Amber Heard & Johnny Depp....Your thoughts? THREAD 2!

[Whatdoyouthinkaboutthisone]

Hi everyone,

I’ve started a second thread for anyone who wants to continue the debate!

Link to thread 1:-
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/3962491-Amber-Heard-Johnny-Depp-Your-thoughts

Depp's lawyers have now filed their grounds of appeal and skeleton argument. If you want to read them in full you can find them at www.nickwallis.com/courtofappeal. To summarise, Depp is not asking for the Court of Appeal to reverse the judgement and find in his favour, which would be very unlikely. He is asking them to order a retrial with a different judge. Still a big ask but with greater chance of success.

The main arguments put forward are:

• The judge failed to explain why he excluded matters that were damaging to or inconsistent with Heard's evidence. In my own reading of the judgement, I noted a few places where the judge mentions evidence that is contrary to Heard but then ignores it without giving any reason. Depp's lawyers also identify instances where he failed to even mention evidence that was contrary Heard, let alone explain why he discounted it.

• The judge failed to explain how he reached his findings.

• The judge's findings on Heard's evidence are inconsistent with documentary evidence and evidence from independent professional witnesses.

• Having found that one of the assaults alleged by Heard did not happen, the judge failed to consider how that impacted the credibility of the rest of Heard's evidence.

• The judge bolstered Heard's evidence by attributing to her evidence which she did not give.

• The judge did not properly assess the grounds on which Heard's credibility was challenged.

• The judge did not make any finding that Depp or his witnesses were dishonest despite that being inevitable given his findings and gave no reason for rejecting their testimony.

• The judge made a mistake in law in rejecting the evidence of a police officer who was not cross examined by NGN despite being available for cross examination at NGN's request.

The skeleton argument fills this out somewhat and suggests that the judge has sometimes taken contradictory approaches to a single document without reason, accepting those parts of the document that agree with Heard but finding it unreliable when it disagrees with Heard.

If you want to read these arguments in full, follow the link above. If anyone wants to ask any questions about the contents of these documents, I will do my best to answer.

For those who aren't keeping an eye on Nick Wallis' tweets and haven't seen it in the press, there was a hearing today to decide whether Depp will be allowed to appeal.

The main discussion centred around evidence showing Heard's claim that she had given her $7M divorce settlement to charity was false. According to evidence introduced by Depp's lawyers, she has only given $550k to the charities concerned, although she claims to have given another $500k anonymously. Depp's lawyers argue that this undermines her credibility. They also argued that the judge took the wrong approach in preferring evidence given in court and witness statements over contemporaneous documentary evidence.

NGN's lawyers accepted that there was evidence that Heard had not paid $7M as she had claimed, but argued that she had pledged to pay this amount and that was the same as actually giving it. They also argued that this evidence was available to Depp at the time of the trial - if the judge accepts this argument, Depp cannot use this evidence. They also argue that this donation was not at issue in the trial and therefore proving the claim was untrue would not affect the outcome.

We don't currently have a date when the decision on whether Depp can appeal will be announced.

There is no requirement to donate divorce settlement to charity to somehow prove domestic abuse.

The argument is more a repeating of the claim that AH is a money grabber and arguing that the judge was somehow gaslight by a money grabber pretending to be a philanthropist.

And that therefore the judge was subliminally influenced.

Desperate last ditch doomed to failure.

Really interesting, thanks ph4, I'm surprised the judge has made such silly errors and not jade this water tight!

There is no requirement to donate divorce settlement to charity to somehow prove domestic abuse.

No, there isn't. That is not what was argued. Depp's lawyers were arguing that this shows Heard lying in her evidence to court and, according to them, going to considerable lengths to try and cover up the lie. Whilst it does, as you say, go to the claim that she was a gold digger, it also goes to her general credibility, which appears to be the main point Depp's lawyers wanted to make.

I'm surprised the judge has made such silly errors and not jade this water tight!

The fact Depp's lawyers are claiming he made these errors does not mean he did, in fact, make such errors. That is for the full Appeal Court to decide if the judge gives Depp leave to appeal.

The odds are against Depp being granted leave to appeal. If he is granted leave, the odds will be against him winning his appeal.

Ok thanks ph4, it sounds convincing.

Depp has been refused permission to appeal. That is the end of the road legally for him in the UK. He has lost his libel case against NGN.

His libel case against Heard in the US continues. The hearings are currently expected to take place next April. Libel cases are harder to win in the US so, given that he has lost in the UK, it seems unlikely he will win there. However, the one factor potentially in his favour is that Heard will be required to make full disclosure in that case. In the UK, the judge refused to force disclosure so Heard was, in effect, able to choose what evidence to disclose.