The ridiculous Johnny Depp verdict may simply be one of the best improvement for abuse victims in a very long time as a result of it means extra ladies will name 911, secretly report abuse, file police reviews, and search restraining orders in courtroom. Here’s why.
It’s pretty straightforward for abusers to sue victims for defamation in the event that they write an oped. It’s practically unimaginable to sue if a sufferer reviews abuse to legislation enforcement. Those are shielded from defamation lawsuits in comparison with statements in opeds. It’s why Amber Heard was not sued for the statements she made about Depp’s abuse in when she sought and received a restraining order towards him in a California courtroom in 2016.
That stated, the jury needs to be ashamed of itself.
For starters, the decision was inconsistent as a result of the jury determined that Heard lied when she stated she was abused, and that Depp additionally lied when he stated (by his legal professionals) that her abuse claims have been a “hoax.” Jurors may need thought Depp was extra likable, however there was a ton of proof that Depp was abusive.
From textual content messages the place he apologized to Heard and promised to abuse her “burnt corpse to make sure she’s dead,” to the corroborative pictures and compelling testimony from witnesses who noticed her bruises, and the uncontradicted proof of Depp’s aggression, the jury needed to be brain-dead to resolve, because it did, that each single allegation of abuse was not solely false — however maliciously false.
A choose within the UK, contemplating the identical claims in an analogous defamation case towards a British newspaper that referred to as Depp a “wife beater” in 2018 not solely dominated towards Depp in 2020 but additionally made specific findings that Depp did, in truth, abuse Heard, bodily and sexually, on 12 completely different events. UK legislation was much more favorable to Depp than US legislation, however Depp nonetheless misplaced in an enormous approach. No shock he took a distinct strategy within the US, suing solely Heard somewhat than the Washington Post that printed her piece in December 2018.
By framing the case as Depp v. Heard, somewhat than Depp v. The Washington Post, Depp prevented making the media his enemy, after which he spent a fortune on PR to whip the general public right into a frenzy. It was the OJ Simpson case on steroids — with mobs on the gates of TikTok somewhat than the courthouse.
Depp’s attorneys have been good to not sue the Washington Post, however why didn’t Heard’s attorneys add the Post as a defendant since they have been those that printed the oped, and the media is accountable for guaranteeing that what they publish — whether or not information tales or opinion items — is just not defamatory?
Heard’s attorneys additionally oddly failed to herald the ACLU as a defendant, which is equally curious because it was the ACLU that wrote the oped after getting into into some form of settlement with Heard the place she can be the ACLU’s spokesperson for abuse victims and Heard would donate $3.5 million to the group over time.
The ACLU even had the oped vetted by their very own legal professionals to make sure that Depp couldn’t file a lawsuit, however they have been unsuitable, which is why Heard’s attorneys ought to have added them as a defendant. Having the Washington Post and the ACLU combating on the identical aspect with Heard would have added energy to Heard’s authorized workforce and allowed the jury to unfold among the damages round within the occasion they dominated in Depp’s favor.
An clarification is due the general public for why Amber Heard alone, and never the ACLU or the Washington Post, is being held accountable. Heard’s lead legal professional spent a lot her time on tv after the decision saying the case would set ladies again and deter victims from reporting. Since silencing victims will solely result in a rise in home violence, no advocate ought to say such a factor out loud, even when they suppose it’s true.
On each degree this case is mindless, and the general public is entitled to a greater clarification than “the jury liked Johnny Depp more.”
Wendy Murphy is a lawyer and victims’ rights advocate.
Source: www.bostonherald.com”