Amber Heard's attorney said Heard wants to appeal a Virginia jury's decision that found the actress liable for defaming Johnny Depp.
Bredehoft said that she believes that the jury verdict for Depp sends “a horrible message… The publication was not a defendant in the case. She added, “Really what happened here is a tale of two trials.” She said that they were not allowed to tell the jury that the UK court “found that Mr. Depp had committed at least 12 acts of domestic violence, including sexual violence, against Amber. So what did Depp’s team learn from this? This is a setback for all women in and outside the courtroom, and she feels the burden of that.” She said that Depp’s team was “able to suppress the medical records, which were very, very significant because they showed a pattern … going all the way back to 2012 of Amber reporting this to her therapist, for example. It stopped at November 2, 2020, which is when the judgment came down in the UK.”
Amber Heard's lawyer, Elaine Bredehoft, appeared on "Today" and "CBS Mornings" and said the actress intends to appeal after a jury found she defamed Johnny ...
Bredehoft responded that one issue was the cameras in the courtroom, something Depp’s team had requested and Heard’s lawyers were against. “They were able to suppress the medical records, which were very, very significant, because they showed a pattern going all the way back to 2012 of Amber reporting this to her therapist, for example. Bredehoft responded that Depp’s team “demonized” Heard and suppressed evidence. Bredehoft said that Heard was “heartbroken” after the verdict. “The jury rejected it,” Guthrie said. In addition, the jury found that Depp, through his lawyer Adam Waldman, defamed Heard in one of three statements that called her accusations a hoax and awarded her $2 million.
Amber Heard's lawyer confirmed she will appeal the verdict, but said the actor is "absolutely not" able to pay the $10-million judgment.
“One of the first things she said is, ‘I am so sorry to all those women out there. This amount was later reduced by the judge to $10.35-million. She confirmed that Heard would be appealing the verdict from this trial, adding that she “has some excellent grounds for it.” She said Heard is “absolutely not” able to pay the $10-million judgment. Heard appeared in court alongside her legal team. Bredehoft also highlighted that Depp had already presented this defamation trial in 2020 in the U.K., a case he lost when the London High Court ruled that in 12 different instances Depp was a perpetrator of domestic violence against Heard. This is a setback for all women in and outside the courtroom.’ She feels the burden of that,” Bredehoft said.
Amber Heard's lawyer Elaine Bredehoft said Amber Heard's next move is to appeal the jury's decision to side with Johnny Depp, awarding him $10 million in ...
And one of the first things she said when she came back from the verdict, when we went into the conference room, was, ‘I am so sorry to all these women,’” Bredehoft said. They have social media.” They have families.
Johnny Depp won his explosive defamation lawsuit against ex-wife Amber Heard yesterday.
There was a kind of weaponization of the reputational warfare online. “There was a lot of misogyny that we’ve seen before. We had an enormous amount of evidence that was suppressed in this case that was in the UK case. “What this jury said is if you don’t record it, it didn’t happen.” In the UK case when it came in, Amber won and Mr. Depp lost.” “The burden of proof was easier for him there, the Sun had to actually prove that it was true. That has to change.” “Well, you know, really what happened here is it’s a tale of two trials. The defense attorney argued that Depp emerged a winner because of his celebrity status, but King pointed out that Heard is “a celebrity, too.” “We even had tried to get the UK judgment in his case because he [Depp] already had his shot — and that’s one of the issues but also a number of the evidentiary issues. A High Court judge ruled in November 2020 in the tabloid’s favor after concluding that Heard’s allegations of abuse were “substantially true.” Demonize Amber and suppress the evidence.
People online are criticizing Amber Heard's lawyer Elaine Bredehoft after she blamed social media for the outcome of the Heard-Depp trial.
“I was against cameras in the courtroom, and I went on record with that and had argued against it because of the sensitive nature of this. The Daily Dot previously reported on the online harassment and “thousands” of death threats Heard received during the case, as well as the violent revenge fantasy stories people wrote about Heard on a fanfiction site. “Thank goodness we can all stop feeling sorry for Elaine … digging her own grave by doubling down. Also, a right-wing blog reportedly spent thousands on Facebook ads to discredit Heard during the trial. “It’s like the Roman coliseum, how they viewed this whole case,” Bredehoft said on the show. The judge awarded Heard $2 million in compensatory damages.
Amber Heard's attorney said "lopsided" social media chatter and posts about the Johnny Depp defamation trial "influenced" the verdict and turned the ...
"Johnny Depp brought a suit in the U.K. for the same case and the burden of proof was easier for him there," she said. Demonize Amber and suppress the evidence," she said. "She feels the burden of that." And in the U.K. case, when it came in, Amber won. "We had an enormous amount of evidence that was suppressed in this case that was in the U.K. case. But it made it a zoo," Bredehoft said. The jury found that Depp, through Waldman, defamed Heard on one count. I was against cameras in the courtroom and I went on record with that and argued against it because of the sensitive nature of this. "It’s like the Roman Colosseum, you know? This is a setback for all women in and outside the courtroom,'" Bredehoft said. There’s no way they couldn’t have been influenced by it," she said. They have families.
Elaine Bredehoft, Amber Heard's attorney in her defamation trial against Johnny Depp, opened up about the verdict. Read details!
There is no way they couldn’t have been influenced.” They have families. We weren’t allowed to tell them about the U.K. judgment.”