silly, and being the abuser in an abusive relationship. Heard’s lawyers are trying to equate the two, but the jury won’t buy it. They are in no way equal. Society tolerates people getting drunk and being silly, as long as they don’t hurt anyone. Society doesn’t tolerate someone being physically abusive to their spouse.
I’ll translate for Amber’s lawyers. “Ladies and gentleman of the jury I’d like you to take into account the paparazzi headlines you would typically see and laugh at while standing in line at the grocery store. The ones next to the soap opera magazines? Yes, those. This should be all the proof you need right?! Please!?” I love how hard they try to paint their own portrait of every single witness because they have no real defense to the mountain of evidence Depp’s team has provided to prove Heard was both the primary abuser and the vindictive party involved. My favorites are the witnesses they ask a question to then try to cut the witness off when the witness refused to give a third of an answer because the entire answer, aka the truth, doesn’t play to their arguments.
I mean yea... that's the point that's being made? That JD had a tons of bad publicity (true or false) prior to the article that JD is suing over. If the publicity was so bad before then her article didn't do that much damage overall to his reputation and thus doesn't constitute deformation. The witnesses point is that the allegations in AH article are materially different to the other allegations in other articles because hollywood studios treat accusations of DV and SA as materially different to being drunk or high etc.
a lot of people are saying how the judge appears biased with how she won't cut off Amber's judges when they make obvious mistakes, but I have to disagree I think the judge, for as impartial and educated as she seems, is having a little thrill letting heards lawyers absolutely destroy their own case themselves. they don't need a judge to stop them after every sentence to prove what a poor job they're doing, she just let's them go at it and utterly embarrass themselves.
@giggle_snort wait what? You guys don't know what ROTTEN means? He even capitalized it. I mean this is the MOST MOST MOST basic level of sarcasm and if you still don't get it, then it's your problem. Grown some brain cells.
I literally would have had to ask the judge for a break if I were a witness, it would be so hard to hold back from cussing out someone on Amber's team. They interrupted all of the witnesses during almost every answer and had invalid objections for questions that hadn't even been fully asked. The case would have been over already if it weren't for her lawyers wasting the court's time day after day.
The judges job is to listen, if the lawyers wanted they could interject but they can see how useless the defendant's line of questioning is so they just humour them.
It's not hearsay. Copying from what I wrote above: There's an exception to the hearsay rule here (actually it's not even an exception -- by definition it's not hearsay). What is said in the articles is not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in those articles (e.g., whether or not Johnny was drunk for example); rather, it's being used as an example of negative publicity. This is why Depp's lawyers aren't objecting. Trust me, they would if they could, and they have objected to hearsay many times. Hearsay would be, for example, Amber Heard testifying "My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit" -- because she's offering an out of court statement ("My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit") as evidence that she did indeed suffer a broken arm. Of course, if her team called her doctor, he could testify that she suffered a broken arm, since that's not hearsay.
Amber has not only made herself look like a joke of a human but also made her lawyers look like absolute clown heads for trying this hard to defend her
I just don’t understand how the defense objects to everything as hearsay, yet uses tabloid articles as proof - aren’t those a prime example of hearsay????
It's not hearsay, that's why they aren't objecting. Explanation below: There's an exception to the hearsay rule here (actually it's not even an exception -- by definition it's not hearsay). What is said in the articles is not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in those articles (e.g., whether or not Johnny was drunk for example); rather, it's being used as an example of negative publicity. This is why Depp's lawyers aren't objecting. Trust me, they would if they could, and they have objected to hearsay many times. Hearsay would be, for example, Amber Heard testifying "My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit" -- because she's offering an out of court statement ("My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit") as evidence that she did indeed suffer a broken arm. Of course, if her team called her doctor, he could testify that she suffered a broken arm, since that's not hearsay.
@Kat Yaneshthe team is not a joke, they just dont have nothing to prove that amber is the victim, so they try with the articles, and btw everyone should be ashamed to bully these lawyers, its their job, and probably they though that amber as the real victim and now they are in this situation.
@Kalin Simovski it’s alright buddy, no hard feelings.. this trail doesn’t really have much of an impact on my life being single and all lol (no risk of IDV for now) and i’ve only seen few videos.. commented on this one - which i don’t normally do.. and comment got couple of likes.. from what i’ve seen, it looks like she is lying about a lot, but he’s been all over the place with his addictions.. that’s my take on it.. but i understand the impact of it, in terms of how future cases might be viewed.. i certainly have no skin in the game when it comes to the lawyers - i see this as more of a media theatre/battle, than a standard court case
@Ivan Kucerak The fact is I won't find you making this criticism about any other lawyer/case, you didn't even notice that the petitioner here does it quite a lot. However, I really shouldn't have assumed you are projecting here. Lots of ppl give hot takes about this. Sorry about that.
At the rate at how fast Amber heards attorney speaks and just throwing questions to every person they cross examine, you would think they in a hurry to go somewhere. Like allow these people to speak. What kind of tactic is this? Asking a man questions on articles and expect him to give a straight answer on it is absurd on so many levels. This is so pathetic. Until they can allow these witnesses a decent chance to answer properly as its their right to do so lawfully, Amber's legal team shouldn't be allowed to ask questions.
“the smarty pants who wrote that” “Netflix is a joke” “if that’s what it says that’s what it says” “No i missed that one-“ “again johnny depp talks with irony..” this guy is so funny and fresh. i love it.
I love how they're trying so hard to prove Johnny Depp has struggled with addiction. He's never tried to hide it. He has even talked about it in TV interviews.
Her attorneys are a joke. I would never have them try to defend me because they try to make things something and it end up looking desperate and foolish . They can’t be taken seriously, why did they take on Amber in the first place when they saw there was little to nothing to defend ? Possibly because they may have thought there’s a chance she won’t be found guilty and they get their share. Who knows
@Yeah The bOis At last ! A true explanation of the role of the judge presiding a trial : it is called a trial because the parties involved are the ones making their own cases, the jury has to listen to the evidence to make a decision and the judge is master of the law and proceedings. No bias at all here, just sound administration of justice.
Or when she allowed that awful lawyer to bully those poor witnesses! That was hard to watch. I actually do like the judge but I wish she did more on preventing all the unprofessionalism from AH team
@Jeremy the Graten Even little things can add up to be significant over a period of time. Giving slight leeway here, giving slight leeway there…in the end it can help out a lot, especially in cases where it’s a close-call.
I mean, the court is keeping time. So these useless questions are literally wasting their time as well as making them look bad. As far as I'm concerned this is good for JD's team
❤️Thank you for your utmost love and support you have consistently shown me in such difficult moments. I’m forever grateful. I really appreciate your unconditional love to me and every effort exerted by you to cause a change…Where are you watching from?
Didn’t realize it’s supposed to bring hate to an innocent man in these days where women get away with claiming acts of violence/crime with no proof and get away with it .
Every star gets a mix of good and bad press. But this Op-Ed was definitely something far different. And to have lost two $20 million franchise movie roles over unfounded accusations shows it was truly a beast of an article.
I would've immediately called out every single one of those articles as heresay. I'm surprised they even allowed them to be used for evidence against him. Pathetic.
It's not hearsay, for the reason below (copying my answer from above): There's an exception to the hearsay rule here (actually it's not even an exception -- by definition it's not hearsay). What is said in the articles is not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in those articles (e.g., whether or not Johnny was drunk for example); rather, it's being used as an example of negative publicity. This is why Depp's lawyers aren't objecting. Trust me, they would if they could, and they have objected to hearsay many times. Hearsay would be, for example, Amber Heard testifying "My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit" -- because she's offering an out of court statement ("My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit") as evidence that she did indeed suffer a broken arm. Of course, if her team called her doctor, he could testify that she suffered a broken arm, since that's not hearsay.
Interesting how the lawyer called Johnny’s last movies flops. I wasn’t aware of a single movie of his being a flop, some were better than others but to call them flops? Absolutely absurd. That’s a disgusting insult to every single person involved with those movies.
The fact that these lawyers are going off on “posts/articles” made from people who have never once spent a second with both or either one of these people as facts is laughable. Anyone can write anything to get a second of recognition or infamy
@Me Here They're not hearsay because the lawyer isn't using them to establish truth (of what's in the article) just as evidence that JD had lots of bad publicity (true or false) before AH article. The point that the witness is making is that the types of behaviour described in those articles is normal for hollywood and factored in when a studio hires them. Domestic Violence however (AH's article) is an entirely different matter and much worse publicity.
@Yoga Journey Basically The Daily Telegraph newspaper had to pay Geoffrey Rush $2.9 million for defaming him after it published a news story claiming he acted inappropriately towards a female co-star during a King Lear theatre production (or "king leer" as they titled it in the paper) & the person who made the alligation was found not to be credible. The paper found another woman who was also willing to make claims against Rush, but the court refused to allow that to be added onto the case & appeal court upheld the decision & payout amount. He'd actually asked for just $50,000 & an apology, but Murdock/his paper didn't respond, so it went to court & he got nearly $3million from it. So that's one pirates star defamation win for what the court found to be false aligation, lets hope Johnny can follow
“We’re talking about Johnny Depp’s reputation.” Dude if you wanna know his reputation, just look at the video of Johnny leaving the court room with all his fans giving him gifts.
The fact the lawyer is asking such repetitive questions over and over again about something which is relatively unimportant is in itself a sign of desperation.
@MaybeGodwillsaveMe .......the whole point of this is for a jury to decide...... you're legally not allowed to see the jury when it's being publicized like this. They're entitled to privacy and anonymity
@Blake Which funny enough has nothing to do with the Lawsuit itself, as the suit is about a specific article and it's malicious intent to defame him. Basically this was a diversion and an insult to the Jury's intelligence.
The witness should refuse to answer the question unless presented with the article in question. Force the attorney to submit each and every article into evidence before asking the question. Not only would this further annoy the judge, but the jury would literally fall asleep waiting for him to trudge through all this nonsense.
Rottenborn wasn’t far off, he based biggest part of his arguments on public statements and opinions. That’s the only content they managed to find for this trial 😂 Well done JD, your life is an open book - they made fools of themselves 🙈🙈
❤️Thank you for your utmost love and support you have consistently shown me in such difficult moments. I’m forever grateful. I really appreciate your unconditional love to me and every effort exerted by you to cause a change…Where are you watching from?
The lawyer here mentions, like, a million articles painting Johnny in such a bad light and yet doesn't even show any of the articles he was saying. Dear god, that begs the question if those articles actually did exist
I keep coming back to this cross just to enjoy the the eloquence of this witness. Total class act and sure knows how to ridicule this lawyer's poor questioning
3:06 _"December of 2016, there's an article that says quote Johnny Depp is Hollywood's most over paid actor for the second year in a row. Did you recall reading that?"_ _"was that written by the second uh...uhh underpaid actor?"_ This had me laughing suddenly, even though I am half asleep!! 😂😂😂 And also _"I'm sorry, I haven't committed his IMDb page to memory..."_
Yes, her lawyers are constantly interrupting I.. rudely but yet if a witness talks a little more than they expect (elaborate) they rudely tell a witness that THEY are interrupting??? Why are the other lawyers and the judge allowing that to happen?
Ugh it always scared me when people bring up the jury. The media and stuff is (I feel) mostly on johnnys side but then I worry because the jury is not seeing and not seeing all these comments that make you think about what we’re watching it’s just scary they might not have the ability to look at is as we do
@Jordan Kelly I wouldnt say everyone but you still have a point. I'm glad he stood his ground for this, not just for his wellbeing and for justice but simply for the entertainment as well
❤️Thank you for your utmost love and support you have consistently shown me in such difficult moments. I’m forever grateful. I really appreciate your unconditional love to me and every effort exerted by you to cause a change…Where are you watching from?
I can’t believe that Amber heard and her attorneys came to court and had absolutely nothing!!! I would have killed to build a fly on the wall when they sat in the room with Amber before all of this and told her how she was going to come out the superstar and get all his money and everyone was going to feel sorry for her😂😂😂😂
I am a kind of person who takes everything all in before responding and I have to say’ it seems to me like AH professional witness we’re found at the bottom of the trades, And JD’s professional witnesses were at the top the list of pros.
Her lawyer is asking if the articles exist & his reply is that yes, they exist, but that it doesn't mean they are truthful and based on known facts. Her attorney sounds so confident during his failed attempt at asking rapid fire questions like Ms. Velaques during cross examination of Amber's witness'. HER ATTORNEY is so proud when asking some "we got'em now" questions without realizing his responses help to prove Johnny's claim and that her claims are lies.
This lawyer is disgusting. He keeps saying "you would agree" when he never outwardly says he agrees. This is a joke. This case is going to kill his career.
@SuSu M You're allowed to ask leading questions on cross because it's assumed that the witness is hostile to you and that they're not going to volunteer information that helps your case. In fact if you're doing anything other than asking leading questions and insisting on a yes or no answer and nothing more during cross examination, every lawyer will tell you that you're incompetent and probably failing to provide effective assistance of counsel.
@Timelens well they get money from Heard, thats it though. They're getting paid their normal rate, they won't get anywhere near the money that winning the case would get them which is the only thing that matters
It's very common for lawyers to say "you would agree", and overall it's their job to be aggressive towards opponent so they can win case for their clients. Most people here never been in court room and don't know what they're even talking about.
Oh my GODS, it's so mind-numbing to listen to that clown of a lawyer act like any old article posted by anyone can be used as proper ammo to defend their case. It's absolute nonsense.
I think that ending a question which is actually posed as a statement with a request for confirmation is a weak and somewhat pathetic technique for questioning a witness. If I was presiding over this case I would automatically dismiss any such evidence as a series of statements given by a biased counsel in pursuit of his goal and therefore largely irrelevant and generally absent from any judgement I might arrive at.
@Callan C The questions themselves are framed as questions on his own experiences. Also in cases like this a level of hearsay is permitted, just what sort is limited. He is framing the questions badly though as he's trying to antogonise the witness into damaging Depps character.
I believe that judge is putting on the poker face in court room until no one is around and then she burst out laughing and keeps laughing until the next day when she arrives to court room... and this is pretty much her life nowadays 😄
I have two questions. First, were these articles admited into evidence? Second, if someone says that they haven't seen something and the lawyer is asking whether they agree with the information presented in it, doesn't that call for a speculation objection?
Depps team is letting the witness go because it makes them look better than objecting to everything and because this witness in particular is handling himself just fine lol
I like how the judge is allowing us to see that these lawyers have NO CASE, suck at what they do and loose emotional control while on the job. I think she's doing a service by letting us and jurors see workers like this, they are terrible at what they do.
It’s not that they’re terrible at what they do, it’s just that they have no evidence, so they have to resort to these tactics. If it were any other case, they might do a good job, but in this case they have nothing to work with, so they’re just trying to hard, and it’s not looking good for them.
it's hilarious how desperate and defeated the lawyer sounds when he's not getting the answers he wishes then proceeds to interrupt and raise his voice. this lawyer is garbage and the jury will remember the way he presents himself
She wrote an article about being a domestic violence relationship but didn't tell them who? Meanwhile she was married to Johnny. "Did she have another husband?" She didn't refer it to Johnny, who else could it be?
I'm confused on what Amber's team is trying to achieve here. "Do you agree that this random news outlet wrote an article about Johnny?" Like what do they expect as an answer? Yes newsoutlet69 made an opinionated article in 2014, so what? You can't exactly deny that news articles about Johnny Depp exist. I literally don't know what the attorney was trying to argue here.
AH's lawyer is trying to play down the negative effect of her op-ed on JD's reputation and career by digging up obscure published articles expressing negative opinions about JD. In other words, he's desperately clutching at straws. Pathetic.
I can't help but notice that Johnny don't often look at his witnesses, unlike Amber who keeps staring at them very intently. The only time I saw Johnny looks at his witness for a long while was his sister, and his eyes was full of compassion for her.
The fact that to win in court seems more important than getting witnesses perspective so it's possible to understand what has really happen, is going to sink justis like Titanic ...long term. But I'm really happy Johnny was listened to. The behavior of the juridic system towards all the witnesses (on both sides) was to me a disgrace. It looked more like a sport event trying to hit points, listening to the lawyers.
Everytime rottenborn speaks, he makes a stronger case for depp. It’s almost like he is working for depp, just from the other side, hehe! I like that the judge and depps lawyers are letting him badger and misbehave. More public sympathy for depp, when we see what madness Amber Herd is capable of bringing to the table.
Yes, JD had negative publicity before the op-Ed as do so many A list celebrities but it has never derailed his career before. These articles that AH’s lawyer are bringing up were being planted into the tabloids but tabloids are now and have always published bull crap articles without ever finding out if sources are legitimate. That op-ed was specifically targeting JD even though she didn’t use his name. She has caused her own downfall and deserves for her career to be over
❌ counts of lying under oath ❌ counts of assault ❌ counts of false allegations ❌ counts of defamation And whatever the charge is for shitting in someone's bed. Like SEND HER TO PRISON ALREADY.
Can’t believe the lawyer is using tabloid gossip as a measure of proof to gauge Johnny’s integrity. Absurd beyond reproach. Speechless!
!
Recall, this is the defense attorney who objected to his own question!
@Gee R not necessarily as goal of this (as I think) was not to prove Johnny misbehaved or was playing bad but that newspapers were publishing about him badly b4 Heard went there with her story. Which is kind of bs, because tabloids usually do it.
It's hearsay
the fact that TABLOIDS were even allowed to be used as EVIDENCE is absolutely INSANE... LITERALLY the definition of HEARSAY...
@brian merry different legal protocols. Two different cases.
Yes,what a trial has wit tabloids???😤😤😤😤
Really. Mag rags...credible evidence. Hearsay all day
@Willzb2000 and the brothers are the same america canada. "JOKE"
@brian merry im ashamed of my country's legal system
Imagine being a junior lawyer talking to a practicing attorney of 50 years like this. Man that must be embarrassing, Amber's career isn't the only one she ruined, this defense team won't see another trial anytime soon.
@LoneWolfHero35 and failed miserably
I feel bad for the Junior lawyer
@Stephen Hodgson this aged poorly
@Stephen Hodgson, You were saying?
@skull they were assigned by their law firm
I cannot believe how absurd this lawyer is!!! Almost trying to force the witness to make a claim/statement based on articles written by others?? I mean, is he REALLY a lawyer??? If HE is, I TOO can be a lawyer!!!
This lawyer could argue, based on Marks’ responses, that articles are irrelevant to ruining one’s reputation and extrapolate that argument into Amber’s case.
@Gem Star And isn't he the lawyer that objected to his own question? 😂
I believe he read the same titles to Johnny, To his comedic effect.
Uhuh...and, just how versed in Bird Law and various other Lawyerings are you?
He is a 🤡
This trial is a perfect example of the old saying: Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake.
I love it! Never heard it before, thanks for sharing
@le be press on Amber's glowy coral face
@The Amber Heard Playlist!! where is that?
Agree
@The Amber Heard Playlist!! Hunting for clicks again eh? Don't bother, the algorithm doesn't distinguish between 100 and 120 views. And then, if "the only video you need to watch" turns out be an unintelligeble audio tape that you put in the wrong context, calling it the ultimate proof that AH is right, and saying that anyone opposing this is a misogynist... Then, viewers will only leave dislikes. Not good for your algorithm shananigans.
I love this guy. The lawyer is using tabloids, literal pieces of teen gossip, and this guy is just dealing with him like he's a snarky child (which, at this point, all of AH's lawyers are).
I just put up 'This Is The Only Video You Ever Need To Watch About Johnny Depp And Amber Heard'
Can’t believe this guy is a professional lawyer. He doesn’t even let the person finish their answer before asking another question. Every time he asks a question you can tell he doesn’t even know if he should be asking it.
This specific lawyer is a professional troll. No boundaries, no ethics, no honor, but most importantly no shame. The ultimate internet troll except he's IRL.
@ORDINARY MEMER the goal is to get the jury to see your side of the situation, then add to the fact that this guy needs to make an impact cause it ain't gonna be telivision recordings for the jury 6wks from this testimony, there's sooooo much more complexity than a guy being mean and rude cause he feels like a sore loser only a week into a 2month trial lol you know how much these ppl slept? Would yall ppl be this nasty to a firefighter or a police officer? these ppl defend you and yeah amber sucks I bet this dude will tell you amber sucks but you gotta help your client win the jury that's US Court, jury of your peers, interpretation of the law.
neither does camille, but no one cares bc she's on johnny's team
Obvs went to Fox School of Law with Carlson and Hannity
I now have a different opinion about her lawyers it’s not just that they’re bad lawyers it’s that her case is so full of inconsistencies & lies it’s impossible to get a clear side across and not look insane.
-Come over here and see this content whereI I have got a transcribed recording from the 7th day of the trial, of Johnny Depp chasing Amber Heard with a blade
@Rita Snow You’re right. He certainly tried his best - that’s for certain. There’s a couple of clips where she turns, looks at him, smiles and right when she turns back, he looks down at her notepad, closes his eyes and shakes his head. The man truly did not want to be there.
@DBeazRN 3 i think he did a decent job, given he seems to have a conscience. Elaine, though?
Sorry, she stunk.
@Ancient Humor Tracer EXACTLY!!! Agree 💯%
The lawyer was trying to make him lose his temper and say something like: "Well, articles are articles and whatever they said isn't really that important" therefore implying that what AH wrote wasn't that meaningful to JD career after it was published. Glad he didn't fall for it.
EXACTLY WHAT I THOUGHT AT THE TIME! We should be lawyers
But the witness was smart he said Hollywood has drawn a line for SA and DV
I loves his lying about Netflix being a joke.
@mila851 Same here
@Ric Zen 🤣
Whether he wins or loses, his and his legal team's demeanor has won the internet and he can live in peace. If there is any justice in this world, he should win handily. But knowing how the law works, they may even screw this over
@John Bloss he won~ yaayyy~
@farinaa Thank you so! 🙏🏼
@John Bloss not much! All he needed was AH and friends' testimony. Truth wins always 😉
@Relax in Nature استرخاء في الطبيعه your channel is great.
@Jayneet Chheda lmfao... She fired her first PR team too. Probably cause they demanded that she pay their salaries instead of donating them..I mean pledging them to charity.
Their entire case is built on tabloids, hearsay and bullying tactics; only allowing their narrative to be filled when questioning, but letting their "psychologist" spread rumors and drone on for hours regurgitating Amber's story. If she wins I give up
@LP.Shakur lol you must be so cool
@Cas S cheap shot or a observation?
@TheBlackLodge ok
@Nayan Nbg Yeah you're very obscure because you're one of a kind.
Never paid much attention to JD before this whole saga.. but must say, becoming a huge fan of how he’s been able to put up with this crap throughout his life. All those complaining about his drug addiction should be put up on trial for causing it in the first place.
Yes literal crap.
Imagine having “a journalists opinion ” as a credible source in court? Like they really having nothing to serve.
You said everything👍👍👍👍❤
*"tell me you have nothing to serve, without telling me you have nothing to serve"* moment right there
Come over here and see this content whereI I have got a transcribed recording from the 7th day of the trial, of Johnny Depp chasing Amber Heard with a blade
@Moodle Oowada you can if you are trying to make the point that those articles were the main reason for Johnny Deep to be fired from Disney, they are not trying to prove tha what the articles said was true or not but that they had a mayor impact on Disney decision; they knew they lost the defamation case already they are trying to minimize the economic compensation that Amber Heard would have to pay Johnny;
This gentleman is extreeeeemely patient. Much respect!
This was the best witness testimony ever. He made AH’s attorney look like a buffoon.
It’s painfully obvious that, in society, there is a difference between self destructive behavior such as occasionally being too drunk and looking silly, and being the abuser in an abusive relationship.
Heard’s lawyers are trying to equate the two, but the jury won’t buy it. They are in no way equal. Society tolerates people getting drunk and being silly, as long as they don’t hurt anyone. Society doesn’t tolerate someone being physically abusive to their spouse.
I’ll translate for Amber’s lawyers.
“Ladies and gentleman of the jury I’d like you to take into account the paparazzi headlines you would typically see and laugh at while standing in line at the grocery store. The ones next to the soap opera magazines? Yes, those. This should be all the proof you need right?! Please!?”
I love how hard they try to paint their own portrait of every single witness because they have no real defense to the mountain of evidence Depp’s team has provided to prove Heard was both the primary abuser and the vindictive party involved. My favorites are the witnesses they ask a question to then try to cut the witness off when the witness refused to give a third of an answer because the entire answer, aka the truth, doesn’t play to their arguments.
I mean yea... that's the point that's being made? That JD had a tons of bad publicity (true or false) prior to the article that JD is suing over. If the publicity was so bad before then her article didn't do that much damage overall to his reputation and thus doesn't constitute deformation. The witnesses point is that the allegations in AH article are materially different to the other allegations in other articles because hollywood studios treat accusations of DV and SA as materially different to being drunk or high etc.
a lot of people are saying how the judge appears biased with how she won't cut off Amber's judges when they make obvious mistakes, but I have to disagree I think the judge, for as impartial and educated as she seems, is having a little thrill letting heards lawyers absolutely destroy their own case themselves. they don't need a judge to stop them after every sentence to prove what a poor job they're doing, she just let's them go at it and utterly embarrass themselves.
Lawyer: Calls hearsay on everything.
Also that same lawyer: Uses articles based on hearsay as evidence.
Yes!
@giggle_snort wait what? You guys don't know what ROTTEN means? He even capitalized it. I mean this is the MOST MOST MOST basic level of sarcasm and if you still don't get it, then it's your problem. Grown some brain cells.
🤔 a sarcasm font!
A saying in Scotland rotten by name and by nature but is it not the other guy anyway
@Mike Hamric it's rottenarse man psml
They said the guy on the stand is a lawyer as well, so he knows how to play the game and you tell with the way he answers questions LIKE A BOSS
he's not phased at all. seems to enjoy it actually lmao
“ARE YOU JUST GONNA KEEP READING THIS?” - Ambers lawyer expects this man to read and acknowledge all and everything written in rags.
This comment is especially great coming from the witness.
lol xD
Seriously this lawyer is like:
"So you are aware of Johnny's existance?
Yes
"So you are agreeing that he is guilty"
Perfectly stated!
I literally would have had to ask the judge for a break if I were a witness, it would be so hard to hold back from cussing out someone on Amber's team. They interrupted all of the witnesses during almost every answer and had invalid objections for questions that hadn't even been fully asked. The case would have been over already if it weren't for her lawyers wasting the court's time day after day.
How can a lawyer use random news articles as facts! This is ridiculous
All of her lawyers don’t let anyone finish speaking. Why doesn’t the judge stop this from continuously happening?
@Allen C. Did I say answering fully is a crime? Don't think so. Though I don't agree with the conduct of Amber Heard + her lawyers.
They all respect the court time, which might be the only target that was obvious for them.
Because trying to get key words from them without them explaining themselves
The judges job is to listen, if the lawyers wanted they could interject but they can see how useless the defendant's line of questioning is so they just humour them.
They just out there searching for loopholes
“No sir, Im afraid I don’t have a picture perfect memory of every specious clickbait article written in an obvious effort to dog pile Depp.”
Yeeee
Richard, nice one. 👍 😁
😂
I would’ve refused Amber’s case. Even if I was a good lawyer I wouldn’t let my career get destroyed by representing her.
@MayfallTribe I wouldn’t if that would end up being my last check because nobody will want an incompetent lawyer.
I think it’s more so destroyed because they are acting incompetent and silly, not so much that they are defending her.
You would if u were getting a check either way.
I love how JD's lawyers are not objecting to any of this, instead letting her lawyer make a total fool of himself!
I don’t understand how the defense objects to everything as hearsay, yet uses tabloid articles as proof!?! Those are in fact examples of hearsay!!!
@Fate Ani yeah but I got over 170 likes didnt I. How many did you get? ;)
@Anders Hebekk you just copy pasted a comment that was made 2 weeks before yours, from word to word.
@kieran what?
It's not hearsay. Copying from what I wrote above: There's an exception to the hearsay rule here (actually it's not even an exception -- by definition it's not hearsay). What is said in the articles is not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in those articles (e.g., whether or not Johnny was drunk for example); rather, it's being used as an example of negative publicity. This is why Depp's lawyers aren't objecting. Trust me, they would if they could, and they have objected to hearsay many times.
Hearsay would be, for example, Amber Heard testifying "My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit" -- because she's offering an out of court statement ("My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit") as evidence that she did indeed suffer a broken arm. Of course, if her team called her doctor, he could testify that she suffered a broken arm, since that's not hearsay.
stolen comment
Amber has not only made herself look like a joke of a human but also made her lawyers look like absolute clown heads for trying this hard to defend her
I just don’t understand how the defense objects to everything as hearsay, yet uses tabloid articles as proof - aren’t those a prime example of hearsay????
It's not hearsay, that's why they aren't objecting. Explanation below:
There's an exception to the hearsay rule here (actually it's not even an exception -- by definition it's not hearsay). What is said in the articles is not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in those articles (e.g., whether or not Johnny was drunk for example); rather, it's being used as an example of negative publicity. This is why Depp's lawyers aren't objecting. Trust me, they would if they could, and they have objected to hearsay many times.
Hearsay would be, for example, Amber Heard testifying "My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit" -- because she's offering an out of court statement ("My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit") as evidence that she did indeed suffer a broken arm. Of course, if her team called her doctor, he could testify that she suffered a broken arm, since that's not hearsay.
@Kat Yaneshthe team is not a joke, they just dont have nothing to prove that amber is the victim, so they try with the articles, and btw everyone should be ashamed to bully these lawyers, its their job, and probably they though that amber as the real victim and now they are in this situation.
hearwrite
@Kalin Simovski it’s alright buddy, no hard feelings.. this trail doesn’t really have much of an impact on my life being single and all lol (no risk of IDV for now) and i’ve only seen few videos.. commented on this one - which i don’t normally do.. and comment got couple of likes.. from what i’ve seen, it looks like she is lying about a lot, but he’s been all over the place with his addictions.. that’s my take on it.. but i understand the impact of it, in terms of how future cases might be viewed.. i certainly have no skin in the game when it comes to the lawyers - i see this as more of a media theatre/battle, than a standard court case
@Ivan Kucerak The fact is I won't find you making this criticism about any other lawyer/case, you didn't even notice that the petitioner here does it quite a lot.
However, I really shouldn't have assumed you are projecting here. Lots of ppl give hot takes about this. Sorry about that.
At the rate at how fast Amber heards attorney speaks and just throwing questions to every person they cross examine, you would think they in a hurry to go somewhere. Like allow these people to speak. What kind of tactic is this? Asking a man questions on articles and expect him to give a straight answer on it is absurd on so many levels. This is so pathetic. Until they can allow these witnesses a decent chance to answer properly as its their right to do so lawfully, Amber's legal team shouldn't be allowed to ask questions.
“the smarty pants who wrote that”
“Netflix is a joke”
“if that’s what it says that’s what it says”
“No i missed that one-“
“again johnny depp talks with irony..”
this guy is so funny and fresh. i love it.
Did she have a second husband??
@Thomas Benjamin don't be creepy
Anyone who is having a bad day will smile after looking at your pictures. You must be very special, what an amazing look.
OMG! You're such a beautiful woman.
"Was that written by the 2nd most underpaid actor?"
I love how they're trying so hard to prove Johnny Depp has struggled with addiction. He's never tried to hide it. He has even talked about it in TV interviews.
I just put up 'This Is The Only Video You Ever Need To Watch About Johnny Depp And Amber Heard'
Her attorneys are a joke. I would never have them try to defend me because they try to make things something and it end up looking desperate and foolish . They can’t be taken seriously, why did they take on Amber in the first place when they saw there was little to nothing to defend ? Possibly because they may have thought there’s a chance she won’t be found guilty and they get their share. Who knows
Everyone says that until their liberty/money/reputation is on the line.
They don't have a case to defend though, they're defending something non existent so it's hard
Articles of random journalists’ opinions on his movies are being used as major evidence? This is so embarrassing.
It's amazing how much nonsense this judge has allowed, how disappointing.
@Yeah The bOis At last ! A true explanation of the role of the judge presiding a trial : it is called a trial because the parties involved are the ones making their own cases, the jury has to listen to the evidence to make a decision and the judge is master of the law and proceedings. No bias at all here, just sound administration of justice.
Or when she allowed that awful lawyer to bully those poor witnesses! That was hard to watch. I actually do like the judge but I wish she did more on preventing all the unprofessionalism from AH team
@Jeremy the Graten Even little things can add up to be significant over a period of time. Giving slight leeway here, giving slight leeway there…in the end it can help out a lot, especially in cases where it’s a close-call.
This is how court is now
I mean, the court is keeping time. So these useless questions are literally wasting their time as well as making them look bad. As far as I'm concerned this is good for JD's team
This cross question is laughable at best and shameful at worst. I would be astonished if this attorney is retained by anyone after this lawsuit.
Richard seems like such a stand up guy. I really liked him as a witness.
❤️Thank you for your utmost love and support you have consistently shown me in such difficult moments. I’m forever grateful. I really appreciate your unconditional love to me and every effort exerted by you to cause a change…Where are you watching from?
"Does she have another husband?"
Knowing that Heard has lied about pretty much everything, she probably does.
I just put up 'This Is The Only Video You Ever Need To Watch About Johnny Depp And Amber Heard'
I love how the attorney gets choked up when the judge calls him out for interrupting the witness’s answer to the question 🤣
It’s almost impossible to not have anything negative seen about you when you’re as big as Johnny.
This comical court case is making Johnny Depp’s popularity soar instead of bringing hate to him.
Good job Amber👏🏽👏🏽
@BuckleBlockGamer neither am i
Maybe that's the whole reason it is still going.
Didn’t realize it’s supposed to bring hate to an innocent man in these days where women get away with claiming acts of violence/crime with no proof and get away with it .
This lawsuit is airtight. Even if he lose the 50 mill, he get public opinion on his sides and popularity back.
@Paula Pickett Me too
Its amazing that there hasn't been an article about awful and overpaid lawyer. That guy would lead the hall of shame
Every star gets a mix of good and bad press. But this Op-Ed was definitely something far different. And to have lost two $20 million franchise movie roles over unfounded accusations shows it was truly a beast of an article.
I would've immediately called out every single one of those articles as heresay. I'm surprised they even allowed them to be used for evidence against him. Pathetic.
It's not hearsay, for the reason below (copying my answer from above):
There's an exception to the hearsay rule here (actually it's not even an exception -- by definition it's not hearsay). What is said in the articles is not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in those articles (e.g., whether or not Johnny was drunk for example); rather, it's being used as an example of negative publicity. This is why Depp's lawyers aren't objecting. Trust me, they would if they could, and they have objected to hearsay many times.
Hearsay would be, for example, Amber Heard testifying "My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit" -- because she's offering an out of court statement ("My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit") as evidence that she did indeed suffer a broken arm. Of course, if her team called her doctor, he could testify that she suffered a broken arm, since that's not hearsay.
It’d be great to have that attorney actually allow the witness to finish answering
Interesting how the lawyer called Johnny’s last movies flops. I wasn’t aware of a single movie of his being a flop, some were better than others but to call them flops? Absolutely absurd. That’s a disgusting insult to every single person involved with those movies.
The fact that these lawyers are going off on “posts/articles” made from people who have never once spent a second with both or either one of these people as facts is laughable. Anyone can write anything to get a second of recognition or infamy
@Me Here They're not hearsay because the lawyer isn't using them to establish truth (of what's in the article) just as evidence that JD had lots of bad publicity (true or false) before AH article. The point that the witness is making is that the types of behaviour described in those articles is normal for hollywood and factored in when a studio hires them. Domestic Violence however (AH's article) is an entirely different matter and much worse publicity.
@Yoga Journey Basically The Daily Telegraph newspaper had to pay Geoffrey Rush $2.9 million for defaming him after it published a news story claiming he acted inappropriately towards a female co-star during a King Lear theatre production (or "king leer" as they titled it in the paper) & the person who made the alligation was found not to be credible. The paper found another woman who was also willing to make claims against Rush, but the court refused to allow that to be added onto the case & appeal court upheld the decision & payout amount. He'd actually asked for just $50,000 & an apology, but Murdock/his paper didn't respond, so it went to court & he got nearly $3million from it.
So that's one pirates star defamation win for what the court found to be false aligation, lets hope Johnny can follow
@Me Here I'm not really familiar with that case so I'll have to read up on it.
@YouDaMANRAJ Yeah, that"s what I was trying to say, although you expressed it way more clearly.
@Don’t mind my PFP 😂
“You would agree that… right?” Is that leading the witness? Glad that no objections were made. This was funny to listen to.
that was basically an objection to smart defense . lmfao
@D M exactly
You can ask leading questions during cross-examination. You cannot ask leading questions of your own witnesses on direct examination.
I’m not even being questioned and this dude is raising my blood pressure.
Objection
That's hearsay!
watching johnny smile throughout all this gives me life
“We’re talking about Johnny Depp’s reputation.” Dude if you wanna know his reputation, just look at the video of Johnny leaving the court room with all his fans giving him gifts.
The fact the lawyer is asking such repetitive questions over and over again about something which is relatively unimportant is in itself a sign of desperation.
I really hope the jury isn't taking these questions seriously. Shouldn't questions about tabloid articles fall under a hearsay objection?
@MaybeGodwillsaveMe .......the whole point of this is for a jury to decide...... you're legally not allowed to see the jury when it's being publicized like this. They're entitled to privacy and anonymity
Exactly
This type of questioning throughout the trial really helped Johnny.
agreed
@Blake Which funny enough has nothing to do with the Lawsuit itself, as the suit is about a specific article and it's malicious intent to defame him.
Basically this was a diversion and an insult to the Jury's intelligence.
The witness should refuse to answer the question unless presented with the article in question. Force the attorney to submit each and every article into evidence before asking the question. Not only would this further annoy the judge, but the jury would literally fall asleep waiting for him to trudge through all this nonsense.
Rottenborn wasn’t far off, he based biggest part of his arguments on public statements and opinions. That’s the only content they managed to find for this trial 😂
Well done JD, your life is an open book - they made fools of themselves 🙈🙈
❤️Thank you for your utmost love and support you have consistently shown me in such difficult moments. I’m forever grateful. I really appreciate your unconditional love to me and every effort exerted by you to cause a change…Where are you watching from?
The lawyer here mentions, like, a million articles painting Johnny in such a bad light and yet doesn't even show any of the articles he was saying. Dear god, that begs the question if those articles actually did exist
I keep coming back to this cross just to enjoy the the eloquence of this witness. Total class act and sure knows how to ridicule this lawyer's poor questioning
I’ve never seen such incompetent lawyers before
Their whole law firm is a joke
I can't really understand how a lawyer can base his arguments on random articles found here and there...
3:06 _"December of 2016, there's an article that says quote Johnny Depp is Hollywood's most over paid actor for the second year in a row. Did you recall reading that?"_
_"was that written by the second uh...uhh underpaid actor?"_
This had me laughing suddenly, even though I am half asleep!!
😂😂😂
And also _"I'm sorry, I haven't committed his IMDb page to memory..."_
Yes, her lawyers are constantly interrupting I.. rudely but yet if a witness talks a little more than they expect (elaborate) they rudely tell a witness that THEY are interrupting??? Why are the other lawyers and the judge allowing that to happen?
When their full of tou know what just let them spue more bile that way they can get caught out its simple lawyer tactics
"When your enemy is busy making a mistake, don't interrupt them"--Vilho Gottlieb
If they turned this court case into one of those Netflix limited series I would literally binge watch it
Ugh it always scared me when people bring up the jury. The media and stuff is (I feel) mostly on johnnys side but then I worry because the jury is not seeing and not seeing all these comments that make you think about what we’re watching it’s just scary they might not have the ability to look at is as we do
For me personally, Amber's goal of trying to make the public hate Johnny and destroy his credibility has had the opposite effect.
@Jordan Kelly I wouldnt say everyone but you still have a point. I'm glad he stood his ground for this, not just for his wellbeing and for justice but simply for the entertainment as well
@ffnerd be glad about that, not annoyed at the repetition
I think they call that karma 😎
Yes, that is also the consensus by pretty much every single person aware of the happenings in the trial
It honestly didn't. It worked, very very well at first. Everyone hated him, until this trial started
This witness was the most honest down to earth you could wish for !
❤️Thank you for your utmost love and support you have consistently shown me in such difficult moments. I’m forever grateful. I really appreciate your unconditional love to me and every effort exerted by you to cause a change…Where are you watching from?
I can’t believe that Amber heard and her attorneys came to court and had absolutely nothing!!! I would have killed to build a fly on the wall when they sat in the room with Amber before all of this and told her how she was going to come out the superstar and get all his money and everyone was going to feel sorry for her😂😂😂😂
This line of questioning is beyond desperate.
I am a kind of person who takes everything all in before responding and I have to say’ it seems to me like AH professional witness we’re found at the bottom of the trades, And JD’s professional witnesses were at the top the list of pros.
Her lawyer is asking if the articles exist & his reply is that yes, they exist, but that it doesn't mean they are truthful and based on known facts. Her attorney sounds so confident during his failed attempt at asking rapid fire questions like Ms. Velaques during cross examination of Amber's witness'. HER ATTORNEY is so proud when asking some "we got'em now" questions without realizing his responses help to prove Johnny's claim and that her claims are lies.
This lawyer is disgusting. He keeps saying "you would agree" when he never outwardly says he agrees. This is a joke. This case is going to kill his career.
@SuSu M
You're allowed to ask leading questions on cross because it's assumed that the witness is hostile to you and that they're not going to volunteer information that helps your case. In fact if you're doing anything other than asking leading questions and insisting on a yes or no answer and nothing more during cross examination, every lawyer will tell you that you're incompetent and probably failing to provide effective assistance of counsel.
@Timelens well they get money from Heard, thats it though. They're getting paid their normal rate, they won't get anywhere near the money that winning the case would get them which is the only thing that matters
Like Beyoncé once said: Somebody’s getting fired.
It's very common for lawyers to say "you would agree", and overall it's their job to be aggressive towards opponent so they can win case for their clients. Most people here never been in court room and don't know what they're even talking about.
Oh my GODS, it's so mind-numbing to listen to that clown of a lawyer act like any old article posted by anyone can be used as proper ammo to defend their case. It's absolute nonsense.
Love this man's incredulous expressions.
How embarrassing. This is actually the lawyers PROFESSIONS!!
I think that ending a question which is actually posed as a statement with a request for confirmation is a weak and somewhat pathetic technique for questioning a witness. If I was presiding over this case I would automatically dismiss any such evidence as a series of statements given by a biased counsel in pursuit of his goal and therefore largely irrelevant and generally absent from any judgement I might arrive at.
I wonder if those lawyers realize what kind of damage this will do to their careers?
Amber’s lawyer tried to break this witness with ridiculous and pointless “hearsay”, but the witness did a great job by not busting out laughing.
@Callan C The questions themselves are framed as questions on his own experiences. Also in cases like this a level of hearsay is permitted, just what sort is limited.
He is framing the questions badly though as he's trying to antogonise the witness into damaging Depps character.
@Rull Mourn the lawyer acting tough. 😁😆
@Jeff ..That's pointless.
@Dina Mihelios ..your comment is senseless.
Her lawyer is a desperate crybaby.
I believe that judge is putting on the poker face in court room until no one is around and then she burst out laughing and keeps laughing until the next day when she arrives to court room... and this is pretty much her life nowadays 😄
Lost it at, "soooo are you just going to recite tabloid articles to me?"
Lawyer: *yes*
I have two questions. First, were these articles admited into evidence? Second, if someone says that they haven't seen something and the lawyer is asking whether they agree with the information presented in it, doesn't that call for a speculation objection?
Depps team is letting the witness go because it makes them look better than objecting to everything and because this witness in particular is handling himself just fine lol
From 2:36 on…. I couldn’t stop laughing! 😂 He can’t possibly be a real attorney!
Johnny is a legend, legends never die, they only become greater❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
I like how the judge is allowing us to see that these lawyers have NO CASE, suck at what they do and loose emotional control while on the job. I think she's doing a service by letting us and jurors see workers like this, they are terrible at what they do.
@orez point yea that’s true too
It’s not that they’re terrible at what they do, it’s just that they have no evidence, so they have to resort to these tactics. If it were any other case, they might do a good job, but in this case they have nothing to work with, so they’re just trying to hard, and it’s not looking good for them.
@Clayton Courtney thank you! great comment.
It just amazes me that these lawyers are reading headlines as if they were facts.
it's hilarious how desperate and defeated the lawyer sounds when he's not getting the answers he wishes then proceeds to interrupt and raise his voice. this lawyer is garbage and the jury will remember the way he presents himself
This is harassment! Amber and her lawyer should be thrown out of the court immediately
She wrote an article about being a domestic violence relationship but didn't tell them who?
Meanwhile she was married to Johnny.
"Did she have another husband?" She didn't refer it to Johnny, who else could it be?
The judge should have stepped in here and said "enough." What a waste of time.
How can this type of hostile questioning keep going?? It’s pathetic and unprofessional! AH’s lawyers are plain rude.
Lo que pasa es que estan deseperados
@Jeni El J
It's normal behavior for defense lawyers in a civil suit.
I honestly think the annoyance of her lawyers would lose this for her 100% if she had ANY leg to stand on. Which she doesn’t
Probbaly why there are not much objections on JD side. They let them sink themselves.
I just want to give Johnny a big hug and tell him it will be ok.
I'm confused on what Amber's team is trying to achieve here.
"Do you agree that this random news outlet wrote an article about Johnny?"
Like what do they expect as an answer? Yes newsoutlet69 made an opinionated article in 2014, so what? You can't exactly deny that news articles about Johnny Depp exist. I literally don't know what the attorney was trying to argue here.
AH's lawyer is trying to play down the negative effect of her op-ed on JD's reputation and career by digging up obscure published articles expressing negative opinions about JD. In other words, he's desperately clutching at straws. Pathetic.
@ravenchain85 That makes sense actually. Still dislike Heard tho lol
What is wrong with this lawyer?!? Omg he’s insane
I can't help but notice that Johnny don't often look at his witnesses, unlike Amber who keeps staring at them very intently. The only time I saw Johnny looks at his witness for a long while was his sister, and his eyes was full of compassion for her.
The fact that to win in court seems more important than getting witnesses perspective so it's possible to understand what has really happen, is going to sink justis like Titanic ...long term. But I'm really happy Johnny was listened to. The behavior of the juridic system towards all the witnesses (on both sides) was to me a disgrace. It looked more like a sport event trying to hit points, listening to the lawyers.
Everytime rottenborn speaks, he makes a stronger case for depp.
It’s almost like he is working for depp, just from the other side, hehe!
I like that the judge and depps lawyers are letting him badger and misbehave. More public sympathy for depp, when we see what madness Amber Herd is capable of bringing to the table.
@Professor Ding Dong I looked it up and it appears it was in fact Ben Rottenborn who objected his own question
@David Bak we need his name...i only call him "Lawyer Object His Own Questions Guy" ...can you drop his name...i want to give it to my future kids..
Everytime he speaks he’s just making sure he can read 😭
Its not rottenborn, this is the guy who objected to his own question earlier in trial. He’s an embarrassment, does anybody know his name?
That's not Rottenborn
RESPECTS TO THE JUDGE for letting this go....
Yes, JD had negative publicity before the op-Ed as do so many A list celebrities but it has never derailed his career before. These articles that AH’s lawyer are bringing up were being planted into the tabloids but tabloids are now and have always published bull crap articles without ever finding out if sources are legitimate. That op-ed was specifically targeting JD even though she didn’t use his name. She has caused her own downfall and deserves for her career to be over
❌ counts of lying under oath
❌ counts of assault
❌ counts of false allegations
❌ counts of defamation
And whatever the charge is for shitting in someone's bed.
Like SEND HER TO PRISON ALREADY.
Ever get the feeling that this lawyer just wants his questions presented to jury rather than expecting witness to answer? He sounds ridiculous.