ABC News’ Linsey Davis spoke with celebrity lawyer Christopher Melcher about the latest developments on the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard defamation trial and Kate Moss’ upcoming testimony.
ABC News Live Prime, Weekdays at 7EST & 9EST
WATCH the ABC News Live Stream Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_Ma8oQLmSM
SUBSCRIBE to ABC NEWS: https://bit.ly/2vZb6yP
Watch More on http://abcnews.go.com/
LIKE ABC News on FACEBOOK https://www.facebook.com/abcnews
FOLLOW ABC News on TWITTER: https://twitter.com/abc
#ABCNLPrime #JohnnyDepp #AmberHeard #DefamationTrial #KateMoss #CelebrityLawyer
Original source (ABC/Youtube)
I’m amazed that a mainstream channel actually has a legal mind that isn’t toting the believe all women.
#nowhereu@
I personally believe the plaintiff has shown that damage was intentionally done to hurt him & I just don't see, I'm mean this is Virginia, they're not stupid, trust me. The pleads & story after story, isn't helping.
I don't believe anything I didn't witness myself until proven otherwise. I believe I'm reasonable & can be diswayed easily if 1 is clearly ego centrical, on either side it'd be hard to trust them.
He is absolutely right
AH is not the victim here. Period.
Let's be Frank we've seen a lot "empowered" women have abused men using the #metoo movement.
I don’t think this hurts #metoo at all. I think amber made her bed so she needs to lie in it. We can’t just blanketly believe women…that helps no one.
Counter sewer Amber Turd she is a lie
Heard said today, the stuff she wrote was about Depp.
She's been lying about making reference to him.
Oops
Since each side in the Depp v. Heard case has their own mental health expert, and their opinions are totally opposite, regarding Heard’s mental status and both opinions are compelling and it’s difficult to decide which one to believe and both could be biased towards their client, why doesn’t the court order a third mental health expert to examine Heard? And when the court orders another expert, they should choose an expert who has way more years of experience that the two dueling experts, and also has years of experience of testifying to the court and totally non biased towards either side. I think this is what the jury will have a hard time making a decision as to who to believe. The meta data issue I think will not have affect on the jury’s decision because its too complex of information to understand and unless all the jury members know and understand the complexity of meta data, they will just dismiss that testimony from the experts and not consider anything in the expert’s opinions when making their verdict. I believe the decision of the jury will cause the whole trial to be a wash, having both sides not getting anything. In the end, however, I believe Depp will be the victor, having gained a better public perception, which will help him get cast in future opportunities in the film market. Also, I believe this trial has hurt Heard’s image to the public as well as maybe causing the film making market to make a pass on considering her for future opportunities in that market, but I think she will get more endorsement opportunities in the future. I’m leaning more towards Depp’s side though, not because I’m a fan or anything like that, but because the witnesses on his side sound more believable, and most of Heard’s witnesses were over exaggerating a lot in their testimony.
Since each side in the Depp v. Heard case has their own mental health expert, and their opinions are totally opposite, regarding Heard’s mental status and both opinions are compelling and it’s difficult to decide which one to believe and both could be biased towards their client, why doesn’t the court order a third mental health expert to examine Heard? And when the court orders another expert, they should choose an expert who has way more years of experience that the two dueling experts, and also has years of experience of testifying to the court and totally non biased towards either side. I think this is what the jury will have a hard time making a decision as to who to believe. The meta data issue I think will not have affect on the jury’s decision because its too complex of information to understand and unless all the jury members know and understand the complexity of meta data, they will just dismiss that testimony from the experts and not consider anything in the expert’s opinions when making their verdict. I believe the decision of the jury will cause the whole trial to be a wash, having both sides not getting anything. In the end, however, I believe Depp will be the victor, having gained a better public perception, which will help him get cast in future opportunities in the film market. Also, I believe this trial has hurt Heard’s image to the public as well as maybe causing the film making market to make a pass on considering her for future opportunities in that market, but I think she will get more endorsement opportunities in the future. I’m leaning more towards Depp’s side though, not because I’m a fan or anything like that, but because the witnesses on his side sound more believable, and most of Heard’s witnesses were over exaggerating a lot in their testimony. And Heard’s attorneys sound and I get a perception that they don’t believe their own client and have lost faith in her, almost as though they come off of as just being public defenders and just protecting her rights and not considering anything els
I never heard of Amber Heard before this case she is obviously a liar and so blatantly narcissist
The judge is for amber
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmG4zvstrlg&t=19s
Amber Heard does not display herself as a victim of DV. She is defiant as to the stories she confesses and nothing to truly show evidence of DV. Her sister and a few friends stories do not speak the truth because nothing meshes. Amber Heard is too bold and shows her every move of narcissistic behavior. It’s very difficult to be in the presence of narcissistic behavior because the narcissist displays himself/ herself above you, whether with voice or by physically hurting the victim. Their words are truths in their eyes even though it’s not so. They resort to violence and hence, are overly thrilled when they physically hurt the victim because they feel and see victory in their eyes. It’s like a high only narcissistic people feel. While the victim falls to the narcissists tactics, the monster now thinks of a way to sooth itself by knowing they did it but will always be in denial… will also blame the victim as to why they did it or will deny doing it. Amber Heard has caused her own defamation and brought others down as she recruited them to her aid. The devil has unleashed itself… very scary woman.
EXCUSE ME. The judge made comments that could bring a mistrial, push comes to shove. Her comments whether jokingly or not, , but still – completely bias – an oar to jds team. Completely out of line. Could be viewed and acted on in benefit of jd's team – to use to file a Mistrial. And- You should get it, being you are an attorney. A good judge does not make such remarks to a witness nor to a plaintiff. You do not joke around in any type of way – especially directly to eirher party, and in a way of a comment as to dismiss and, or DEMINISH a party – to the case – JD's acts of violence and abuse which IS DIRECT TESTIMONY in the case. Very unprofessional. Could been viewed as help, a oar or a life saver and a good reason and a excuse for jds team to file a mistrial. And you know this being you are an attorney. Her saying, and smiling at jd – said: "" and don't break anything on your way out""???? NOT COOL. A joke or not. Her comment regardless whether made accidentally inserted foot in mouth – or said deliberately, either way, it could be taken, into account, and it can come across to jurors and can influence jurors – sway the jurors — "" to DEMINIISH jds acts of violence and abuse, via deminish his physical acts of rages in his destroying property. NOT COOL. NOT FUNNY. IT COULD SWAY JURORS INTO ALSO DEMINISHING SUCH VIOLENT ACTS. You are an attorney- you should know this. And have a issue with it. Especially immediately following jd's detrimental and incriminating – testimony which he was at the time exiting the witness stand. Very sneaky and convenient on the judges part. So not cool. She should be immediately removed or dismissed and disciplined – as the presiding trial Judge. Judges are NOT suppose to make such remarks as to diminish, make fun of, joke around about violent acts that are directly testified and involved in a trial case. She crossed the line. And it could be used by jds team to motion a mistrial should they lose. I believe she did it exactly for that reason, too. To give jds team a OUT, in case they lose. a outlet, a reason to file a mistrial. NO judge, would ever make such comments to any witness, but directly and especially to the very party and witness of the Case, , who has repeatedly damaged property and said acts are recorded testimony- . She deliberately threw a last minute oar or life Saver out there, it was A DELIBERATE statement, it was that clear, that obvious. It's like a judge making light in a murder trial, telling a murderer on trial , on the witness stand, folloeing the murderers testimony – and in a joking manner, "don't go out and murder anyone on your very out". Look. Anyone in law, any smart attorney – any legal assistant, any paralegal, any law clerk would have noticed it, and had serious issues with it, and would have called her out for it, to expose it, fir what it really was. Jds team knew exactly what it was. You'd had to be unfamiliar with law, trials, judges – how it works NOT to have noticed it. As the presiding judge – she violated both state and federal RULES of Conducts – per code of conducts under both state and federal Codes of Conducts and Codes of Color, Rules of Procedure, Instructions to Trial Judges – which all cover such prohibited Bias and Acts of Conflicts particularly instructed to trial judges. And you are a attorney, and you know this, yet didn't say a word of the implications. Talk about CONFLICTS, this was/is a MAJOR issue. It is a good thing, that if AH' loses this. Ase, her legal team too can file a Mistrial due to this judges detrimental, Unethical, violation of a presiding Trial Judges Conducts in this case. They too can use it, to file a Mistrial and to have a unfair jury decision to be thrown out, Mistrial, and, or Request for New Trial.
This case will empower both men and women to come forward………….Amber is not Everywoman – she is ruining my cause with lies and fraudulent evidence – UK
Johnny Depp have many audio and picture evidences to strenghten his side of the story. But Amber had no evidences and her over dramatic testimonies didn't just add up. The public around the World heard his side of the story and support him.
If you have been watching every day of the trial, you'd have some serious doubts as to wether Amber was actually abused by Depp.
Perhaps it is the other way around, we should be very careful to not just think of women being an abuse victims.
Due process is everything, basing your comments in fact, by watching the whole trial is also important.
#justiceforjohnnydepp
I lost count of how many times Amber has lied
The victim did come forward. Johnny Depp is the victim. The facts tell the story.
Men are victims of domestic violence too.
Cancel Amber Turd 💩
Maybe the idea that we should always believe the woman (I know some people say victim but we all know who they're referring to) on just their word was irresponsible in the first place because, you know, sometimes a pissed off partner will do or say anything to drag the others name through the mud. Automatically believing the woman is/was foolish and this case highlights that.
You're going to talk about how it's sad that Amber may be lying and making it more difficult for victims to come forward, but you're NOT going to talk about how Johnny's testimony is encouraging many male victims to come forward? Disgusting sexism. Thanks for confirming my bias against ABC.
Then how about the man who was really abused.
Yes – he took the stand!!! ANd he lied and lied and lied!!!!AT least admit some of your wrongdoing!!!!
This is supposed to be journalism?!? She mentions just starting off that AH's editorial did not directly name Johnny Depp, as if that means anything. It doesn't, at all. What matters is the context, and to whom the context of the message portrays, which in this case for all who have been watching the trial, is Mr. Depp. I think their biggest problem is that this case absolutely contradicts the METOO movement, showing that instead of believing anyone's words, we should instead believe the evidence.
nothing has to happen with the METOO movement, if you are saying the truth.
Panelist is insightful.
What if the victim lied, misrepresented and/or exaggerated facts to support their arguments.
Nice job by Attorney Melcher ⚖️ !
God will continue to bless Dr OSABA ON YOUTUBE for curing my herpes disease you can reach out to dr osaba on his YouTube channel for any kind of diseases
I was diagnosed with herpes disease for 3years and many people told me there is no cure for herpes after I meant dr osaba on YouTube and I use his herbal medicine for 14days I was cured today I’m herpes negative
Who is this loser ?
Amber isn’t a victim so she has damaged the real victims
Amber the Aquaturd getting flushed out of court. 💩
This woman is a lier