Poll: This Johnny Depp Stuff

Who wins?

  • Total voters
    361
  • Poll closed .
Eve Barlow, Gf who managed to ban herself from the trial,
Michele Dauber, crackpot ultra 4th wave feminist Stanford Professor,
Christopher tongue-so-far-up-heard's-backside-she's-practically-choking-on-it Bouzy,

All three of them have been going hard after TUG this last 24, which if nothing else is is really really REALLLLLLY ironic.

(He lives with his wife and two kids)

(Completely incorrect)

(Doxing and not a shred of evidence to support that)

Live right now
 
So tomorrow is the day that they are back in court to finalise the "payment plan" and for Depp's team to call for any injunction or propose any changes etc to the outcome given recent interviews of further lies from Heard etc. Speculation is that Depp may have just said no need for payment, it's settled the jury has spoken, but since Heard's team have been out still telling these lies and doubling down, it's unlikely he will do that now I guess.

An injunction however would mean that any further lie peddling Heard does would result in criminal penalties, so we may well see some juicy happenings tomorrow.

Also I saw today that Depp has been offered £301 million to return to Disney and play Jack Sparrow. Interesting, i'm sure he said he would never go back to Disney or something like that but he seems to be all about the fans and Sparrow "is" Depp so who knows.

Edit* Almost forgot, Heard is releasing a tell-all book! Naturally the media have been giving some sob story about how the book is to help fund the money she has to pay Depp, and that she was spotted in TJ Maxx because she's now poor.... Which turns out was more likely a PR stunt tipping off TMZ etc on what the plan is, just like last time.
 
Final judgement has been made.

No settlement, no injunction vs AH.

Judge said if you want to appeal you must settle the bond beforehand, bond is $8.35m + 6% interest per year. She has 30 days to lodge an appeal after which she won't be able to appeal the verdict.
 
$8.35m at 6% interest per year.

If she wants to appeal which she has 30 days to do, she must offer up that $8.35 as a bond.

JD's team didn't apply an injunction which could leave AH open to more legal action down the line is she continues to defame him.
 
MadMossy said:
$8.35m at 6% interest per year.

If she wants to appeal which she has 30 days to do, she must offer up that $8.35 as a bond.

JD's team didn't apply an injunction which could leave AH open to more legal action down the line is she continues to defame him.
Click to expand...
Good they decided to not drop the charges based on the way she has been acting since the verdict. Who knows what is going through her head.
I really hope it goes down the legal route if she keeps defaming the man, she's just ignoring the verdict all together. So much for wanting him to leave her alone.
 
MadMossy said:
The net settlement is 8.35m which is Depps 10m + the 350k - AH's 2m

It's a flat 6% interest, which is ~480,000 a year until paid in full. She could never pay it and end up with a bill for hundreds of millions eventually.
Click to expand...
Is it listed as net? The court docs just show two seperate bills.
 
Guardian article says Amber Heards team want a retrial as
‘“Juror no 15 was not the individual summoned for jury duty on 11 April 2022, and therefore was not part of the jury panel and could not have properly served on the jury at this trial,” the documents stated.’

If true, that’s not good for JD I guess.

www.theguardian.com

Amber Heard’s lawyers call for retrial with claims of ‘improper juror service’

Legal team say ‘newly discovered facts’ about juror in defamation case with Johnny Depp mean mistrial should be declared
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
It's not good for either, for JD it means rehashing the same thing over again, just as it would for AH, the thing is now EVERYONE knows about it.

They also have to prove the facts about this juror with evidence, and we know what their track record is like when it comes to evidence.
 
from what ive heard (ha) this doesn't really affect anything - the jurors were vetted by all the lawyers - even if the above is true it doesn't affect anything as they were all happy with them at the time and they were selected by both sides.
They are only submitting this so it will be in the court record as the apeloton court only takes into account the court records, nothing else.
Even so, this is not even remotely enough for a retrial.
 
The quote makes it sound odd though, like surely it wasn't someone turning up for jury duty even though they weren't the person called? If that were the case (like a flatmate or family member turned up instead) then yikes!

Though presumably, it's more like someone who was due to be a juror on some other case/was called up later got shifted onto this one or something and they're just clutching at straws to find a technicality?

Does anyone know the precise details on the complaint?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom