Amber Heard’s attorney suggests that Virginia jurors didn’t believe her client’s insulting accusations on social media.
Elaine Bradhoft spoke to NBC this day on Thursday morning to criticize the outcome of Johnny Depp’s defamation lawsuit against Herd. The jury found on Wednesday that Herd had insulted Depp on three counts and that Depp had insulted Herd on only one of his claims, resulting in a major legal victory for the court. Pirates of the Caribbean Actor.
Bradhoft said unscrupulous jurors could not escape the barrage of posts on Twitter, Instagram and TikTok criticizing their client. When asked if he thinks social media played a role in the case, Bradhoft replied “absolutely”.
“How can you not [see it]? asked Bradhof. “[The jury] He went home every night. They have families. Families are on social media. We had a 10 day break due to the court conference. In no way can they be influenced. And that was horrible. It was very, very one-sided. It looks like a Roman Colosseum.
Social media polls showed that the #JusticeForJohnny campaign was far more popular than posts supporting Herd (to make a difference, Depp’s post-test message received 17 million likes on Instagram, while Herd liked around 300,000). Many memes and viral posts were particularly brutal, like a mocking herd taunting a viewer.
Bradhoft added that the six-week trial had become a “zoo”.
“I was against the existence of cameras in the courtroom and I recorded it and argued against it because of its sensitive nature,” he said. “But that made him a zoo.”
Bradhoft suggests that another factor did not give him the right to present certain evidence. He said Herd’s medical records were not allowed at the trial, which he called “very important” because it showed Herd had been telling his therapist about the violence since 2012.
The lawyer also noted that Heard plans to appeal the verdict, which requires the actor to pay Depp $10 million, an amount Bradhoft said his client “absolutely” couldn’t afford.
“Johnny Depp filed a lawsuit in the UK in the same case and the burden of proof was easier on him,” he said. “The court ruled there, and we couldn’t tell the jury, but the court found that Mr. Depp had committed at least 12 domestic abuses, including sexual assault, against Amber. What did Depp’s team learn from this? Demonize Amber and suppress the evidence. We had a lot of evidence that was suppressed in this case, as was the case in the UK. In the case of the UK, when it entered, Amber won. “Mister Depp lost.”
interviewed by experts Washington post, Depp lost in the UK but won in the US because the decision in the UK case was made by a judge rather than a jury. “It has just come to our attention so [Depp’s legal team’s strategy of deny, attack, and reverse victim and offender] “It works very well with juries, but it almost never works with judges trained to examine evidence,” said Mark Stephens, an international media attorney. “Essentially, what you have is jury evidence that was not accepted by a British judge.”
Herd had previously said in a statement that the verdict was a disappointment “beyond words. It is heartbreaking that much evidence has not yet been sufficient to withstand the force, influence and disproportionate fluctuations of my ex-husband.”
Depp released a statement: “The jury gave me my life back. I am very humble. ”
Source: Hollywood Reporter
Camila Luna is a writer at Gossipify, where she covers the latest movies and television series. With a passion for all things entertainment, Camila brings her unique perspective to her writing and offers readers an inside look at the industry. Camila is a graduate from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) with a degree in English and is also a avid movie watcher.
