Jurors reached a verdict in the Amber Heard-Johnny Depp Trial

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  perrie-halpern  •  4 weeks ago  •  50 comments

By:   Doha Madani, Diana Dasrath and Saba Hamedy (NBC News)

Jurors reached a verdict in the Amber Heard-Johnny Depp Trial
Johnny Depp won a defamation suit Wednesday against his former wife Amber Heard after a jury found that she had defamed Depp in saying that he had abused her over the course of their relationship.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Johnny Depp won a defamation suit Wednesday against his former wife Amber Heard after a jury found that she had defamed Depp in saying that he had abused her over the course of their relationship.

Depp, who was not in court Wednesday due to a previously scheduled work commitment, sued for $50 million in damages over a 2018 opinion-editorial essay by Heard in The Washington Post, in which she said she had become a "public figure representing domestic abuse." Although the essay never mentioned Depp by name, his attorneys said it indirectly referred to allegations she made against him during their 2016 divorce.

The jury unanimously found that Heard could not substantiate her allegations against Depp and that she knew her claims of abuse were false when she published her 2018 essay.

1654116161137_f_mo_presser_2depp_lawyers_220601_1920x1080-p2vcai.jpg

Depp's lawyers say claims against actor were 'defamatory and unsupported by any evidence'


The jury determined that Heard acted with actual malice when writing her op-ed. The jury awarded Depp $10 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive damages in his defamation suit.

Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge Penney Azcarate reduced the punitive damages the jury awarded to Depp to $350,000, which is the state's statutory cap or legal limit, making his total damages $10.4 million.

"From the very beginning, the goal of bringing this case was to reveal the truth, regardless of the outcome," Depp said in a statement Wednesday. "Speaking the truth was something that I owed to my children and to all those who have remained steadfast in their support of me. I feel at peace knowing I have finally accomplished that."

Depp said that "the jury gave me my life back. I am truly humbled."

Follow along here for live coverage of the verdict and reaction

Heard had countersued for $100 million and said she was only ever violent with Depp in self-defense or defense of her younger sister. Heard's countersuit centered around three statements made by Depp's former attorney Adam Waldman in 2020 to the Daily Mail, in which he described Heard's allegations of abuse as a "hoax."

The jury found that Depp, through Waldman, defamed Heard on one count. The jury awarded Heard $2 million in compensatory damages but $0 in punitive damages.

The panel, which began deliberations Friday, came to its decision after approximately 13 hours over the course of three days. The high-profile trial, which took place over about six weeks in Fairfax County, Virginia, was broadcast across the country and drew numerous headlines.

Defamation claims filed in the U.S. by public figures, such as an actor, are commonly thought of as difficult cases to win due to the higher standard a plaintiff must prove.

The Supreme Court ruled in 1964 that defamation suits brought by notable figures must not only prove the claims were false and caused them damage, but that the person who made the defamatory statement did so with "actual malice."

In a statement Wednesday, Heard said: "The disappointment I feel today is beyond words. I'm heartbroken that the mountain of evidence still was not enough to stand up to the disproportionate power, influence, and sway of my ex-husband."

"I'm even more disappointed with what this verdict means for other women," she said. "It is a setback. It sets back the clock to a time when a woman who spoke up and spoke out could be publicly shamed and humiliated. It sets back the idea that violence against women is to be taken seriously."

tm-hrd-hrt-zqyh12.jpg

Amber Heard 'heartbroken' after jury sides with Johnny Depp in defamation case


The jury's decision marks a legal redemption for Depp, who lost a libel case in the United Kingdom two years ago over allegations that he hit Heard.

Depp sued the parent company that owns The Sun and the newspaper's executive editor for calling him a "wife beater" in 2018. Justice Andrew Nicol ruled against Depp in 2020, saying the British tabloid had presented substantial evidence to show that Depp was violent against Heard on at least 12 of 14 occasions.

In her statement Wednesday, Heard said she believes Depp's "attorneys succeeded in getting the jury to overlook the key issue of Freedom of Speech and ignore evidence that was so conclusive that we won in the UK."

"I'm sad I lost this case," she said. "But I am sadder still that I seem to have lost a right I thought I had as an American — to speak freely and openly."

During the trial, Depp testified that he lost "nothing less than everything" after Heard's essay was published and that the allegations have controlled his "every waking second."

"What did it do to me? What effect did it have on me? I'll put it to you this way: No matter the outcome of this trial, the second the allegations were made against me … once that happened, I lost then," he said.

Heard initially alleged in 2016 when she filed for a protective order that Depp bruised her after he threw a phone at her. She wrote in a sworn declaration to the court that she was living "in fear that Johnny will return to [our house] unannounced to terrorize me, physically and emotionally."

Depp denied the incident, saying he went to the couple's penthouse the day after his mother died to speak to Heard about his desire to file for divorce. In that conversation, Depp and Heard argued, and he tossed her cellphone on the couch after he heard her laughing about him to a friend, according to his testimony.

"It was a tough couple of days, and I really didn't feel like I deserved that kind of treatment," Depp said.

During the trial, Depp's legal team called to the witness stand two police officers who responded to the scene in 2016. The officers said they did not observe physical injury to Heard, noting her face appeared red with emotion, and that she was uncooperative.

Heard told the court she did not call 911 during the 2016 argument and chose not to cooperate with police because she feared they might arrest Depp, whom she was trying to protect.

Depp's legal team accused Heard of faking injuries and doctoring photos of herself with bruises in a yearslong attempt to gain a financial advantage in a divorce. Heard denied ever staging or doctoring photos in her abuse allegations.

Depp's attorneys accused Heard of being the abuser in the relationship while cross-examining her and said that she lied about ever fearing him.

Heard has denied abusing Depp, saying she only ever struck him in defense of herself or her sister after Depp had initiated a violent assault.

Depp and Heard each took the stand, offering their perspectives on the course of their roughly five-year relationship and the volatile arguments they shared. Their testimonies were similar in some ways — both describing an instant infatuation that evolved into a roller coaster romance — but differed as to the source of the acrimonious end.

In his testimony, Depp told the court he initially believed Heard to be the ideal partner for him, recounting how the two bonded over a love of literature and obscure music. But about a year or so into the relationship, Depp said Heard became volatile and instigated arguments over small matters.

He accused her of having a "need for conflict." Depp said Heard would sometimes "strike out," whether it was a slap or a shove or throwing something at him.

"It's hard to explain, but the argument would start here, but it would roll around and become this circular thing of its own," Depp said. "You'd get back to the beginning. … Now it's heightened even more and it's still circular. There's no way in or out."

Heard took issue with Depp's consumption of alcohol and drugs during their relationship, he said, though she never curbed her own substance use around him. He denied ever being out of control while under the influence or having an addiction to alcohol.

While under cross-examination, Heard said she only consumed illicit substances in Depp's presence early twice in their relationship.

"I did a lot of changing to support his sobriety. I tried everything that I could possibly think of," Heard said.

During his testimony, Depp saidHeard would pick fights with him and escalate them until physical violence ensued.

Heard said that she would express concern over Depp's drug and alcohol abuse, which would escalate into arguments. She also testified that the couple had spoken about how to approach disagreements in couple's therapy.

Depp resided in Australia for a portion of 2015 in order to film the fifth installment of Disney's "Pirates of the Caribbean" franchise. He testified that Heard flew out to stay with him in March 2015 after she wrapped filming on a movie in London and that the couple had a fight regarding a postnuptial agreement.

He told the court that Heard followed him around several rooms in the rented Australia home as he attempted to escape the argument, until he began drinking in the bar area of the residence. Heard eventually sought him out, continuing the argument, and threw two vodka bottles at him, he said.

Depp testified that broken glass from one of the two bottles severed the tip of his finger, resulting in surgery and a delay in filming.

Heard denied the allegation, testifying instead that Depp was in the midst of a multiday binge of drugs and alcohol. She testified that he had a fit of rage and assaulted her during that time, as well as trashing the home. Heard said she believed Depp may have severed his finger while smashing a phone that was mounted on the wall.

Depp admitted to causing damage at the home after the couple's arguments, testifying that he had a "kind of nervous breakdown"after his finger was severed, but he denied Heard's account of what happened.

Ben King, who worked for Depp as an estate manager and was brought out by Depp to Australia, testified that he never saw a phone smashed following the couple's argument. He also said he did not observe anything unusual in Heard's physical appearance, other than red eyes from crying.

Depp's legal team submitted numerous audio recordings of the couple's arguments into evidence, one file of which included Heard seemingly admitting to having "hit" Depp while simultaneously denying that she punched him.

Heard testified that the hit occurred when she was defending herself against Depp and that the audio was recorded in a verbal argument about the matter later.

"I accused him of being a baby for complaining about me hitting him when he was trying to get through the door. I was trying to barricade," Heard said.

Depp's attorneys called a number of witnesses, including Heard's former assistant, Depp's security team, Depp's sister, a counselor who conducted couple's therapy during their marriage, and a forensic psychologist hired by Depp's legal team.

Heard's former assistant described her as "belligerent" and "abusive" during their working relationship. The forensic psychologist hired by Depp's legal team testified that she diagnosed Heard with both borderline personality disorder and histrionic personality disorder, which was later disputed by Heard's own forensic psychologist.

Depp's security team testified that they never saw Depp assault Heard but attested that the couple's relationship became volatile and that both parties spewed "verbal vitriol" at each other.

Heard's defense called several witnesses to testify to seeing bruises on her during the time she was with Depp, including two friends who she was close with at the time, Raquel Pennington and iO Tillet Wright. She also had a forensic psychologist testify disagreeing with the personality disorder diagnoses, telling the court instead that Heard had post-traumatic stress disorder.

In his statement Wednesday, Depp said he is "overwhelmed by the outpouring of love and the colossal support and kindness from around the world."

"I hope that my quest to have the truth be told will have helped others, men or women, who have found themselves in my situation, and that those supporting them never give up," he said. "I also hope that the position will now return to innocent until proven guilty, both within the courts and in the media."


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
1  pat wilson    4 weeks ago

Saw a comment on FB a little while ago. " She made her bed, now she can shit in it".

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2  devangelical    4 weeks ago

in the scope of all things important on this earth, bfd is my verdict. I do wonder how amber will earn all that money she now owes JD though.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
2.1  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  devangelical @2    4 weeks ago
I do wonder how amber will earn all that money she now owes JD though.

she will ask Elon. or find some other sugar daddy . if she has to rely on talent , JD will be long dead after a long ,long , LONG  life  before he sees a penny.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
2.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  devangelical @2    4 weeks ago

An article today says she doesn't have the money to pay, so from now on what she earns could be garnished unless bankruptcy saves her ass.  She could always do a GoFundMe so her fans could end up paying a price for their loyalty. 

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
2.2.1  Gsquared  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @2.2    4 weeks ago

Bankruptcy is probably not available to her.  Defamation is an intentional tort, which cannot be discharged in bankruptcy if there is a finding that the intentional misconduct was "willful and malicious".  Also, punitive damages cannot be discharged in bankruptcy.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
2.2.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Gsquared @2.2.1    4 weeks ago

Good.  And thanks for that info, your being versed in American and California law (which, of course, I'm not).

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
2.2.3  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Gsquared @2.2.1    4 weeks ago

She's appealing.  I don't like her chances.  Wasn't it a unanimous jury verdict?  If she can't pay the judgment, I guess she sees no reason not to go for broke.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
2.2.4  Gsquared  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @2.2.3    3 weeks ago

Whether or not the verdict was unanimous has no bearing on the question of whether there are grounds for an appeal.  At least, none that I can think of.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
2.2.5  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Gsquared @2.2.4    3 weeks ago

My thought was that a unanimous jury verdict should be a signal that an appeal might not be as easy to win if it were not unanimous, whether or not it has any legal bearing. 

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
2.2.6  Gsquared  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @2.2.5    3 weeks ago

Appeals are generally based on whether there was an appealable error committed by the trial judge, not on how many jurors supported the verdict.  In most jurisdictions a civil verdict must be supported by at least 9 jurors.  The fact that the jurors may have been unanimous in their decision is irrelevant.

Appealable errors are usually based on an incorrect jury instruction or an improper evidentiary ruling by the trial judge, as examples.    

An excessive, or so-called run away verdict may be subject to appeal, but the unanimity of the jury in that circumstance would not sway the appellate court.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
2.2.7  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Gsquared @2.2.6    3 weeks ago

It is my assumption that NEITHER of us knows whether or not there was an appealable error in the trial, and I will assume that she is appealing on the basis of what Bob Dylan wrote: "If you ain't got nuthin' you've got nuthin' to lose" and so I'll put my money on Depp.  Keep it in mind for down the road when an appeal decision is made. 

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
2.2.8  Gsquared  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @2.2.7    3 weeks ago

I have no idea whether there was an appealable error or the alleged basis for her possible appeal.  Nor do I care in the least.  I purposefully did not read any reports about the trial as it was going on and only happened to have the TV turned on when the verdict was announced.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3  Mark in Wyoming     4 weeks ago

My simple solution to my distaste for the woman , i simply wont pay to see any movie she is in , from now on anything with her in it is a "NO GO" . no need to sign any petitions , let box office receipts be the judge , if the money doesnt come in and its known its because she is in the production , those that make movies will get the idea .

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1  Sparty On  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3    4 weeks ago

I hear ya.
Haven’t watched anything Hanoi Jane has done since the early 70’s.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Sparty On @3.1    4 weeks ago

WTF are you talking about?  They're talking about Amber Heard.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
3.1.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.1    4 weeks ago

It's a comparison of another person that someone won't dignify by going to the box office for...............SMH

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.1.3  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.1    4 weeks ago
WTF are you talking about?

I know that you enjoy nicknames, Hanoi Jane is a nickname for Jane Fonda.  Jane was a movie actress.  She went to Hanoi, a city in what was then North Vietnam.  At the time, the US was at war with North Vietnam.  Many that saw her actions as traitorous and stopped paying admission to her movies. 

I've always enjoyed learning history, how about you?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.4  Sparty On  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.1    4 weeks ago

Others here have done me the favor of explaining it to you.

It is nice to know we can expand your knowledge base.    Especially about treasonist shitbirds like Hanoi Jane.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  Sparty On @3.1.4    4 weeks ago

Yeah, I go to agnorant alleged conservatives and trumpturd supporters and enablers for all my history.  

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.6  Sparty On  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.5    4 weeks ago

You should do that more often.    The fact that you don’t is a huge part of the malfunction with most of your comments here.

But as we all know, c’est la vie mon ami.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.1.7  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Sparty On @3.1.4    4 weeks ago

i think when it comes to Jane Fonda , its a little more complicated than the fact that she went to n Vietnam while our servicemen were fighting there . a lot has to do with the fact that her visit was a  propaganda opportunity used by the N Vietnamese  and had a willing anti war celebrity to use .

 Now the allegation of meeting US POWs as part of the propaganda so that she could tell the folks back home that our military members were not being mistreated is likely a big bone of contention for many , especially when she is suppose to have turned over simple scraps of papers to those holding the POWs that were passed to her from said POWs. the issue of the distaste for her  is that some of those POWs were later released and told what happened to them after  the incident . I still go into VFWs that have Hanoi Jane urinal targets in the mens room.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.1.8  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.1.7    4 weeks ago
its a little more complicated than the fact that she went to n Vietnam while our servicemen were fighting there

Of course your absolutely right Mark.  I simplified and provided the condensed version for the attention challenged readers here.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.9  Tessylo  replied to  Sparty On @3.1.6    4 weeks ago

[removed]

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.1.10  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.1.8    4 weeks ago

She has since over the years has issued numerous apologies  for doing so , and for the most part i think those apologies have generally been accepted , but accepting an apology and forgiving someone for what they did , are actually 2 different things  the standing joke i usually hear if she is brought up is whats your ticket number in line to piss in her casket ......

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.11  Tessylo  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.1.10    4 weeks ago

Yeah, that's what alleged conservatives do - piss in liberal caskets.  

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.1.12  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.11    4 weeks ago

Maybe you should preselect a closed casket visitation.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.1.13  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Tessylo @3.1.11    4 weeks ago

Im just shaking my head and sighing , there is no way you will possibly understand no matter how i attempt to explain it , it has absolutely nothing to do with being conservative or liberal , it has everything to do with the perceived harm that she caused to POWs  by her actions ,  actions like elections have consequences .

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.1.14  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.1.3    4 weeks ago

There was a famous photo of her sitting at a big gun emplacement with a bunch of North Vietnamese soldiers. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.15  Sparty On  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.1.7    4 weeks ago

The word you are looking for is Treason.

She gave aid and comfort to the enemy.

Period, full stop

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.1.16  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.1.14    4 weeks ago

I remember that one, she had the steel pot on her head.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3    4 weeks ago

She is now what is called box office poison.  Say good bye Amber to your career, your penthouse, your designer duds, your expensive car, and all of your expensive trappings.  Say hello to your new career of "Will that be paper or plastic?"

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
4  Tacos!    4 weeks ago

Finally an end to the case of Who Gives a Shit vs. Who Gives a Fuck. I can’t believe how many people have been obsessed with this petty conflict between celebrities.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
4.1  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Tacos! @4    4 weeks ago

Thinking about it ( i barely followed it really) , the verdict does set a pretty interesting precedent though, and it makes me wonder who might be thinking or contemplating bringing their own cases forward .

i don't think Ms. Heard hurt the "me too " movement , she did expand it though and showed women can be abusers as well and be held liable .

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
5  mocowgirl    4 weeks ago

I was raped as a teenager.  I knew better than to ever tell anyone at the time and chance being tried in the court of public opinion or face the retaliation of my rapist.  I later surmised from a brief conversation I overheard between him and a "pastor", that I had "seduced" him.  Sure, I did.  I was not a drinker.  I had been force fed enough whiskey to almost pass out.   That was almost 50 years ago.  I can honestly say, one of the best days of my life was when that bastard died a few years ago.  I was berated for not attending his funeral!

I was married to an alcoholic for nine years.  Life was bizarre.  I learned to live for the "good" days which became so few they were non-existent.  A person, who hasn't lived it, probably couldn't comprehend the levels of abuse an alcoholic can use that have nothing to do with actually hitting a person.  He threatened to kill me for divorcing him.  Then he told he had put a hit out on me.  The chemicals in my brain told me I "loved" this person and should have stayed and "helped" him more and maybe he could have quit drinking.  It took years to accept that I was not responsible for his drinking or his salvation.

Tonight, I have shared far more than I am comfortable with because I learned long ago how it feels to be tried and found guilty in the court of public opinion.

I just found a video where a woman explains perfectly why most women don't dare speak out about abuse in the United States.

 
 
 
Dragon
Freshman Silent
5.1  Dragon  replied to  mocowgirl @5    4 weeks ago

I did not watch the trial, just read articles. My impression that both were addicts, alcohol and drugs. They were in a very troubled relationship, yet it was Heard who, in my opinion, who defamed Depp. They had divorced, she had gotten a settlement, she was out of the relationship, yet she continued to put out lies and accusations against him. Depp sued Heard for defamation, not abuse, and she sued him back for same. 

 
 
 
squiggy
Sophomore Quiet
5.2  squiggy  replied to  mocowgirl @5    4 weeks ago

I was ambivalent at the snippets I accidentally saw and I don't think Depp had hands clean enough to be there, but the 'coke on the stand' bit was a sterling example of shit msm has become. The video - my girls will love it.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
6  Sparty On    4 weeks ago

Amber shit the bed Fred.

Literally and figuratively.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1  Tessylo  replied to  Sparty On @6    4 weeks ago

[removed]

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
7  Gulliver    4 weeks ago

I have made an effort to learn as little as possible about this trial, and I think I have succeeded.

But it does seem that they were both guilty of contributing to the problems in their marriage. They have taken up far too much of our time, attention, and legal system with their psycohdrama. It is time to move on.

They need to stop this nonsense in the courts and give us what we really want:

They need to star together in a remake of War of the Roses.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Freshman Guide
8  Right Down the Center    4 weeks ago

An interesting poll would be to go to a park and ask 1000 people if they knew the results of the Depp trial? Then ask them if they knew the results of the sussman trial. You might learn where the average Americans heads are at.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.1  Tessylo  replied to  Right Down the Center @8    4 weeks ago

Most Americans don't give a shit about the Sussman trial.  

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
8.1.1  Gulliver  replied to  Tessylo @8.1    4 weeks ago

The lengths some people will go to in order to not have to talk to a 1000 people.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
8.1.2  bugsy  replied to  Tessylo @8.1    4 weeks ago

In a way you are right.Let me educate you...

During the Sussman trial, nary a peep from the left wing media...nothing but ignoring the entirety of the trial.

Now that Sussman was found not guilty, every leftist "news" source had it as their front page and gloated that Sussman was found not guilty.

RDTC is correct. Most people give a shit more of a semi washed up actor and a "who" than a trial that literally shed light on more evilness that is called Hillary Clinton.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
8.1.3  Snuffy  replied to  bugsy @8.1.2    4 weeks ago

As a lot of people are selective in what main-stream media they listen to, they only got the news that was presented.  And for most of them they only follow what their masters tell them they should be interested in.  So if the trial was ignored then they must do so as well, and now that it's over they have been given permission to gloat.  Of course the same thing happened from the other political side after the Mueller report came out and didn't have any proof for a conviction.  So goose / gander thing I believe.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Freshman Guide
8.1.4  Right Down the Center  replied to  Tessylo @8.1    4 weeks ago

My point exactly yet the media and some left wingnuts are almost giddy with the news thinking everyone cares or should care..

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
9  Ender    4 weeks ago

They are both nutjobs that seem to have nothing better to do with their money and time.

I would never even know or care about this is it wasn't for all the media attention.

And sorry but Depp lost any looks he had. He has turned into an average looking, aging man. I would actually say, less than average looking.

I finally saw one of the Potter franchise movies he was in. Ugly as fuck. A very monotone performance. He didn't add any value to the movie.

After all the shit I have heard (pun intended), their careers should be over.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
9.1  Sparty On  replied to  Ender @9    4 weeks ago
They are both nutjobs

Condensed into one short, succinct, spot on sentence.

Bravo! 

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
10  Gulliver    4 weeks ago
The forensic psychologist hired by Depp's legal team testified that she diagnosed Heard with both borderline personality disorder and histrionic personality disorder,

I think this is also known as the "women are so hormonal" defense.

 
 
 
Lucifer Morningstar
Professor Guide
11  Lucifer Morningstar    4 weeks ago

I can’t believe how many dipshitts dumbphucks  whack doodles came out in support of Johnny Depp who is mostly a fucking drunken drug addled douche bag….   on second thought I guess that helps explain why.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
12  Thrawn 31    3 weeks ago

Didn't really follow this in any way shape or form, all I know about it is from my wife, but my basic takeaway is that they both suck. Was never really a huge Johnny Depp fan to begin with, he is okay I guess,  so I am hardly disappointed to learn that he is a raging alcoholic/coke head (Blow was apparently a documentary) and apparently just kinda a fucking asshole, and I am not shocked to learn that she apparently has anger issues on top of substance abuse issues. They both suck and so did pirates. 

 
 

Who is online


20 visitors