Did Amber Heard use insurance to pay for her defense of Johnny Depp’s defamation lawsuit? It's a smart move that others have used to save millions in attorney's fees. #justiceforjohnnydepp
In the US, homeowners insurance covers personal liability, which may include defamation suits. Umbrella insurance (not to be confused with @ThatUmbrellaGuy) offers coverage in excess of the limits of the homeowner’s policy.
Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, OJ Simpson, Bill Clinton, and Roger Clemens all turned to their insurance companies to pay for the costs of their defenses.ipjournal.law.wfu.edu/2016/05/sued-f…
Amber Heard had no real property when the parties divorced in 2016, per their dissolution action. She may have bought a home after or had renter’s insurance. The policy in effect when the claim occurred (December 2018) is on the hook.
The insurance company must pay the costs of defending a claim that is covered. Intentional acts are not covered, so the insurance company might not have to pay the verdict if the jury finds her op-ed was knowingly false.
Even when insurance pays, the duty of the lawyers is to the client. The insurance company cannot direct the litigation. Those decisions are made by the client.
There’s nothing wrong with using insurance when it’s available. That’s what it is there for. It’s a good lesson to check your insurance if a claim is made, as you never know what might be covered.
If you liked this thread and want to get the latest updates from the deliberations, please follow me on Twitter.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
After listening to the audio of Amber Heard abusing Johnny Depp, the ACLU has issued a statement on “What You Need to Know About ACLU Artist Ambassadors, Including Amber Heard.” Thanks, ACLU, for splaining this to us! #JusticeForJohnnyDepp
In 2016, the ACLU proclaimed: “Amber Heard Donates Millions to Support the ACLU….” Like its ambassador, the ACLU considers "pledge" and "donate" to be synonymous. A huge organization that relies on actual money to operate would think that.
Two years after Amber Heard promised in a divorce judgment not to disparage Johnny Depp, she had no trouble telling the world she was a victim of abuse at JD’s hand. Here are the non-disparagement provisions she agreed to in the court judgment:
Amber Heard's defamation expert, Kathryn Arnold, testifies that AH suffered reputational damage after statements were made by Depp's attorney Adam Waldman, not understanding the difference between correlation and causation. #JusticeForJohnnyDeep
The fact an event occurs after another (correlation) does not mean the first event was the reason for the second (causation). When pressed about the difference, Arnold said "I'm not an expert in semantics." Garbage in, garbage out.
Concluding that Amber Heard suffered harm to her reputation after the "defamatory" Waldman statements were made, Arnold did not consider if the prior accusations against AH contributed. The terrible press AH received earlier was not important to this expert.
It was an ethics violation by Dr. David Spiegel to testify about Johnny Depp's psychological traits without evaluating him. Spiegel acknowledges the rule against giving opinions about people they have not evaluated but does it anyway. #JusticeForJohnnyDeep
Per the American Psychiatric Association, ethics rule 7.3, it "is unethical for a psychiatrist to offer a professional opinion unless he or she has conducted an examination and has been granted proper authorization for such a statement."
It's called the Goldwater Rule. Ethical rules were created to maintain the legitimacy of the profession, to keep psychs from giving uniformed opinions. psychiatry.org/news-room/gold…
Why did Amber Heard call the media in 2016 instead of the police if she feared Johnny Depp, and how did her bruise disappear overnight? Let’s break it down #justiceforJohnnyDepp
Upon filing for divorce, Amber Heard’s attorney made financial demands on Johnny Depp and accused him of abuse. The 24 May 2016 letter says Amber wants to handle this quietly, so she has “not yet” asked for a restraining order.
Two days later, at 9:45 am, Amber Heard’s attorney noticed an emergency hearing for the next day (27 May 2016) at 10:00 am. This is the ONLY information shared with Johnny Depp's team about the hearing that would occur in 23 hours:
Amber Heard knew her dogs can’t fly, but she illegally brought them to Australia in 2015 and falsely blamed others. She is now being investigated for perjury. Let’s break it down. #JusticeForJohnnyDepp newsweek.com/amber-heard-pe…
In April 2015, Amber Heard wanted to take the couple’s two Yorkshire terriers, Boo and Pistol, to Australia. Assistant Kevin Murphy told Amber that taking the dogs would violate Australia’s rules protecting its biosecurity.
Johnny Depp did not want the dogs to travel on airplanes, believing they should stay in Los Angeles. He put the interests of Boo and Pistol ahead of his desire to be with them.
Amber Heard said nothing of the horrific bottle incident she claims Johnny Depp committed in March 2015 when asking for a restraining order in May 2016. See below for her papers. #JusticeForJohnnyDepp
Leaving out the most serious incident, which allegedly occurred a year earlier, makes no sense if Amber wanted to ensure court protection from Johnny. The incidents she chose to mention in her application are minor in comparison.