Jurors have yet to determine who they believe most. But they were not silent: they challenged the court with a doubt about one of the questions put to them.
When the lawyers finished their closing arguments last Friday, many believed that the verdict would not be long in, even due to the fatigue of the jury, “stuck” in this trial since April 11th . But the seven jurors, chosen by lot among the nine who witnessed the trial, seem not to be as certain as those watching from outside and left the decision for this week. But, after a whole day, they didn’t come to any conclusion about the millionaire dispute between Johnny Depp and his ex-wife, Amber Heard.
Johnny Depp has filed a defamation suit against his ex-wife over an essay the actress signed in 2018, published in The Washington Post , in which she described herself as a public figure who had been a victim of domestic violence. Depp denies all allegations of abuse and alleges that the article damaged his career, seeking compensation of 50 million dollars, based on the amount he will have left to bill with the sixth episode of the Pirates of the Caribbean saga in the drawer and with his departure from the Fantastic Beasts franchise .
In response, Amber Heard filed a counter-action in the amount of 100 million dollars, accusing lawyer Adam Waldman, who represented Johnny Depp at the time, of having made several statements that undermined his career, namely that the allegations of abuse they were a “hoax”.
It was precisely the article published by The Post , which was not part of this process, that raised doubts among the jurors. During Tuesday’s deliberations, the jury sent a question to Judge Penney Azcarate asking whether she should consider the article in its entirety or just the title: I spoke out against sexual violence — and faced the wrath of our culture. That has to change . The magistrate replied that the statement made in the title was what should be considered to reach a verdict.
For six weeks, Heard’s lawyers argued that the actress had told the truth and that her comments were protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution, which protects free speech. But Depp’s team tried to demonstrate that the actress had been abusive and had lied , such as with regard to the seven million dollars that Aquaman ‘s Mera said it had donated to two institutions, which it did not, undermining its credibility. .
On the part of Amber Heard, the thesis was defended that Depp had been abusive throughout the relationship , physically and sexually, with the actress reporting an episode in which she said that her ex-husband raped her with a bottle.
Every moment in court, in a trial broadcast live, was widely publicized and manipulated on social media, in which Amber Heard is at a clear disadvantage against Johnny Depp. On TikTok, for example, the tag #JusticeForAmberHeard has, at the time of publication of this article, less than 80 million views; #JusticeForJohnnyDepp gathers over 18,500 million views.
While the jury deliberates and many remain in Fairfax, Virginia, waiting for an outcome, it was said that Depp was still in the UK after having attended a Jeff Beck concert over the weekend, with whom he was previously compromised, as informed by the actor’s representatives.