Let's debunk some horrendous #DeppVsHeard misinformation that has been flying around the internet and that countless people have cited to me as evidence.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion on this case, but no-one should base that opinion on things that simply aren't true.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion on this case, but no-one should base that opinion on things that simply aren't true.
MYTH 1) The UK case, in which a judge ruled that Depp has physically abused Heard 12 times, was a "sham", that Depp wasn't allowed to present evidence, that the judge didn't hear the same evidence as in this trial, or that it's very hard to win a libel trial in the UK.
This is not true. Firstly, the UK is famously one of the easiest places on earth to win a libel suit. In fact, the government is in the process of reforming libel laws here because it is TOO easy for someone to win and because the jurisdiction is seen as too plaintiff-friendly.
Secondly, it definitely wasn't a "sham". This is absolutely false. My Law360 colleague was there, she heard all the evidence and reported it. We are one of the most reputable legal news agencies in the world. You can find her first-hand coverage here:
law360.com/search?q=QB-20…
law360.com/search?q=QB-20…
The evidence presented in Virginia is v similar to what the judge heard in the UK. Eg, that audio of Heard saying "I was hitting you." The judge considers that in his judgment: "No great weight is to be put on these alleged admissions by Ms Heard to aggressive violent behaviour."
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
