Poll: This Johnny Depp Stuff

Who wins?


  • Total voters
    361
  • Poll closed .
Soldato
Joined
21 Jan 2010
Posts
12,756
How does Jonny's bill to her grow at 6pc as well? Isn't there a net settlement? Or is it a bit more daft than that
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Oct 2004
Posts
7,894
Location
Sunny Torbaydos
The net settlement is 8.35m which is Depps 10m + the 350k - AH's 2m

It's a flat 6% interest, which is ~480,000 a year until paid in full. She could never pay it and end up with a bill for hundreds of millions eventually.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Jan 2010
Posts
12,756
The net settlement is 8.35m which is Depps 10m + the 350k - AH's 2m

It's a flat 6% interest, which is ~480,000 a year until paid in full. She could never pay it and end up with a bill for hundreds of millions eventually.
Is it listed as net? The court docs just show two seperate bills.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Oct 2004
Posts
7,894
Location
Sunny Torbaydos
10.35 is the amount that would need to be paid should AH wish to appeal.

The judgements were seperate I believe, so Depp could pay his 2m immediately and AH could never pay her 10.35m, both are charged at 6% interest p/a.
 
Associate
Joined
19 Dec 2004
Posts
943
Location
Not there, but here
Guardian article says Amber Heards team want a retrial as
‘“Juror no 15 was not the individual summoned for jury duty on 11 April 2022, and therefore was not part of the jury panel and could not have properly served on the jury at this trial,” the documents stated.’

If true, that’s not good for JD I guess.

 
Soldato
Joined
25 Oct 2004
Posts
7,894
Location
Sunny Torbaydos
It's not good for either, for JD it means rehashing the same thing over again, just as it would for AH, the thing is now EVERYONE knows about it.

They also have to prove the facts about this juror with evidence, and we know what their track record is like when it comes to evidence.
 
Soldato
Joined
2 Jan 2005
Posts
8,198
Location
leeds
from what ive heard (ha) this doesn't really affect anything - the jurors were vetted by all the lawyers - even if the above is true it doesn't affect anything as they were all happy with them at the time and they were selected by both sides.
They are only submitting this so it will be in the court record as the apeloton court only takes into account the court records, nothing else.
Even so, this is not even remotely enough for a retrial.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Oct 2004
Posts
7,894
Location
Sunny Torbaydos
She's grasping at straws, flinging as much spaghetti at a wall hoping something sticks.

Her insurance company only offered a $1m liability policy which they are refusing to cover due to her lies.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
56,004
The quote makes it sound odd though, like surely it wasn't someone turning up for jury duty even though they weren't the person called? If that were the case (like a flatmate or family member turned up instead) then yikes!

Though presumably, it's more like someone who was due to be a juror on some other case/was called up later got shifted onto this one or something and they're just clutching at straws to find a technicality?

Does anyone know the precise details on the complaint?
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
5,582
Location
Leicestershire
Well at least if there is a re-trail, we'll get to see this mountain of evidence that they didn't take into consideration the first time round right?
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
37,405
Location
Ireland
She probably only wants a retrial as she got more acting lessons and finally learned to cry on command, unfortunately for her it involves jabbing herself in the eye with her thumb...which im pretty sure the Jury would pick up on.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
2 Jan 2005
Posts
8,198
Location
leeds
The quote makes it sound odd though, like surely it wasn't someone turning up for jury duty even though they weren't the person called? If that were the case (like a flatmate or family member turned up instead) then yikes!

Though presumably, it's more like someone who was due to be a juror on some other case/was called up later got shifted onto this one or something and they're just clutching at straws to find a technicality?

Does anyone know the precise details on the complaint?

supposedly there were 2 people living in the same house with the same name and the son assumed it was for him.

BUT, in virginia law it is up to the lawyers themselves to raise an objection during the selection process when they are told all the info (like age etc.) - if they didn't raise an objection at the time its too bad, there is nothing they can do about it and there's nothing wrong with it.
 
Associate
Joined
9 Jul 2022
Posts
136
Location
London
When JD got his finger cut, and said the following: "this can't be living, this is not living" it struck a chord in me as I remember saying the very same thing while getting abused by my ex-girlfriend back then. So I guess I'm biased in favour of JD.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
56,004
supposedly there were 2 people living in the same house with the same name and the son assumed it was for him.

Ah OK, I mean that seems reasonable and not a big deal... I guess American families have fathers and sons with the same name, like Joe Blogs, Joe Blogs Jr etc.

Rather different to say some person being like "OMG jury service, I really can't be arsed" and their instance flatmate being like "Yeah but have you heard about this case, OMG I love Johnny Depp let me go instead" etc.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Jun 2013
Posts
4,098
it's a non-event, they already acknowledged in their previous letter that the issue is not enough to force a mistrial. Turd's been caught out perjuring herself AGAIN by stating SHE paid the $6m for legal services, and is now being sued for trying to claim from her insurance policy, so they're all flapping and floundering and trying in vain to forestall the inevitable.

and if you think this is all getting beyond belief, here's a short primer on the Manson case, regardless of what you feel about him or his music, had a little watch and see how long it is before your first "WTF??!"
 
Man of Honour
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
28,117
Location
Surrey
supposedly there were 2 people living in the same house with the same name and the son assumed it was for him.

BUT, in virginia law it is up to the lawyers themselves to raise an objection during the selection process when they are told all the info (like age etc.) - if they didn't raise an objection at the time its too bad, there is nothing they can do about it and there's nothing wrong with it.
Yep. Also they won't know which trial they will be on until they are picked from a pool of waiting jurors on the day. It's like here where there are a couple of hundred jurors waiting in a room during their service. At some point during their time their name is randomly chosen to serve on a case. They simply don't know which case they will be on until chosen. They are then whittled down further and some act as reserve jurors.

Furthermore both legal teams then have to vet each candidate very carefully. So on this occasion Heard's legal team seem to me to be objecting to the failings of Heard's legal team.
 
Top Bottom