A former Los Angeles attorney predicted the verdict in the defamation battle between Amber Heard and Johnny Depp — pointing to a small detail that could affect the jury.
As the world awaits jury deliberation in the high-profile Amber Heard and Johnny Depp defamation trial, a former Los Angeles lawyer has given her two cents over the outcome of the arguments.
This Ongoing multi-million dollar defamation trial two actors involved end in six weeks On Friday, local time, after sparking a media frenzy, Public scrutiny of the coupletheir careers and failed marriages preceded their painful divorce.
Heard that Depp wasn’t mentioned in the article, but he sued her implying he is a domestic abuser and is seeking US$50 million (A$67 million) in damages.
Stream more entertainment news live and on demand with Flash. 25+ news channels in one place. New to Flash? 1 month free trial. Offer ends October 31, 2022 >
Heard countersued for $100 million (A$139 million), claiming she suffered “rampant physical violence and abuse”.
Now, the case is in the hands of jurors.
Emily D. Baker, a former Los Angeles district attorney and legal analyst who has been providing commentary on the high-profile trial on YouTube, admitted that in an interview with The New York Times, she initially believed Depp Neither Hurd nor Hurd will win the case. neither thin nor fat Recent podcasts.
However, she changed her tune after a key detail in Amber Heard’s testimony, leading her to believe Depp might win the case.
When she took the stage earlier this month, Neptune Actress Heard confirmed that she retweeted a Washington Post opinion piece she wrote in 2018 that included a headline that Depp claimed was defamatory.
According to Baker, here are the details given Depp’s legal team an advantage.
“The title is ‘Opinion Amber Heard: ‘I talk about sexual violence and confront the anger of our culture.’ This has to change,” Baker explained.
“Her team has been arguing that she didn’t write the headline. Depp’s team is still arguing that even though she didn’t write the headline, she retweeted it and said, “Today I published this in the Washington Post, It tells the story of women who turned their anger at violence and inequality into political power, despite the cost. forward’. ”
Baker went on to call the tweet the “strongest” part of Hurd’s testimony for Depp’s team.
“So it had the headline, and she said ‘I wrote this’. So I think this tweet is their strongest case right now, because she said ‘I wrote this’ and she said ‘I wrote this, Include title”.
“If they find the allegations to be untrue, or they don’t believe them, or they can’t believe them enough to say it’s not defamation, then those are the ones that matter most to him.”
Baker’s take on closing arguments
Speaking on her YouTube channel, Baker explained why she didn’t think there was a “path to victory” for either side when the trial began, but speculated that Depp’s victory would be justified, as the tweet said he “The clearest path to victory.
“The law and the column were not good for me. I was like ‘this is going to be very, very difficult,'” she said.
“After watching the trial for six weeks, I can see why they chose to take it and I see Johnny Depp has the potential to win.
“I think it’s a huge win for them because that’s not where I was at the beginning of this case.
“So my verdict is, if it wins, that’s it. I still think this jury can go on without anyone winning, I still think this jury can hang. I never put it aside. I I don’t like to bet on the verdict either, and I didn’t do that with my own verdict.”
Both sides could still lose
Baker went on to say that she could see both sides lose the defamation suit, but neither side wins overall.
“The jury can find that no one is responsible, no one has defamed no one, no one has defamed anyone, no one has defamed at all. Everyone loses,” she explained.
“The jury might find one side wins. I don’t see a path for both sides to win in defamation. If you think Amber Heard didn’t defame Johnny Depp, then you can get them to call her a hoaxer is actually defamatory.
“If you think she didn’t defame Johnny Depp, or you think she did defame Johnny Depp, then calling her a liar or a liar is not necessarily defamatory in your eyes.
“I don’t think both sides can win, I think both sides can lose,” she concluded.
Baker also explained the possibility of a jury hanging in the balance.
“This jury can fail … if there are several on the jury, one or two, they believe strongly in one side or the other.
“If you believed Amber Heard lied to Johnny Depp, would you say ‘No, Amber Heard did not slander Johnny Depp.’ If you believed Johnny Depp Pu’s horrific abuse of Amber Heard, would you say “no, she slandered Johnny Depp”. That’s where you could end up being a hanging jury.
“The potential of the hanging jury is that if you’re a firm believer in one side, nothing can shake you.”