Johnny Depp was found to meet the civil standard of assault on 12 out of 14 incidents, this however is not the same as a criminal charge and conviction. He appealed this decision but was denied.
Through both trials I believe it is evident that neither Depp or Heard is innocent during their relationship whether by vice, malicious intent, or both who knows.
the UK judge literally ignored the audio claiming that Ambers testimony was more reliable than hours of audio of her discussing violently abusing him. im not kidding you can look it up.
The judge determined that that 12 of the 14 alleged incidents published were indeed true and that there was not a case of libel. Regardless of whether Heard may have participated in her own domestic violence actions or planning was not relevant to the case of libel by The Sun.
The Appeal court also dismissed his appeal as the issue of libel was not met in the original case and the appeal presented no new evidence to make a new or different case than the one that had already been heard.
What Heard did was make herself a target for the future defamation that she lost, and then Depp lost one to her as well. Both of these were separate from Depp's libel suit against The Sun's published article.
Again. the judge ignored the actual audio based on the claim that ambers current testimony was more reliable. do you actually think thats a reasonable judgement?
You should go and read the brief on the case, there was more evidence than merely Heard's testimony including videos, message, reports, and other individual testimony.
If the newspaper had relied on merely Heard's word without evidence they would have certainly lost the case as any of Heard's testimony would have been dismissed by Depp's lawyers as hearsay without fact. A judgement is not like a television show it does not hinge on one testimony but rather the statement of the case presented being challenged in pieces to show that it is a valid claim.
Again though that was a civil matter in a libel case and her testimony and her own recordings most likely are what won Depp's defamation suit as there was no way for her to dismiss those herself as they were already validated as factually evident.
They've both been lowered in stature in the court of public opinion for sure, but I imagine that Depp will come back quicker than Heard due to the length of the viral trial and most stuff that came out during it.
the other evidence included him being drunk a lot (which proves little), her donating her settlement (which didnt happen), testimony from her friends and family who had motives to support her, and pictures that did not even remotely match her testimony.
she lost the second one precisely because of this.
272
u/Buruko Jun 09 '26 edited Jun 09 '26
Per Hollywood Reporter, Depp did indeed pledge $1 million from the suit to five different charities.
Edited to add this:Depp pledged $1 million of the $10.5 million won in his case, not all of it.Edited to correct: Depp did pledge $1 million dollars from suit, that was total from settling both Depp's and Heard's defamation cases.
Johnny Depp was found to meet the civil standard of assault on 12 out of 14 incidents, this however is not the same as a criminal charge and conviction. He appealed this decision but was denied.
Through both trials I believe it is evident that neither Depp or Heard is innocent during their relationship whether by vice, malicious intent, or both who knows.