Nope that isn't how that works, and if it was then none of these witnesses would have met the burdens of proof for the allegations thrown around. Lying under oath in a criminal proceeding vs a civil are very different.
- - - Updated - - -
A civil court has no jurisdiction over a criminal complaint, Domestic Violence is a Crime so is Lying about it and seeking to commit fraud in order obtain financial gain.
- - - Updated - - -
Nope, but apparently AH has been convicted anyways.
Milli Vanilli, Bigger than Elvis
The moment the evidence moved to the validity or truth of claims of domestic violence OR accusations that she faked it, in terms of make up and calling the press for financial gain
- - - Updated - - -
Yess Google.com Search Johnny Depp Trial, you're welcome
Milli Vanilli, Bigger than Elvis
I didn't say JD shouldn't file a defamation case, I said that any arguments made not specifically answering, how the defamation specifically identified him, and what damage he specifically insured because it alone then it should have been dismissed or lost outright.
As to financial gain, according to JD Amber had something to gain by faking Domestic assault SOO, he should have sought criminal charges, first.
Milli Vanilli, Bigger than Elvis
I think you guys broke him.
I'm just asking for a link, homie, not your firstborn child. One would think a link is pretty easy to provide
https://criminalminds.fandom.com/wiki/Amber_Heard
Like that, which is one of the top results when I search "Amber Heard criminal" on browsers.
See, I shared a link, it's really not that scary.
Got it, so you think criminal cases should be started based on he said she said. Also, we don't know if JD could have sought criminal charges.
Very compelling arguments. The better question is, why the fuck didn't she seek criminal charges but instead wrote an op-ed and leaked videos to TMZ?
No you're just being a condescending full of fucking shit, It is not my job to link you shit you can find for yourself in order to fix your view about events you should clearly have been able to figure out. I don't give a fuck what you think, and you can clearly read what I have. So the only reason you're responding to me, for exactly the response you just got.
- - - Updated - - -
No Crimes should be investigated and processed, they should not be used as fodder for civil cases to get rich and win defamation on facts not substantiated.
And yes the same is True for Amber Heard, she shouldn't win anything either.
Milli Vanilli, Bigger than Elvis
Yes, I am aware which is why none of the BS about anything AH said or did should have been brought up as testimony. It had nothing to do with defamation because none of it was substantiated in the first place, her Opinion or perspective in a Op-Ed where she didn't specifically mention him and DIDN'T cause any damage that could be established is what is relevant.
Not did or did he beat her, if he wasn't triad and found guilty nobody reasonably should or could credibly believed without that to the point that JD would be punished. RUMORS on the other hand is another issue, people OUTSIDE the court in a private business can act on all kinds of RUMORS or GOSSIP especially in Hollywood.
AH isn't especially responsible for that unless it's determined. That's defamation, This trial was not about defamation because that element was never proven, along with proof, that anybody else KNEW who AH meant in the Op-ED after it was published, not after it was discovered for this trial.
Milli Vanilli, Bigger than Elvis