Depp Vs Heard Verdict: A Setback For Women?

Unless you’ve been living under a rock these past few weeks, you’re most likely aware of the defamation case between Hollywood actors Johnny Depp and his ex-wife Amber Heard.

It is, after all, the biggest celebrity trial of the decade!

This case is so controversial, that various news outlets across the globe ran live coverage of it for weeks. Since the jury gave its verdict, there have been a lot of reactions on social media, and on TV.

Both parties have released statements, but the controversial statement was from Amber Heard. According to her, the jury’s verdict was ”a setback for women” all over the world.

Image Source: Instagram

As we take an in-depth look at this verdict, we consider all the reasons why it may or may not be a setback for women who statistically, are the typical survivors of physical and sexual abuse.

Summary Of The Facts Between Johnny Depp And Amber Heard

Johnny Depp and Amber Heard were married from 2011 to 2015, after meeting on the set of the movie called “The Rum Diary”. Their marriage ended when Amber Heard filed for divorce in 2016, and obtained a restraining order against him.

She appeared in court with a bruise on her face and was captured by the paparazzi. Newspapers across the USA posted these photos and Johnny Depp was declared a wife beater. Although he denied these allegations, very few people believed him.

As Hollywood turned its back against him, new doors opened for Amber Heard. She played a major role in the DC film “Aquaman” alongside Jason Mamoa, and got several ambassadorial deals. She also became a face of the #Metoo Movement which was gaining momentum.

Image Source: Instagram

In 2018, the Washington Post published an article about Amber Heard where she claimed to have spoken up against sexual violence two years ago, and that she had “faced our culture’s wrath”. Many assumed this post was about Johnny Depp, and the backlash against him grew.

In 2020, Johnny Depp sued “The Sun” newspaper, a UK news outlet, for calling him a wife beater. The Sun won, and his appeal was dismissed. He then instituted an action against Amber Heard for 50 million dollars in the USA, and she countersued for 100 million dollars.

What Constitutes Defamation?

Proving that a defamatory statement was made against you is not the easiest task, especially for celebrities. There are three crucial elements you must show to successfully prove your case.

• A statement was made particularly against you.
• The said statement is false.
• The maker was aware it was false or willfully disregarded the need to verify the truth.

The first requirement means that the statement must be directly made towards you, or that everyone who reads the statement can infer that it is about you. It must not be a general statement capable of referring to anyone.

It must be false, and the maker must be aware it is false. Additionally, the said statement must be capable of harming your reputation in the eyes of right-thinking members of society.

The Burden of Proof In a Defamation Case

A defamation case is typically a civil case. This means that the burden of proof is on a “balance of probabilities”. The evidence is weighed on the scales of justice, and the heavier side wins. Essentially, the claimant has to prove that it is “more likely than not” that he is telling the truth.

Image Source: pexels

This is unlike in criminal trials where the onus or burden of proof is higher. The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused person is guilty. In some jurisdictions, a defamation case can be criminal and is punishable by jail time.

If the maker of the false statement was aware that it was false, we refer to it as “malicious intent to cause harm”. This means that the maker intentionally made such statements with the motive of ruining the other person’s reputation.

When Johnny Depp set out to prove the falsity of Amber’s allegations against him, he knew that the stakes were very high. He had already lost the UK case, so he desperately needed a win. To prove his innocence, he had to share the most intimate details of his life with the public.

Amber Heard’s Argument

Amber Heard’s lawyers, Elaine Bredehoft and Ben Rottenborn claimed that her op-ed didn’t mention Johnny Depp’s name. She simply shared some of her experiences as a victim of sexual abuse, and the fifth amendment of the US constitution guarantees her right to free speech.

They also attempted to prove that Amber indeed suffered physical and sexual abuse at the hands of Mr. Depp and that the abuse allegations she leveled against him were true. They even included psychological, emotional, and mental abuse among their claims.

In response, Johnny Depp’s attorneys Camille Vasquez and Ben Chew stated that the guarantee for free speech under the US constitution does not include making false allegations. Besides, the medical records and testimony of witnesses did not support Amber’s claims.

Additionally, the case was not about emotional or psychological abuse, but physical and sexual abuse specifically. According to them, the voice recordings of the conversations of Mr. Depp and Mz Heard made it quite clear who the real victim of domestic abuse was.

Why Did Johnny Depp Lose In The UK But Win In The US Case?

Image Source: Instagram

Before his action against his ex-wife in the US court, the Pirates of the Caribbean star had initially sued The Sun Newspaper in the UK and lost.

Here are some of the reasons for these conflicting verdicts.

Judge Vs Jury

The verdict in the London court was reached and delivered by a judge. Judges are trained to observe the demeanor of witnesses and decide a verdict unbiasedly. Although in reality, they can be influenced by their personal beliefs and experiences.

A jury, on the other hand, is made up of ordinary men and women of society. They are not trained to observe witnesses but rely heavily on their own experiences, education, and discretion.

While the verdict in the UK was decided by one judge, that of the US was decided by several members of the jury who reached a unanimous decision to grant Johnny Depp a total amount of 15 million dollars as damages for compensation.

So while the judge in the UK believed Amber Heard, the jury in the US simply did not.

Evidence Differed

Both courts ruled out certain pieces of evidence. In the UK, Judge Andrew Nicol discredited the majority of Johnny Depp’s testimony because of his alcohol and substance abuse. Amber claimed that he was often unaware of his actions while under the influence.

In the US, Judge Penny Azcarate did not allow the UK verdict to be tendered into evidence to support Amber. Her lawyer Elaine Bredehoft in her post-trial interview claimed that “a mountain of evidence” was ignored by the court, including medical records.

The US court allowed evidence from expert witnesses, including Hollywood agents who indicated how much both parties likely lost due to statements from both camps. IT experts also showed that some of the abuse photos Amber presented could have been tampered with.

Different Legal Systems

Every country has its own legal system with distinct laws. Some countries even have different laws in different states, just like in the USA. Therefore, a judgment reached in one country is not binding on another.

At most, such a decision can have persuasive authority over the other country’s court, but this has little effect. Therefore any idea that the US court should have reached the same conclusion as the UK because they have similar laws is misinformed.

Multiple Inconsistencies In Amber Heard’s Story

During the UK trial, Amber Heard was a witness for The Sun Newspaper, and the judge heavily relied on her testimony. She claimed that she had donated the 7 million dollar settlement she received from Johnny Depp to the Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, and the ACLU.

Since she supposedly had donated this money, it gave credence to her claims that she did not want anything from Mr. Depp, and that she just wanted to move forward. And in the US, she claimed that she did not write the op-ed, and it wasn’t about Johnny Depp at all.

However, during cross-examination, she admitted that she had not donated the 7 million dollars to charity as she claimed under oath in the UK. She also admitted she wrote the op-ed because she knew how powerful Johnny Depp was, and how many people would defend him.

Since she backtracked on some of her previous statements given under oath in the UK trial, these inconsistencies severely damaged her credibility.

Effects of the Decision

Since this trial began, a lot of organizations have attempted to create a narrative that suits them. Some claim that the #Metoo movement is dead if we fail to believe or support victims like Amber.

The fact is that this verdict has some advantages and disadvantages for women. They include:

Advantages

1. Highlighting The Need To Gather Sufficient Evidence

One recurrent theme during the Amber Heard vs Johnny Depp trial was the question of who had credible evidence. As much as we know that many women suffer from physical and sexual abuse, the reality is that oftentimes, these women lack credible evidence.

Without substantial proof, the court cannot decide in your favor. This makes it worse if the defendant has sufficient proof to discredit your story, such as an alibi, multiple witnesses, medical records showing contrary facts, and worse still, voice recordings of your actual words.

The court will always tilt towards the party with credible evidence. So as millions of people watched this trial, the need to have sufficient evidence resonated with many.

Credible evidence can be photographs, video or voice recordings, witnesses, documentary evidence like printed documents, text messages, emails, or social media chats. Without these, all you will likely get is sympathy, and that just isn’t the same as justice.

2. Evidence That Women are Logical and Analytical, not Emotional and Biased

Image Source: pexels

When some people argue against feminism, they claim it is a theory that robs women of their objectivity. The idea to believe all women without checking the credibility of their stories creates room for manipulation, and many believe this was the case with Amber Heard.

Amazingly, women like Camille Vasquez, Judge Penny Azcarate, other female lawyers on JD’s team, and the female jurors were at the forefront of this trial. They, along with several female viewers from home, logically analyzed the evidence and reached a conclusion on their own.

This proves that when women speak up for women’s rights, it is from a place of logic too, not just emotions. Some people claim that any woman who failed to believe Amber Heard was betraying the #Metoo movement. But perhaps this highlights one of the movement’s loopholes.

The idea that reaching a conclusion based on your intelligence is wrong because it is against someone who shares your gender is absolutely manipulative. We have called out men for centuries because some of them make excuses and protect vile men who commit atrocities.

We must hold ourselves to the same standard, as anything less would make our movement a sham.

3. Calls For Objectivity

This case has also reminded women of the need for objectivity. Although many women share similar stories of abuse, no two stories are exactly the same. Even though we judge new cases based on our own experiences, we must remember to assess the facts.

We can support each other emotionally without giving room for manipulation. Everyone deserves a fair hearing, and the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” is enshrined in every country’s constitution for a reason.

Disadvantages

1. Credibility of Victims

Sadly, a lot of women were already struggling with coming forward to tell their stories of domestic abuse. These women face a lot of criticism, with statements implying that they asked for it, they enjoyed it, or they cannot be believed because they want to ruin a successful man.

Defense attorneys use this tactic in criminal cases. They take the focus away from the defendant or the allegations and focus instead on the credibility of the victim. This case has amplified this, especially in the eyes of the public.

Rape victims mostly lack evidence, and it is one of the reasons such cases are under-prosecuted. With rape, speaking out early increases the chances of getting medical evidence. Victims who speak out years after without corroboratory evidence are hardly believed.

Even when evidence exists, factors like religion and culture frustrate the efforts of justice. Just like the story of little Ochanya, the 13-year-old Nigerian girl who endured over 5 years of repeated sexual abuse by her two uncles, from both her anus and her vagina.

She gave a dying declaration naming them as her abusers, and medical evidence confirmed she died from sexual abuse complications. Still, the judge in the Benue State High Court disregarded her dying declaration and declared that the medical evidence was circumstantial.

Female victims of sexual and domestic abuse already have it hard, especially when an abuser is a powerful person in society, like a political, traditional, or religious leader, which is often the case. This trial has certainly made it harder for such victims to speak up.

2. Intimidation of victims

This case was between two celebrities worth millions of dollars. Even though one is richer and more famous, Amber Heard is not a helpless victim. Compared to millions of women worldwide who suffer such fates, she could afford to pay millions of dollars in legal fees.

Unlike her, many women cannot. It has now become easier for powerful and rich abusers to simply threaten their victims with a defamation case. The prospect of bankruptcy, losing their means of livelihood, or being bullied on social media is enough to scare them into silence.

Amber Heard was bullied for weeks, and she had to turn off her comments section on all her social media platforms. For several weeks, various negative hashtags about Amber Heard have been trending on Twitter, such as #AmberHeardIsAnAbuser, #AmberHeardIsALiar, #AmberTurd, and #AmberHeardCommittedPerjury.

These trends extended to other social media platforms like Tik Tok, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube. One can only imagine how difficult it must have been for her, even though many believe she deserved it.

Some victims may see this as an example of what they could face if they speak up, and it is not helpful to women everywhere.

Our Verdict

If there’s one thing we’ve reaffirmed from this case, it’s that the scales of justice will always tip in favor of the one with more evidence. The only thing that saved Johnny Depp in this trial, is the records he kept, not his fans, his gender, or his fame. After all, he lost them all at first.

If your allegations are not blatantly false, you have no reason to fear a defamation lawsuit because the standard of proof is usually quite high. Johnny Depp had evidence specifically proving Amber Heard was lying. He didn’t just deny the allegations as most abusers do.

The public trial also gave people room to observe the trial and make up their minds, so perhaps this can be a strategy for the victim to resist intimidation too. Tell the truth, present the evidence, and give people a chance to decide for themselves.

Nevertheless, endeavor to keep records. Amber Heard claimed that she did not report several incidents to the police because she was protecting Johnny Depp. Protecting your abuser will never end well, and it is in your best interest to report incidents of abuse as soon as you can.

Of course, the truth will always come out eventually, but you can make it come out faster by keeping records as much as you can.