LogFAQs > #965309538

Next up is Morgan Tremaine, live, as the ex-TMZ employee! He was a field assignment manager, which means he's the guy who sent the paparazzi out after receiving tips. They would receive tips from many people including celebrities themselves, publicists, and lawyers. The guys above him have to verify that the tip is legitimate, because that dictates how much time it takes for him to dispatch.

He was the guy that sent paparazzi to the courthouse when Amber was getting her restraining order. He said they would never send anyone to a courthouse unless they had a tip. He dispatched them to photograph Amber and the bruise on her face. They were told that she was going to purposefully turn her face to give them a good shot of her bruise. He said they got the pictures.

Then he mentioned that he also dispatched paparazzi to receive pictures of her doing a deposition for the law office as well. And then again, for a trip she was taking in LAX. He mentions both of these were verified tips.

Then he also said that he received the video through a link with Johnny Depp smashing cabinets and they downloaded it and they put bumpers on it and watermark to officially copyright it. (Side note: This is not how copyright works.) He says that the only way they can obtain copyright if it was verified and purchased and/or given to them by the rights holder, which is who made the video. If it's directly from the source, it takes 15 minutes. He said it took 15 minutes for them to throw up the video, and that TMZ absolutely owns the copyright. Oh, and this video was a lot shorter than the one played in the UK trial and this trial, because it removed the parts where she was setting up the camera and also the part where she is smirking at the camera, and he verified it was clipped out when they received it.

So let's see... Amber claimed nobody contacted TMZ letting them know she'd be at the courthouse getting her restraining order, and that she has no idea how TMZ got the video but they were able to immediately verify it was received from the rights holder who made it and also were able to immediately verify that Amber would be at the courthouse. I mean, it doesn't get more damning than this that Amber is a lying sack of shit.

Cross comes on and Elaine does it whyyyyyy. He said all he saw was the clip of the video from this trial. She tries to make very vague connections to Morgan here and Depp's family members and it's absurd.

"And you know this is being televised, do you not?"
"I am aware that there are cameras."
"And so this gets you your 15 minutes of fame, right?"
"I stand nothing to gain from this. I'm actually putting a target on my back by TMZ who is very litigious. So I am not taking my 15 minutes here. But you are welcome to speculate. And I could say the same thing for taking Amber as a client for you."

Elaine just got fucking annihilated so badly by this dude. Maybe don't open up with this idiotic argument because it's awful and opens yourself up. She also tried to imply Johnny's PR team was the one who was calling TMZ to set up all of this. What.

Camille on redirect just asks him how he got in contact with her. He said he reached out because he saw the video was very different than the one they had received with TMZ. He said he just wanted to help out with the timeline of things and didn't anticipate he would be testifying, but was happy to speak the truth. That's all for redirect. This guy just killed Amber's credibility entirely.

You might be thinking... how can this get worse? Well, Brian Numeister testifies and he was a grossly overqualified digital forensic guy that was hired to analyze the metadata in everything that Amber submitted. It was such a fucking disaster and delivered way, way, way too late. He says he doesn't really testify often because 2% of cases ever go to trial and data is easy usually.

He authenticated the pictures Amber had of her injuries. God, I will butcher this if I try to explain it but let me try. He analyzed the Exif info, which tells you what software the file is coming from. Basically, a ton of the photos didn't come from the iPhone software, it came from the Photos app, which you use to edit the pictures.

So you guys remember Rottenborn III who was the baby associate that objected to his own question and asked about Depp's penis? That's the guy doing cross for him. But so far he's just objecting constantly and losing all of them. It's so bad.

For instance, he said there were a dozens of different versions of Amber's photo where she is showing off the bruise on her arm. He said that they were all different file sizes, physical sizes, and chromatic values. They went through Photos 1 software and Photos 3 software, which he notes are image editing software apps.

Basically, he showed three different versions of that picture and showed off the file size and said they were impossible to authenticate because none of them were the source photo and went through some kind of transformation to make those file sizes. Rottenborn III kept getting butthurt that he was mentioning colors.

He shows off how he analyzes all the data and it's kind of interesting I guess, but he verifies they are odd and come from the Photos 3.0 app and not from the iPhone software.

Then they play a video he made of Amber with a bruise on her cheek that they presented two versions of in court. She maintains they were completely different, and then the two pictures flash back and forth and... the only difference between them is the hue is red in one of them. Everything else is identical. The one that is less red is the iPhone source while the more red one is the Photos 3.0 source. He shows another video of Aber and her bruise where both of them come from different directions until they place perfectly over one another. And then it flashes back and forth, same thing. One is more red than the other and that's the only difference. Same deal with the source.

He mentioned one was more red than the other and then Rottenborn III objects stating that they made a ruling on the colors and he keeps violating it. Absolutely horrific lawyering. You don't SAY what you ruled on because then it gives the jury an excuse to look for it. If they weren't thinking about you wanting to make sure he didn't talk about it being more red, they're definitely thinking it now!

They have another objection over him explaining more of the data he looked into and Rottenborn III actually won the objection here. So Numeister said it would be impossible to authenticate anything though, and then it goes to Rottenborn III.

"From your testimony, you rely on the Exif metadata but no other data, is that correct?"
"Incorrect."
"What other data did you rely on for the opinions you testified on today?"
"I was trying to explain but you kept me--"
"NO. What other data did you rely on actual opinions you've been able to testify to today?"

So he tries to explain and then he objects and calls it non-responsive to his question. BRO YOU MADE AN OPEN-ENDED QUESTION ASKING ABOUT WHAT YOU JUST GOT A SUCCESSFUL RULING ON. What did you think would happen!? Like the witness even tried to tell you twice that you kept him from answering it before. They go to a sidebar and then the Judge just tells him that he can answer the question. Rottenborn III is so bad.

"Can you restate the question?"
"Uhhhhh. I don't recall the question Your Honor."

Absolutely hilarious. You KNOW what you just asked. You just had a sidebar talking about it. What is this!? He says maybe they can ask it on redirect, but the Judge sees through this and says that they can have the court reporter recite it. So she does and he starts to answer and he objects and says it's beyond the scope. lol The Judge tells him to answer it.