A juror explains why the sentence was heavier for the actress

What is behind a victory in court against a jury? In the case of the trial between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, one of the seven jurors agreed to answer – on condition of anonymity, we only know that it is a man – on the reasons which led them to condemn the actress more strongly than her ex-husband. Both were indeed convicted of defamation of the other. The interpreter of Queen Mera must pay 10.35 million dollars in compensatory and punitive damages, while the Pirates of the Caribbean owes him $2 million in compensatory damages.

“They had couple arguments. They were yelling at each other. I don’t think that makes either of them right. That’s what happens when we argue. But to get to the level of what she was claiming, there was not enough or any evidence to support what she was saying. If you are a battered woman, why buy the other, “aggressor”, a knife? If you really want Johnny Depp to get drugs, why are you taking them in his presence? the juror told ABC.

not successful

No evidence proven by Amber Heard was able to convince the jury. The photos taken by the actress of Johnny Depp unconscious? “If you mix alcohol with marijuana, that’s how you’re going to end up – you pass out. We talked at length about all the drugs she said was enough, and most of them are drugs that turn you off. You don’t get violent with these drugs. You become a zombie, as seen in the pictures,” he explained.

Amber Heard’s pics with bruises? “She never goes out without makeup, but to file a restraining order in court, she doesn’t wear makeup and her publicist is with her. These things add up and start to get hard to believe,” he comments. The attitude at the helm also played a role. According to the juror, Amber Heard appeared less natural than Johnny Depp. “It was as if she could go from one emotion to another with the snap of her fingers. She would answer a question, start crying, and two seconds later she was freezing. It didn’t look natural,” he explained, explaining that the jurors had dubbed it “crocodile tears”.

Social networks and hypocrisy

Finally, the longest debate (four hours) between the jurors was over the divorce money that she did not give to charity, as she had nevertheless claimed. Amber Heard had explained to the bar that it was about a “pledge of donations” which she would honor when her finances allowed it. She added that if she had not been able to pay the 7 million dollars since 2016, it is because she had to pay her lawyers to defend herself in this case brought by Johnny Depp.

The latter’s lawyer, Camille Vasquez, was surprised since her client filed a complaint in March 2019, then broadcast, in the courtroom, an interview dating from 2018 of the actress, in which she declared to have ” given” the entire amount received during his divorce. It turned out that the ACLU, one of the organizations, received out of pocket only $350,000 of the expected $3.5 million. “The fact that she wasn’t given a lot was hypocritical,” the juror commented.

Finally, he defended the jury in its entirety on their links to social networks. Amber Heard indeed affirmed in her first televised intervention – just like her lawyer the day after the verdict on NBC – that their decision had been integrated by social networks, massively behind Johnny Depp. “That’s not true. Social media has had no impact on us. We focused on the evidence. We have not taken into account what happens outside the court. (…) There were serious charges and a lot of money at stake, we did not take that lightly, ”he said, specifying that of the seven jurors (five men and two women), he and three others “at least” did not have a Twitter account.

Leave a Comment