Lawyers respond to the decision in the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard case

Lawyers respond to the decision in the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard case

Web Desk
June 3, 2022

Lawyers respond to the decision in the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard case

The Defamation case of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard took six weeks to finally come to a conclusion
Judge chose to allow cameras in the state court weeks before the trial began.
A decision that Depp´s lawyers welcomed and Heard’s lawyers fought.

Washington: The acrid US defamation trial between actors Johnny Depp and Amber Heard — and the decision to televise it — will have a “potentially catastrophic” impact on abuse survivors, advocates say.

Jurors in the six-week trial, in which the former husband and wife swapped accusations of severe domestic violence, mostly agreed with Depp this week, ordering Heard to pay him $10.35 million for defaming him in a 2018 Washington Post column in which she never mentioned his name.

Judge Penney Azcarate chose to allow cameras in the state court weeks before the trial began, fearful that if she didn’t, too many media might come up for the high-profile case.

“I don´t see any good cause not to do it,” Azcarate said, according to Variety — a decision that Depp´s lawyers welcomed and Heard´s lawyers fought.

Michele Dauber, a law professor at Stanford University and advocate against campus sexual assault, branded it “the single worst decision for survivors by a court in decades” that showed “a profound lack of understanding by the judge of sexual violence.”

Heard was forced “to describe her alleged rape in graphic detail on television. That shocks the conscience and should offend every woman and survivor regardless of whether they agree with the verdict or not,” she said.

The last time she could recall a rape survivor being forced to testify publicly was in 1983, she said.

“There is no way to justify the judge´s decision to allow cameras in this case… There is no public interest in this case that could possibly outweigh the harm done.”

Instead, she argued, “every victim is going to think twice before coming forward and seeking a restraining order or telling anyone about any abuse they are experiencing after this.

“Women may be injured or even killed as a result of not seeking help. This case has been a complete disaster. It is potentially catastrophic.”

The trial riveted a global audience not used to watching sexual assault and intimate partner allegations play out in court and that — regardless of opinions on the verdict — is a problem, warned Ruth Glenn, president of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

“I don´t think we have a society yet that understands the dynamics of domestic violence,” Glenn told AFP in an interview.

That crucial context was not discussed enough during the court proceedings in Fairfax, Virginia, she argued, saying that for her and her colleagues there was “no doubt” about the patterns of abuse that were displayed.

“You make sure that there are people present that understand that. And until you do that, let´s not televise this,” she said.

For the latest Entertainment News follow BOL News on Google News. Read more on Latest Entertainment New on oldsite.bolnews.com