Current Events > Johnny Depp loses libel case against newspaper that called him a wife beater.

Topic List	Page List: 1
Lebronwon 11/02/20 3:34:13 PM #1:	https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/02/media/johnny-depp-libel-ruling-scli-intl-gbr/index.html Johnny Depp has lost his highly publicized libel case against the publisher of Britain's The Sun newspaper, whose claim that he was an abusive husband sparked a courtroom showdown between the Hollywood star and his ex-wife, actress Amber Heard, earlier this year. Depp sued News Group Newspapers and Dan Wootton The Sun's executive editor over an article that claimed the "Pirates of the Caribbean" star was violent toward Heard while they were together. But the UK's High Court ruled in the publisher's favor on Monday. Citing evidence, including photos, audio recordings and Depp's own text messages, lawyers for the newspaper group argued in court filings that Depp "beat his wife Amber Heard, causing her to suffer significant injury, and on occasion leading to her fearing for her life." Depp had admitted long-term problems with drugs and alcohol during the trial but said the tabloid's claims that he was violent toward Heard were "completely untrue." However, Judge Andrew Nicol said in his 129-page judgment Monday that the paper's claims had been shown to be "substantially true." "I have reached these conclusions having examined in detail the 14 incidents on which the defendants rely, as well as the over-arching considerations which the claimant submitted I should take into account," the judge said. --- Not 1, not 2, not 3, not 4, not 5, not 6, not 7 <cite>Lebronwon posted [p:946624100] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/02/media/johnny-depp-libel-ruling-scli-intl-gbr/index.html Johnny Depp has lost his highly publicized libel case against the publisher of Britain's The Sun newspaper, whose claim that he was an abusive husband sparked a courtroom showdown between the Hollywood star and his ex-wife, actress Amber Heard, earlier this year. Depp sued News Group Newspapers and Dan Wootton The Sun's executive editor over an article that claimed the "Pirates of the Caribbean" star was violent toward Heard while they were together. But the UK's High Court ruled in the publisher's favor on Monday. Citing evidence, including photos, audio recordings and Depp's own text messages, lawyers for the newspaper group argued in court filings that Depp "beat his wife Amber Heard, causing her to suffer significant injury, and on occasion leading to her fearing for her life." Depp had admitted long-term problems with drugs and alcohol during the trial but said the tabloid's claims that he was violent toward Heard were "completely untrue." However, Judge Andrew Nicol said in his 129-page judgment Monday that the paper's claims had been shown to be "substantially true." "I have reached these conclusions having examined in detail the 14 incidents on which the defendants rely, as well as the over-arching considerations which the claimant submitted I should take into account," the judge said. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BlueTigerLion 11/02/20 3:36:23 PM #2:	Yikes. I thought it was proven Amber Heard faked her injuries. --- Hey now. <cite>BlueTigerLion posted [p:946624191] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>Yikes. I thought it was proven Amber Heard faked her injuries. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
iPhone_7 11/02/20 3:37:45 PM #3:	Johnny Depp confirmed for wife beater. --- Sig User Logic https://imgur.com/lA5fm7w <cite>iPhone_7 posted [p:946624254] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>Johnny Depp confirmed for wife beater. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Funkydog 11/02/20 3:39:01 PM #4:	Imagine ruling in favour of the "newspaper" that called people involved in a stadium collapse thieves despite no evidence. --- https://imgur.com/BGbZK <cite>Funkydog posted [p:946624323] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>Imagine ruling in favour of the "newspaper" that called people involved in a stadium collapse thieves despite no evidence. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 11/02/20 4:19:47 PM #5:	I saw some girl literally in tears bemoaning this is a store earlier People are going totally mad over it --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair! https://imgur.com/yPw05Ob <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:946626030] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>I saw some girl literally in tears bemoaning this is a store earlier People are going totally mad over it </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Lebronwon 11/02/20 6:28:15 PM #6:	iPhone_7 posted... Johnny Depp confirmed for wife beater. Yep. Looks like his career is over. --- Not 1, not 2, not 3, not 4, not 5, not 6, not 7 <cite>Lebronwon posted [p:946631068] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>iPhone_7 posted... </cite> <quote>Johnny Depp confirmed for wife beater.</quote> Yep. Looks like his career is over. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Irony 11/02/20 6:46:33 PM #7:	Wonder how much The Sun bribed the judge --- I am Mogar, God of Irony and The Devourer of Topics. <cite>Irony posted [p:946631750] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>Wonder how much The Sun bribed the judge </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ZannoL 11/02/20 9:49:26 PM #8:	https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/jul/15/amber-heard-antagoniser-rows-with-johnny-depp-court-told Amber Heards former personal assistant has accused the actor of stealing her own experience of being a victim of sexual violence and twisting it into a different story. In evidence given remotely from Los Angeles, Kate James also said she had regularly received a barrage of drunken, abusive and incoherent text messages from Heard between 2am and 4am. James was answering questions during the libel trial brought by Heards ex-husband Johnny Depp, 57, who is suing the Suns publisher, News Group Newspapers (NGN), and its executive editor Dan Wootton over an article that called Depp a wife beater and referred to overwhelming evidence that he had attacked Heard. In her second witness statement to the court, James said she had been the victim of rape in Brazil when she was in her twenties and that the experience had haunted her ever since. When she read Heards submissions, James said, to my utter shock and dismay, I discovered that Ms Heard had in fact stolen my sexual violence conversation with her and twisted it into her own story to benefit herself. This of course caused me extreme distress and outrage that she would dare to attempt to use the most harrowing experience of my life as her own narrative. James told the court that although she had been subpoenaed to give evidence, she was doing so because she is a sexual violence survivor and its a very serious to take that stance if you are not one Referring to Heards drinking habits, James said in a witness statement: Amber would drink vast quantities of red wine each night. In court, questioned by Depps counsel David Sherborne, James added: I would receive a barrage of drunken text messages between 2am and 4am that were incoherent and abusive. In a final comment, James said Heard was probably the least known person she had been employed by in Hollywood. Earlier the court was told by Depps former butler that Heard often drank a bottle or two of wine a night when she was with Depp, and she was the antagoniser in the relationship <cite>ZannoL posted [p:946638548] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote> https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/jul/15/amber-heard-antagoniser-rows-with-johnny-depp-court-told <quote>Amber Heards former personal assistant has accused the actor of stealing her own experience of being a victim of sexual violence and twisting it into a different story. In evidence given remotely from Los Angeles, Kate James also said she had regularly received a barrage of drunken, abusive and incoherent text messages from Heard between 2am and 4am. James was answering questions during the libel trial brought by Heards ex-husband Johnny Depp, 57, who is suing the Suns publisher, News Group Newspapers (NGN), and its executive editor Dan Wootton over an article that called Depp a wife beater and referred to overwhelming evidence that he had attacked Heard. In her second witness statement to the court, James said she had been the victim of rape in Brazil when she was in her twenties and that the experience had haunted her ever since. When she read Heards submissions, James said, to my utter shock and dismay, I discovered that Ms Heard had in fact stolen my sexual violence conversation with her and twisted it into her own story to benefit herself. This of course caused me extreme distress and outrage that she would dare to attempt to use the most harrowing experience of my life as her own narrative. James told the court that although she had been subpoenaed to give evidence, she was doing so because she is a sexual violence survivor and its a very serious to take that stance if you are not one Referring to Heards drinking habits, James said in a witness statement: Amber would drink vast quantities of red wine each night. In court, questioned by Depps counsel David Sherborne, James added: I would receive a barrage of drunken text messages between 2am and 4am that were incoherent and abusive. In a final comment, James said Heard was probably the least known person she had been employed by in Hollywood. Earlier the court was told by Depps former butler that Heard often drank a bottle or two of wine a night when she was with Depp, and she was the antagoniser in the relationship</quote> </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrupt_Power 11/02/20 9:51:10 PM #9:	This is fucked up. There's been a lot of evidence that Heard was the abusive one, not Depp. --- Posted with GameRaven 3.6.0_B3 <cite>Corrupt_Power posted [p:946638622] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>This is fucked up. There's been a lot of evidence that Heard was the abusive one, not Depp.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ZannoL 11/02/20 9:53:04 PM #10:	https://theblast.com/c/amber-heard-johnny-depp-lapd-officer-testifies-no-injuries-face-phone-throwing-incident-domestic-violence An LAPD officer who arrived on the scene of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard's blowout argument, which she claimed he hurled a cell phone against her face, says she saw 'no injuries' on the actress, during explosive new testimony. LAPD officer, Melissa Saenz, appeared via video link and testified on the fourth day of Depp's ongoing libel trial against a UK tabloid which called him a 'wife-beater.' On May 21, 2016, Amber Heard claims Johnny Depp returned home to the couple's L.A. penthouse 'drunk and high' and became 'enraged' after they started discusses the alleged popping incident. During the argument, Amber claimed Depp began smashing items in the apartment including a wine bottle. Plus, she says during the incident, he threw her cell phone at her 'like someone throwing a baseball' and hit her in the face. But, the 'Pirates Of The Caribbean' star claims he simply went to the penthouse to collect a few belongings and Heard's allegations are part of a 'choreographed hoax.' Officer Saenz, who specialized in domestic violence, arrived on the scene as one of two LAPD officers after one of Amber's friends called 911 to report the incident. Upon arrival, the officer testified Ms. Heard was "visibly upset" saying "her face was red, it was clear she was crying." However, she said there did not appear to be any injuries and told the court her examination of Ms. Heard's face was "extremely thorough." At the time, the officer claimed she had no idea it was Johnny Depp who was involved in the incident, he had left the scene. She also testified Amber Heard was 'uncooperative' and was unwilling to make a statement about the incident. Also, it should be noted, Amber Heard filed for divorce the next week and included a domestic violence restraining order, where she produced photos of alleged injuries and bruises on her face. During the hearing, Depps lawyer questioned the LAPD officer asking her, Did you see any marks at all of any kind suggesting injury on her face? Ms. Saenz replied: No, I didnt. The officer also said she did not witness any damage done to the apartment including the alleged wine bottle smashing. I searched the entire flat and there was no damage, there was no broken glass nothing out of the ordinary," she said. <cite>ZannoL posted [p:946638690] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>https://theblast.com/c/amber-heard-johnny-depp-lapd-officer-testifies-no-injuries-face-phone-throwing-incident-domestic-violence <quote>An LAPD officer who arrived on the scene of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard's blowout argument, which she claimed he hurled a cell phone against her face, says she saw 'no injuries' on the actress, during explosive new testimony. LAPD officer, Melissa Saenz, appeared via video link and testified on the fourth day of Depp's ongoing libel trial against a UK tabloid which called him a 'wife-beater.' On May 21, 2016, Amber Heard claims Johnny Depp returned home to the couple's L.A. penthouse 'drunk and high' and became 'enraged' after they started discusses the alleged popping incident. During the argument, Amber claimed Depp began smashing items in the apartment including a wine bottle. Plus, she says during the incident, he threw her cell phone at her 'like someone throwing a baseball' and hit her in the face. But, the 'Pirates Of The Caribbean' star claims he simply went to the penthouse to collect a few belongings and Heard's allegations are part of a 'choreographed hoax.' Officer Saenz, who specialized in domestic violence, arrived on the scene as one of two LAPD officers after one of Amber's friends called 911 to report the incident. Upon arrival, the officer testified Ms. Heard was "visibly upset" saying "her face was red, it was clear she was crying." However, she said there did not appear to be any injuries and told the court her examination of Ms. Heard's face was "extremely thorough." At the time, the officer claimed she had no idea it was Johnny Depp who was involved in the incident, he had left the scene. She also testified Amber Heard was 'uncooperative' and was unwilling to make a statement about the incident. Also, it should be noted, Amber Heard filed for divorce the next week and included a domestic violence restraining order, where she produced photos of alleged injuries and bruises on her face. During the hearing, Depps lawyer questioned the LAPD officer asking her, Did you see any marks at all of any kind suggesting injury on her face? Ms. Saenz replied: No, I didnt. The officer also said she did not witness any damage done to the apartment including the alleged wine bottle smashing. I searched the entire flat and there was no damage, there was no broken glass nothing out of the ordinary," she said.</quote> </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ZannoL 11/02/20 9:53:56 PM #11:	https://pagesix.com/2020/07/15/amber-heard-accused-of-concocting-assault-photos/ Amber Heard was accused in court Wednesday of perpetrating a hoax by faking photos showing her with a badly bruised face despite having no marks when she first reported being attacked by husband Johnny Depp. Property manager Kevin Murphy told Londons High Court that Heard immediately called out to him when he arrived at her Los Angeles home in Dec. 2015 and tearfully claimed Depp had hit her in the face several times and pulled out her hair, the Evening Standard said. I remember standing roughly four feet away and becoming suspicious, Murphy told the court, according to the London paper. There were no marks, bruises, cuts, redness or swelling to Ms. Heards face, nor was there any area on her head where her hair appeared to have been pulled out, he said of the makeup-free actress. He was shown a photo of Heard dated Dec. 16 the day after his encounter that features Heard with clear marks on her face from what the court had been told was a litany of violence by Depp. When I saw her, I saw no bruises, no redness, no scratches, no signs of any physical abuse or confrontation, he insisted from the witness stand. He also claimed that a photo Heards team released supposedly showing hair pulled out in the attack was looked quite different to a photo he took at the time of a clump of hair the actress showed him. Murphy confirmed texting Depp about his concerns over conflicting evidence in the photos, telling the court he believed they were fraud. Asked if he was suggesting a conspiracy, he told the court, Well, I am not suggesting I think that it is a hoax. <cite>ZannoL posted [p:946638715] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>https://pagesix.com/2020/07/15/amber-heard-accused-of-concocting-assault-photos/ <quote>Amber Heard was accused in court Wednesday of perpetrating a hoax by faking photos showing her with a badly bruised face despite having no marks when she first reported being attacked by husband Johnny Depp. Property manager Kevin Murphy told Londons High Court that Heard immediately called out to him when he arrived at her Los Angeles home in Dec. 2015 and tearfully claimed Depp had hit her in the face several times and pulled out her hair, the Evening Standard said. I remember standing roughly four feet away and becoming suspicious, Murphy told the court, according to the London paper. There were no marks, bruises, cuts, redness or swelling to Ms. Heards face, nor was there any area on her head where her hair appeared to have been pulled out, he said of the makeup-free actress. He was shown a photo of Heard dated Dec. 16 the day after his encounter that features Heard with clear marks on her face from what the court had been told was a litany of violence by Depp. When I saw her, I saw no bruises, no redness, no scratches, no signs of any physical abuse or confrontation, he insisted from the witness stand. He also claimed that a photo Heards team released supposedly showing hair pulled out in the attack was looked quite different to a photo he took at the time of a clump of hair the actress showed him. Murphy confirmed texting Depp about his concerns over conflicting evidence in the photos, telling the court he believed they were fraud. Asked if he was suggesting a conspiracy, he told the court, Well, I am not suggesting I think that it is a hoax.</quote> </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheAwesomeMatt 11/02/20 9:56:02 PM #12:	Is this one of those cases of criminal vs civil cases, and that this was a civil case with the threshold being lowered to 'balance of probability' rather than 'beyond reasonable doubt'? Not a lawyer, if any legal experts want to explain. --- . <cite>TheAwesomeMatt posted [p:946638774] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>Is this one of those cases of criminal vs civil cases, and that this was a civil case with the threshold being lowered to 'balance of probability' rather than 'beyond reasonable doubt'? Not a lawyer, if any legal experts want to explain. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Lordgold666 11/02/20 10:01:54 PM #13:	Its funny bc his woman lied --- "May the Father of Understanding guide you." http://error1355.com/ce/Lordgold666.html <cite>Lordgold666 posted [p:946638968] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>Its funny bc his woman lied </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
St0rmFury 11/02/20 10:07:10 PM #14:	Amber Turd. --- "Average Joe" is a trolling term since it's completely an opinion. "Overachieving" is also an opinion. - SBAllen (Hellhole: 52458377) <cite>St0rmFury posted [p:946639161] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>Amber Turd.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
gunplagirl 11/02/20 10:10:17 PM #15:	Corrupt_Power posted... This is fucked up. There's been a lot of evidence that Heard was the abusive one, not Depp. Evidence seemed to indicate it was mutually toxic, with her being the worse of the two. --- tfw no big tiddy goth vampire gf who lactates blood - viewmaster_pi <cite>gunplagirl posted [p:946639262] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>Corrupt_Power posted... </cite> <quote>This is fucked up. There's been a lot of evidence that Heard was the abusive one, not Depp.</quote>Evidence seemed to indicate it was mutually toxic, with her being the worse of the two. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Darmik 11/02/20 10:15:12 PM #16:	BlueTigerLion posted... Yikes. I thought it was proven Amber Heard faked her injuries. Sure but wasn't that after The Sun published the story? The Sun is complete trash but a case like this going to Depp could set a bad precedent for reporting. Even if this specific decision sucks. --- Kind Regards, Darmik <cite>Darmik posted [p:946639419] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>BlueTigerLion posted... </cite> <quote>Yikes. I thought it was proven Amber Heard faked her injuries.</quote> Sure but wasn't that after The Sun published the story? The Sun is complete trash but a case like this going to Depp could set a bad precedent for reporting. Even if this specific decision sucks. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Middle hope 11/02/20 10:16:29 PM #17:	Alt-right Icon, Johnny "Knuckles" Depp --- https://imgur.com/iQep35u https://imgur.com/nhHkg9L https://imgur.com/mwTy0iF https://imgur.com/FCER80e <cite>Middle hope posted [p:946639459] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>Alt-right Icon, Johnny "Knuckles" Depp </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrupt_Power 11/02/20 10:17:49 PM #18:	gunplagirl posted... Corrupt_Power posted... This is fucked up. There's been a lot of evidence that Heard was the abusive one, not Depp. Evidence seemed to indicate it was mutually toxic, with her being the worse of the two. Hmm. If that's the case, that sucks. There's too much he-said-she-said with this whole situation. --- Posted with GameRaven 3.6.0_B3 <cite>Corrupt_Power posted [p:946639511] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>gunplagirl posted...</cite> <quote>Corrupt_Power posted... </cite> <quote> This is fucked up. There's been a lot of evidence that Heard was the abusive one, not Depp.</quote>Evidence seemed to indicate it was mutually toxic, with her being the worse of the two.</quote> Hmm. If that's the case, that sucks. There's too much he-said-she-said with this whole situation.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 11/03/20 5:22:09 AM #19:	TheAwesomeMatt posted... Is this one of those cases of criminal vs civil cases, and that this was a civil case with the threshold being lowered to 'balance of probability' rather than 'beyond reasonable doubt'? Not a lawyer, if any legal experts want to explain. No you pretty much got it it was a civil case. The Sun (A British tabloid famous for inserting topless women into its 3rd page for literally no reason) called Depp a wife beater He sued for libel And the judge said the sun had the right to call him that. Things like "Well I did throw a phone in her face but it didn't hurt much" didnt stretch far in court The ultimate irony is that if the sun lost they could still call him an "alleged" wifebeater and that would be fine The Sun is dumb and I like Depp but I kinda see the judges view here. people are totally not understanding the case You really dont want every famous person to be able to sue/silence the media everytime they say something they dislike --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair! https://imgur.com/yPw05Ob <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:946648653] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>TheAwesomeMatt posted... </cite> <quote>Is this one of those cases of criminal vs civil cases, and that this was a civil case with the threshold being lowered to 'balance of probability' rather than 'beyond reasonable doubt'? Not a lawyer, if any legal experts want to explain.</quote>No you pretty much got it it was a civil case. The Sun (A British tabloid famous for inserting topless women into its 3rd page for literally no reason) called Depp a wife beater He sued for libel And the judge said the sun had the right to call him that. Things like "Well I did throw a phone in her face but it didn't hurt much" didnt stretch far in court The ultimate irony is that if the sun lost they could still call him an "alleged" wifebeater and that would be fine The Sun is dumb and I like Depp but I kinda see the judges view here. people are totally not understanding the case You really dont want every famous person to be able to sue/silence the media everytime they say something they dislike </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
WesternMedia 11/03/20 6:51:34 AM #20:	I just heard of this. Should've mentioned it was UK in the title imo. Kind of ironic with their stance on free speech --- Cherish me <cite>WesternMedia posted [p:946649799] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>I just heard of this. Should've mentioned it was UK in the title imo. Kind of ironic with their stance on free speech </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
spikethedevil 11/03/20 6:52:32 AM #21:	Theres a reason we call it the scum. --- A garbage pod!? It's a smegging garbage pod! <cite>spikethedevil posted [p:946649817] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>Theres a reason we call it the scum. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
WesternMedia 11/03/20 6:56:28 AM #22:	spikethedevil posted... Theres a reason we call it the scum. Judge apparently doesn't think that. --- Cherish me <cite>WesternMedia posted [p:946649885] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>spikethedevil posted... </cite> <quote>Theres a reason we call it the scum.</quote>Judge apparently doesn't think that. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 11/03/20 7:06:33 AM #23:	WesternMedia posted... Judge apparently doesn't think that. The decision is not an indication of the quality of the journal The decision is that it wasn't a libellous claim. "I'm not a wifebeater, sure we beat each other and I threw a phone at her face but she's a bitch and did way worse than me" might convince people at the bar but in a civil libel suit? The claim needs to be flat out falsehood not "It was misleading and unfair" otherwise every media outlet is fucked If they called him a pedophile or said he murdered some dude called Pete in 1997. That's libel. The judge probably made the correct legal call and The Sun still sucks . Its not an either/or thing --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair! https://imgur.com/yPw05Ob <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:946650019] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>WesternMedia posted... </cite> <quote>Judge apparently doesn't think that.</quote>The decision is not an indication of the quality of the journal The decision is that it wasn't a libellous claim. "I'm not a wifebeater, sure we beat each other and I threw a phone at her face but she's a bitch and did way worse than me" might convince people at the bar but in a civil libel suit? The claim needs to be flat out falsehood not "It was misleading and unfair" otherwise every media outlet is fucked If they called him a pedophile or said he murdered some dude called Pete in 1997. That's libel. The judge probably made the correct legal call and The Sun still sucks . Its not an either/or thing </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
WesternMedia 11/03/20 7:14:10 AM #24:	UnfairRepresent posted... The decision is not an indication of the quality of the journal The decision is that it wasn't a libellous claim. "I'm not a wifebeater, sure we beat each other and I threw a phone at her face but she's a bitch and did way worse than me" might convince people at the bar but in a civil libel suit? The claim needs to be flat out falsehood not "It was misleading and unfair" otherwise every media outlet is fucked If they called him a pedophile or said he murdered some dude called Pete in 1997. That's libel. The judge probably made the correct legal call and The Sun still sucks . Its not an either/or thing It doesn't seem like Depp actually did any of the things that was said though. The article says the Judge just chose who to believe based on what was "likely or unlikely". --- Cherish me <cite>WesternMedia posted [p:946650154] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>UnfairRepresent posted... </cite> <quote>The decision is not an indication of the quality of the journal The decision is that it wasn't a libellous claim. "I'm not a wifebeater, sure we beat each other and I threw a phone at her face but she's a bitch and did way worse than me" might convince people at the bar but in a civil libel suit? The claim needs to be flat out falsehood not "It was misleading and unfair" otherwise every media outlet is fucked If they called him a pedophile or said he murdered some dude called Pete in 1997. That's libel. The judge probably made the correct legal call and The Sun still sucks . Its not an either/or thing</quote> It doesn't seem like Depp actually did any of the things that was said though. The article says the Judge just chose who to believe based on what was "likely or unlikely". </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 11/03/20 7:29:55 AM #25:	WesternMedia posted... It doesn't seem like Depp actually did any of the things that was said though. The article says the Judge just chose who to believe based on what was "likely or unlikely". I could be wrong but I thought the phone throwing wasnt disputed, just that it didnt hurt. Either way. The judge didn't decide the claim was true, just that was likely to be true. So not libel --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair! https://imgur.com/yPw05Ob <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:946650413] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>WesternMedia posted... </cite> <quote>It doesn't seem like Depp actually did any of the things that was said though. The article says the Judge just chose who to believe based on what was "likely or unlikely".</quote>I could be wrong but I thought the phone throwing wasnt disputed, just that it didnt hurt. Either way. The judge didn't decide the claim was true, just that was likely to be true. So not libel </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
WesternMedia 11/03/20 7:31:58 AM #26:	Damn is that actually all it takes for something to not be libel? --- Cherish me <cite>WesternMedia posted [p:946650457] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>Damn is that actually all it takes for something to not be libel? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Inferno Dive Dragoon 11/03/20 7:32:08 AM #27:	UK's High Court is a joke then? Okay, noted. --- N/A <cite>Inferno Dive Dragoon posted [p:946650460] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>UK's High Court is a joke then? Okay, noted.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 11/03/20 8:01:00 AM #28:	WesternMedia posted... Damn is that actually all it takes for something to not be libel? Well yeah it has to be. Think about it. Otherwise anyone could challenge the media on anything they say in court and destroy journalism Libel has to be a clear falsehood, not a disputed severity of action. The judge probably made the correct legal call --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair! https://imgur.com/yPw05Ob <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:946651043] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>WesternMedia posted... </cite> <quote>Damn is that actually all it takes for something to not be libel?</quote>Well yeah it has to be. Think about it. Otherwise anyone could challenge the media on anything they say in court and destroy journalism Libel has to be a clear falsehood, not a disputed severity of action. The judge probably made the correct legal call </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
WesternMedia 11/03/20 8:17:35 AM #29:	UnfairRepresent posted... Well yeah it has to be. Think about it. Otherwise anyone could challenge the media on anything they say in court and destroy journalism Libel has to be a clear falsehood, not a disputed severity of action. The judge probably made the correct legal call Well, the falsehood is the thing. If I'm reading it right the newspaper said Depp did things that he didn't do (as Heard could not back up her claims) and the Judge only had to decide that there was a good possible chance he did it. Maybe it would've worked better if he sued Heard first and won? --- Cherish me <cite>WesternMedia posted [p:946651375] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>UnfairRepresent posted... </cite> <quote>Well yeah it has to be. Think about it. Otherwise anyone could challenge the media on anything they say in court and destroy journalism Libel has to be a clear falsehood, not a disputed severity of action. The judge probably made the correct legal call</quote>Well, the falsehood is the thing. If I'm reading it right the newspaper said Depp did things that he didn't do (as Heard could not back up her claims) and the Judge only had to decide that there was a good possible chance he did it. Maybe it would've worked better if he sued Heard first and won? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ivynn 11/03/20 8:18:32 AM #30:	That musta been a pretty good bribe The Sun gave them. --- https://imgur.com/vDci4hD <cite>Ivynn posted [p:946651399] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>That musta been a pretty good bribe The Sun gave them. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Prismsblade 11/03/20 8:27:14 AM #31:	So unharmenly throwing a phone at someone counts as a beating? Seems to me like the bias judge was just looking for a reason, no matter how minor to side with the newspaper. --- 3DS FC:3368-5403-9633 Name: Kaizer PSN: Blackkaizer <cite>Prismsblade posted [p:946651610] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>So unharmenly throwing a phone at someone counts as a beating? Seems to me like the bias judge was just looking for a reason, no matter how minor to side with the newspaper. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 11/03/20 8:45:48 AM #32:	Prismsblade posted... So unharmenly throwing a phone at someone counts as a beating? Seems to me like the bias judge was just looking for a reason, no matter how minor to side with the newspaper. Because you're being hyperliteral and acting like Depp's friends at the bar. Not as a bearer of legal standard "Its libel to call someone who throws things at his wife a wifebeater because that's throwing not beating" is not an impressive legal distinction The concept of the Suns article was saying it was a disgrace to cast someone who was abusive to his wife to be in a movie you would have to demonstrate that the abuse never occurred to call that libel in a court of law, and Depp couldn't do that. If they called him a pedophile or murderer, that's libel because it's a demonstrably false claim. Best advice I can give is stop looking at this from the perspective of a Depp fan who hates Heard, then it starts to make more sense theres a reason why lawyers are trained to be as unattached and impartial to cases as they can possibly be. --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair! https://imgur.com/yPw05Ob <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:946652092] in Johnny Dep... [t:79080718]...</cite> <quote>Prismsblade posted... </cite> <quote>So unharmenly throwing a phone at someone counts as a beating? Seems to me like the bias judge was just looking for a reason, no matter how minor to side with the newspaper.</quote>Because you're being hyperliteral and acting like Depp's friends at the bar. Not as a bearer of legal standard "Its libel to call someone who throws things at his wife a wifebeater because that's throwing not beating" is not an impressive legal distinction The concept of the Suns article was saying it was a disgrace to cast someone who was abusive to his wife to be in a movie you would have to demonstrate that the abuse never occurred to call that libel in a court of law, and Depp couldn't do that. If they called him a pedophile or murderer, that's libel because it's a demonstrably false claim. Best advice I can give is stop looking at this from the perspective of a Depp fan who hates Heard, then it starts to make more sense theres a reason why lawyers are trained to be as unattached and impartial to cases as they can possibly be. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1

Current Events > Johnny Depp loses libel case against newspaper that called him a wife beater. (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Johnny Depp loses libel case against newspaper that called him a wife beater.