As Marks pointed out, there's hundreds of articles about Depp all the time, cheery picking the gutter press to try and suggest the op ed had no effect on JDs career backfired spectacularly, Marks was just too strong a witness and Heard's lawyer was definitely out of his depth..
yup it's insane that this is somehow allowed, while "hearsay" applies to any counter to any of it! They should be required to put the person the article states directly heard whatever the claim in the article is onto the stand or not be allowed to use any of it! IE, if they want to claim he's the most overpaid actor, they should be required to produce someone who provided that information to the article & that person should be held to hearsay rules & subject to cross examination to see if they really have the financial information on all actors in hollywood to be able to make that claim or not
Never interrupt an enemy when he's making a mistake. Actually they're proving that Heard caused damage. 100s of articles = JD is still "most overpaid actor" - 1 article from H = his career is over.
My thinking is that Heard's defence team are trying to suggest news articles are meaningless and harmless (such as Amber's article about Johnny). Look!... everyone's written a harmful article about Johnny... Amber's article was just a drop in the ocean.
Many levels of unsubstantiated earsay ...and that judge just let's it be said More infuriating is the fact usa courts are using spent legal documents to trail twice on Dv .. in USA that's called double jeopardy by exposed prejudices
Can’t believe this guy is a professional lawyer. He doesn’t even let the person finish their answer before asking another question. Every time he asks a question you can tell he doesn’t even know if he should be asking it.
At this point you can see they're trying to argue with the witness instead of asking questions lmao, I know intimidated and being Aggressive towards witness is one of lawyer tactics or whatever but at this point the way he spoke himself just like a teenager on social media spewing random trivia without anything backing up his argument
@@OrdinaryMemer6969 props to them for sticking to their plan even though all it is doing is helping Johnny haha. Interrupting to create anger and trying to create an image of him being an abuser with no evidence except that he loves to drink and take drugs. Unfortunately that doesn’t equal violence in all people.
Yeah, and then all those objections about 'hearsay' by Amber's lawyer but none from Depp's lawyer about this. Journalists' opinions are literally hearsay.
They may be trying to draw a parallel with Amber Heard’s article. If the witness says something like “those tabloid articles don’t matter”, then it goes to show that Heard’s article wouldn’t matter either.
I just don’t understand how the defense objects to everything as hearsay, yet uses tabloid articles as proof - aren’t those a prime example of hearsay????
I would be appalled at how JD's team allows all this tabloid use without objecting as hearsay if this wasn't the sh1tshow it is right now. I guess they let it roll because AH's team is pretty much sinking themselves and making everyone dislike them with such childish/dirty methods.
the lawyer's job is to ask questions, and the witness is supposed to answer them exactly how the lawyer wants. when they start adding context or explaining, theyre cut off b/c it's the lawyer's cross examination not the witness'. Imagine if you had a lawyer that was asking the a witness of the murder of your family: "is it true the defendant jumped in the car and took off?" and the witness kept answering slightly off like "well, he certainly didnt jump. both of his feet were on the ground.... (and on and on)" not a great example but its the best i could do at this time in the morning lol
@@toericabaker but is it allowed to interfere when the witness is answering and giving his testimony? these lawyers are a joke! worse than the lawyer in kyle rittenhouse case
The fact that these lawyers are going off on “posts/articles” made from people who have never once spent a second with both or either one of these people as facts is laughable. Anyone can write anything to get a second of recognition or infamy
The channel Legal Eagle made a video explaining that to prove defamation in the case of a public person, you need to prove malicious intent and some kind of negative impact (if I remember correctly). So I’m guessing the lawyer and bringing up all this articles to try and show that Amber Heard is not the one responsible for problem’s with his career.
@@yogajourney9519 Being drunk and disruptive on set is vastly different to being a accused of domestic violence. Drunk and disruptive can be deemed normal in Hollywood, historically speaking. Wife beating not so much.
I cannot believe how absurd this lawyer is!!! Almost trying to force the witness to make a claim/statement based on articles written by others?? I mean, is he REALLY a lawyer??? If HE is, I TOO can be a lawyer!!!
Right. I understand he is trying to establish their were other bad articles but the difference is none of those publications had first hand knowledge. Obviously everybody is going to believe the one written by someone b with private knowledge of him
Lawyers play mind games to make evidence up when they have none. These attorneys could PERSONALLY like JD way more, but they were hired by AH so they gotta work for her lol
OMG I could not agree more. I get it, they are her Defense Attorneys, but there is no reason for any of them to behave the way they are. Rude, disrespectful, not letting them answer. There is no need for the lack of respect. They're losing, they know it. It's going to be hard to for AH to dig herself out of this. She lied. She didn't even right the op Ed, Johnny never hit her.
This lawyer is disgusting. He keeps saying "you would agree" when he never outwardly says he agrees. This is a joke. This case is going to kill his career.
I hope JD wins but I'm really wondering why literally everyone in the trial keeps repeating the same words and stuttering a lot before they can say most of their sentences with so many things they are talking about. It's very strange to me
If the public is getting annoyed with Heards lawyers then you know the jury is as well. Guy kept asking different versions of the same question over and over and over.
it's too aggravate the witness before asking the question they actually want the answer for, it's a very aggressive way to do things but often effective.
@@carolburnette2019 "Gaslighting" means tricking a person into doubting their own perceptions or memories. It comes from an old play named _Gaslight,_ and movies based on it.
the fact that this lawyer is getting so heated, argumentative and almost yelling says A LOT. not to mention cutting the witness off and bombarding him with questions without letting him answer the previous ones. so unprofessional and inappropriate. they really are grasping at straws and have NO case xD
So much of what Heard’s lawyers did, from Muffin-gate to these tabloid quotes, backfired badly. A lot of times it backfired because they just went on too long, other times it was like this where they were using rags that everyone in the country knows are rags to support their opinions. By the time Rottenborn was finished he’d have had more credibility if he’d asked about an article in the Enquirer and just left it at that.
Imagine being a junior lawyer talking to a practicing attorney of 50 years like this. Man that must be embarrassing, Amber's career isn't the only one she ruined, this defense team won't see another trial anytime soon.
He's asking someone to AGREE to a news article title that specifically says "allegedly". So the reporter didn't even know for sure....yet this lawyer is using it as fact? Unbelievable.
It all comes down to the credibility of the witness testimony. Marks was crushing in his response to some very weak cross examination. When asked by the judge if they might want to recall Marks, there was no doubt from JDs team, who wouldn't want this guy on the back burner?
I think the point is to repeatedly state that allegations against Depp have been made consistently, so what makes this one so damaging? I don't necessarily think it's going to work as a strategy, but I think that's what he's going for.
I like how the judge is allowing us to see that these lawyers have NO CASE, suck at what they do and loose emotional control while on the job. I think she's doing a service by letting us and jurors see workers like this, they are terrible at what they do.
Unless Johnny lawyer object to the question she doesn't necessarily have to overrule those questions. If the judges decides it on their own on every little questions like that she can be said to be biased.
I’m sure the jury is looking at this like we are. Like, what’s your point? Every star has articles written about them that are 90% lies. Not everyone has one written by their ex wife that she claims as fact though. This is irrelevant to the case. Articles written before by journalists aren’t relevant. Only the one written by Amber is his issue
@The Amber Heard Playlist!! You believe in amber heard when its so obvious she is a pathological liar and a narcissist. I mean its obvious karens like you are on her side. Good luck on your soul though
I screen shot his instagram after his testimony was completed and Ambers…Ambers has stayed the same and he has gained almost a million followers in less than a week!
Hes literally asking questions where the answer would be hearsay as well. "disney wouldnt want to be involved with an actor whos drunk all the time would they?" Idk why you think one man can legally speak on behalf of all of disney
"Most overpaid actor" Sounds like it was written by a jealous underpaid actor. Johnny Depp is a fantastic actor. There will always be people in life who try to drag others down with mob mentality
This witness was so strong it was embarracing watching Heard's lawyer try to discredit him. His mistake was letting the witness flesh out his answers rather than keeping him to yes or no answers. This guy was as good a witness as JD is an actor and the result was crushing.. This is definitely someone you want on your side..
I love how they're trying so hard to prove Johnny Depp has struggled with addiction. He's never tried to hide it. He has even talked about it in TV interviews.
It’s actually beautiful how Johnnys Lawyers are letting AH lawyers ask these ridiculous questions over and over. They know it’s annoying the jury and only helping Johnny. They could have objected with “hearsay” lots of times but just let the guy keep digging his hole deeper.
😅🤣🤣I actually keep thinking the judge is on meds now, she's just going with the flow 🤣🤣🤣JD did Raoul Duke in 98' and these guys talking about Pirates of the Caribbean🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I'm a little confused as to why the judge doesn't cut Amber's lawyers off from time to time. They're extremely unpleasant and almost belligerent in tone whenever they're trying to juice the "right" answer out of the witnesses. I don't feel like it's an equal playing field for the two plaintiffs.
@@hasselett I'm praying it's all just being flushed and dismissed and the jury actually has common sense, JD laughing and blasting reggae to court, now that comforts me, lots lol😅🤣.
Love his remark, “ think I already testified…” “are you just going to keep reading these?”, “I don’t know currently right now Netflix seems to have a running joke…” such great counters! I especially love how he pointed out, “I don’t know did Amber have another husband who she claimed was abusive in 2016?’ Such great responses! Whew!
He actually kept reminding me of Jack Nicholson so strongly I had to keep reminding myself it was real life and I wasn't watching A Few Good Men. Great dude.
Is it a coincidence that Heards lawyers are aggressive and rude and Johnnys are kinds and patient? Probably not lol wonder how the tables will turn when Heard is presenting her case 😬
You should see Elaine. She’s the worst one out of the bunch. Extremely aggressive and throws a tantrum when her questions have objections that get sustained 😂
I love this guy. The lawyer is using tabloids, literal pieces of teen gossip, and this guy is just dealing with him like he's a snarky child (which, at this point, all of AH's lawyers are).
How is the Judge allowing the lawyer to just interrupt the witness like that? It's just inappropriate. Unless it's because it's not in the defence's favour and the Judge just wants it to be over and is having a laugh. Defense interrupting every single witness. Just as the witness is expected to be respectful in Court so does the lawyer. If not more so. Disrespect left and right from AH's attorneys. A complete an utter shambles on top of weak questioning of witnesses and lack of basic principles/courtesy and information. Can't wait to see her take the stand.
Well if the Judge interrupted, she could be labelled as biased if so. I think Johnny's Legal Team is just letting Amber's Team clown themselves but allowing them to speak everything. They dont really do objections, or as I have observed. Its mostly Amber's Team doing the most nonsense objections, and safe to say, the Jury overruled those objections and allowed the questions (Johnny's Team). Man Amber's Team is just, a whole circus.
I've seen a lot of comments on various videos saying what you are saying. This is cross-examination. They want yes and no answers. They in fact are also entitled to those. The opposition can then clarify those questions after cross if they feel like context was required. The exact same will happen with Ambers witnesses by Johnny's lawyers.
@@ruukinen not exactly. You can't confine a witness to yes or no if they have an explanation right then and there. They are allowed to explain their answer as long as it doesn't turn into a rambling monologue. Judges don't allow a lawyer to elicit a yes or no answer and then not allow the witness to explain
The lawyer was trying to make him lose his temper and say something like: "Well, articles are articles and whatever they said isn't really that important" therefore implying that what AH wrote wasn't that meaningful to JD career after it was published. Glad he didn't fall for it.
If that was true, it would be pretty weak. It's a complete different story when some third-party journalist writes about you vs your own wife in a high-profile marriage. Still a nice observation regardless.
@@smigglesmiggles614 it also would run counter intuitively to heards article. To try and create the assumption that the articles are viewed as non-factual and therefore can’t harm one’s reputation then that also applies to Heards article. Whic mean her own lawyers are trying to say her story and retelling of events must be viewed as lies and isn’t truthful.
@@bigboi301slg He is trying to show that Johnny's reputation was not great before Amber's op ed. That perhaps Johnny's inability to get work is due to his behavior and his addictions
@@LindaC616 the evidence is so against it though lmfao. he lost all his work immediately after the op-ed. there is no coincidence since he lost multiple jobs after this and his drug use was already known WELL before any of this happened and yet he still had acting jobs
Her lawyers were constantly reading articles from trash magazines. They literally collected them all. I was surprised that the judge allowed that. And this are highly paid lawyers? So ridiculous.
They're basically testifying via questioning. The way they cut him off without regard to his answer a few times is evidence that they're just trying to build a narrative on their own.
Expensive lawyers with no case who get paid for every minute they spend in that court room. If it costs Amber more money more power to em I say. Their billable hours are probably sky high at this point
I was lowkey waiting for "you agree in 2016 an article was written that mr.depp is a lizard person who cheated on Amber with a Martian? From the onion news"
I now have a different opinion about her lawyers it’s not just that they’re bad lawyers it’s that her case is so full of inconsistencies & lies it’s impossible to get a clear side across and not look insane.
No idea why they agreed to this case. They might win but seriously I don't know how they come out of this looking anywhere near competent - all because of her evidence and stories being impossible to reconcile to make a somewhat comprehensible case lol
@@alliedarda7375 My guess is that they made her agree to allow them to write a book about their experience after the case was finished. I also don't think they expected quite as much public support for JD. It must be a 5000:1 ratio if you go by YT comments alone and now the 5 hour Australia tape no one knew was recording is starting to pick up momentum, it will easily double.
I really don't think AH s team can win . Because of her borderline personality disorder and because she is so needy and wants JDs attention on her and only her . She was also unfaithful to him but we don't know how many times
This guy is brilliant for asking for the SOURCE of the articles. You could tell how embarrassed the lawyer was when he had to admit that he was using "insidethemagic" and "moviemagic" websites. Hilarious how they cropped it out, hoping no one would ask that question but the witness was too smart for that. The source is KEY. Anyone can write anything online. There is the expectation that the Washington Post is a reputable source and what it publishes is credible. Also her attorneys are so incredibly unlikeable and rude...I don't know how/why they would think that this is the way to get the jury on your side. I know they have been on the defensive, but it will be interesting to see how Mr. Depp's lawyer's comport themselves during their cross examinations. I will be shocked if they are are as abrasive as Heard's lawyers have been. Maybe for a murder trial this kind of strong arming of witnesses might be effective, but I really think it is the wrong tactic here. The public is reacting violently against Miss Heard and in favor of Johnny. While it's true that she has yet to present her case, I just don't think the public can be swayed. Her lawyers have painted themselves as bullies...we'll be biased against whatever they say from now on. Hard to believe the jury, composed supposedly of ordinary people, is reacting differently than the general public.
Great strategy by Depp's lawyer here: they could have made so many objections that probably would have been substained, but they let it play out instead to let everyone see just how bad Heard's lawyers are.
@@idfrancisco5057 Could not agree more. I also love how they let Heard's psychological expert give lengthy explanations rather than trying to force her to answer only 'yes' or 'no' on cross - I see it as demonstrating that they actually want all of the information to come out rather than manipulating the testimony to fit their narrative.
@@englishish well remember, the judge told both sides that they have a limited amount of total time for testimony so the longer Depp’s team let’s the other side the more they cut the defenses strategy.
"You agree that Johnny Depp is guilty? He said mean words to Ms Heard. Somebody wrote an article about it. That's how you know it's true! Admit it! He's guilty!"
@@artpela2020 I’m just guessing because I’m not certain, but he mentions articles starting at 2:18. I’m not sure if one of those that he mentioned is the fan blog 🤷🏻♀️
@@hmacklemore2226 what kind of trial are you seeing? there is nothing normal in interrupting and treating in that way the witnesses. It is insane and ridiculous
@@saimonldable what he meant was the question was valid, even if it wasn't directly relevant or socially acceptable. It's up to the lawyers to make objections anyway.
@@hmacklemore2226 Wrong. It’s not appropriate at all but that’s why they’re not objecting. Amber’s lawyers and making themselves look like clowns, so why object to that?
For lawyers that love to say “OBJECTION HEARSAY” they sure do love hearsay in these articles. Like is that the core of your argument? Article titles? Really? That’s the base of your case? That’s pathetic
And they can’t even be bothered with things like the specific dates and headlines and writers of these articles. I mean, produce a printed copy or a screen grab or some other concrete thing-ANYthing-or move the fck along to a real question.
It's a defamation lawsuit, so it makes sense to bring up articles defaming Johnny Depp before Heard did to make the point that Depp's career failed due to those articles and not Heard's lies. The argument has little merit, but since they have nothing to work with, I think it's a valid attempt.
WHAT IS WRONG with this lawyer lol. He sounds like he is having a panic attack just firing one after the other... desperate questions that make NO SENSE 😳
It is on purpose, he is trying to confuse the witness and get him to agree to something that would hurt Johnny case. If he is successful he will latch onto that. Luckily the people giving testimonys have not played into his BS.
This case has become an absolute joke. Asking a barrage of questions without stopping to hear a response, just plain rude. I take my hat off to all of the professional people that have been questioned in this way as none have truly lost their tempers. What is the judge doing? I would think that a lesson in decorum is required.
I think that everyone should take every angle into judgement. Yes, her team sucks and has no defence, Yes her lawyrrs suck.. but they jury is supposed to look past all of that bias and should rely purely on logic and reason, leaving emotion and pre-conceptions at the door.\ On that note, Amber has no defence whatsoever, and I don't see how she could win this case - as noted above, her case has no ground to stand on.
Actually, if Johnny's lawyers know that the witnesses are well-prepared and know how to defend themselves, they don't have to object. The jury is watching everything - they're watching the behaviour of the lawyers of both parties and both Amber and Johnny - so far only Amber's team has been impolite and only they have embarrassed themselves multiple times. The jury notices that, and I think Johnny's team are allowing Amber's team to embarrass themselves further.
I love when the witness says "Are you just gonna keep reading this?" AH's lawyer should have realized his mistake in his line of questioning if he was a truly good & professional lawyer...but none of AH's team is good at what they do, so....ugh.
Lol they didn’t realize anything. They’ve been doing this the whole trial. Literally just reading off tabloid headlines to all of the witnesses who have come on stand. They know what they’re doing. They’re just idiots
The lawyer isn't actually speaking to the witness, he's speaking to the jury. That's why he isn't interested in the witness' answers. He reads tabloid headlines aloud to try to smear Depp's name. He's trying to convince the jury that Depp is a bad man, and the witness just happens to be the means to that.
they are all bad, but I believe this is the one that objected to his own question last week, so he's the worst out of the lot... Thank god Amber hired the 3 stooges.
I'm not legally trained but I believe he's trying to establish that Johnny's own behavior and addictions had as much to do with his inability to get contracts as Amber's op ed
it’s a defamation case, johnnys lawyers have to convince the jury ambers allegations caused financial losses. Ambers lawyers are trying to build a case that johnnys own behavior cost him his movie roles and the money that would’ve come with them. Not ambers allegations.
They're trying to proof that Johnny defamed himself, but the only thing this guy had was the initial lawsuit which as we all know by now, was all a bunch of lies, so he's got nothing and is trying to get the witnesses to screw up by putting pressure on them
The idea that Disney sacked JOHNNY DEPP for being drunk rather than the allegation of wife-beating is just ridiculous. That's quite a reach. I doubt any of the parents of the kids he visited in a hospital or whose days he's made in full character were concerned about his personal issues before the allegation of physical violence. If Disney started drug testing their actors they wouldn't have any left.
Disney is a bunch of groomers anyways so i doubt they have those sorts of standards. Theyd only get rid of Depp because the allegations of violence against women in this political climate will get you protestors and cancel culture, which affects the money they make. Money is all they care about. They'd have Depp back in an instant after this case is settled because there would be millions of people paying to see his next movie just to show him support.
😂 I’m blonde 👱♀️ but wasn’t born blonde lol but ah lawyers is exploiting all her plot in the articles that isn’t allegedly false allegations of domestic violence to Seek revenge of ex-husband Her lawyers is providing evidence that the article SHE wrote does pin point at Johnny Depp 🌽🎭🤪🐩🙈🤦♀️🤦♀️
Gossip Mags are hearsay & made-up lies; to make money. You can’t believe hearsay gossip in a gossip rag at check-outs in a convenience store, drugstore or grocery store. Look how they gossiped & lied about Princess Diana. She had no privacy. In the end she was killed at a very young age, leaving behind her two beautiful boys, by the same paparazzi.
a lot of people are saying how the judge appears biased with how she won't cut off Amber's judges when they make obvious mistakes, but I have to disagree I think the judge, for as impartial and educated as she seems, is having a little thrill letting heards lawyers absolutely destroy their own case themselves. they don't need a judge to stop them after every sentence to prove what a poor job they're doing, she just let's them go at it and utterly embarrass themselves.
No, this is good! The judge, the jury, and the country are getting to see these idiots make fools of themselves. It's only hurting their case lol. Depp already won the only victory that matters, public opinion. So the rest is just a show to watch with popcorn. If he loses, he still wins lol.
This lawyer legit gives me anxiety every time he speaks, how he tries to hurry through these absurd & repetitive questions in attempts for “slipped up” answers. It’s like you could almost hear the fear.
I don't get why they are always referring to headlines and articles from some random magazines and trying to present them as serious evidence. Everyone knows that those headlines are lurid to catch peoples attention and increase sales. Sometimes there are even partly made up just to get publicity. No sane human being can take this seriously. No wonder that poor man loses it.
I think he's just trying to argue that Amber Heard was not the cause of that bad publicity, and shift the blame away from her in regards to defamation. The article headings can change the public view of Johnny, make him lose favor with people and cost him future projects. If they could prove that none of the bad press Johnny received was a result of Amber, then she would be innocent of defamation, which is ultimatly what this trial is about and why Johnny sued her in the first place.
No, someone (me) not following the situation prior to this trial had no idea. Good point to bring up sources, made a marked shift in my consideration of all that. (Some of us are holding out for neutrality until all evidence presented. 😇)
Rottenborn knows that the articles are useless. He's just hoping that as he reads them out loud, the negativity behind the titles sticks in the mind of the jury and the public. It's pathetic but the psychology behind it is valid. But as he has used this monologue on at least 3 or 4 occasions now, even a blind man can see what he's doing.
Whether he wins or loses, his and his legal team's demeanor has won the internet and he can live in peace. If there is any justice in this world, he should win handily. But knowing how the law works, they may even screw this over
@@32braveheart Watching the videos and how AH and her lawyers are in a rapid process of self-destructing anyways, what he paid for PR was too much. If he has paid anything. He and his lawyers asked to broadcast the whole thing, so I assume they were quite aware of what will happen. So why spend money on PR?
I love to create videos and my aim is to show you how beautiful the world is by taking you on a journey with amazing nature scenery and relaxing music!
All of his questions are "do you agree that this article was published?" "This article was posted, right?" Forcing him to say yes, because (of course) they exist, but that doesn't mean they are true in any way. If the lawyer is always objecting for hearsay, and his defense is based on articles made by rumors, you know he can't win this case
This is a desperate maneuver used to bring a positive light to the defense in the absence of actual incriminating facts; they are using the same quality of hearsay that they are condemning with another breath.
exactly. they sound just like what any cheap paparazzo would write. in brazil, we have this video on Porta dos Fundos where they talk about creating new material, and the general title is: "[famous person] was allegedly seen doing something they shouldn't". like, they don't even have to look for a real information, they can just speculate and it's fine, there's no legal repercution for them.
@@Lucifronz Don't kid yourself. Rottenbum Strawman is grasping at straws in the wake of Ms. Elaine Strawgrasper. This wouldn't take all but 3 days to go in Johnny's favor without the cameras there to capture the sensational acting from Heard and hyperbolized strawman arguments from her defense goons. This is essentially the same psychological method used to get kids to eat their vegetables. Amber is a psychopath. I've met Johnny's, I've met Ambers; I wouldn't associate with any of them regularly more than a party night with Depp once in a blue moon, but I would change my address and phone number for someone like Amber. Those people are vampires.
Probate attorneys are far worse. I am experiencing currently over my mother and her estate.... Money is a powerful enticing instrument that creates corruption in the system.
@@claregale9011 A libel trial is about to start in the UK. The litigants are Rebecca Vardy and Colleen Rooney, wives of English soccer players. It's basically a huge disagreement over stuff that one leaked to the media about the other. A matter that could probably be sorted out in a face to face meeting is going to trial; like you say, a waste of resources and time.
Now I believe *"would you agree that such and such article is true"* should only come after you've ascertained the witness has knowledge of the said articles in the first place 😂 Also why would articles written by people who majorly have no personal contact/relationship with the accused/defender be admissible in court as document a lawyer is *"really really wanting you to agree to"* or should I say is *"desperately almost forcing down your throat"* 🤦
Is this what lawyer was asking? I couldn't tell between "would you article this article exists" and "would you are with it's content". Witness seemed to answer the first one time and time again.
Goes to prove.. England is full of LAZY hanging Judges. Why he lost the first law suit. In London.. Over paid public Civil servants. Only interested in PROCESS.. And the paycheque . They hung the truth out years ago. Lazy useless individuals traitors to Justice..
i don't understand why Depp's lawyers dont object to the questions regarding Disney - i.e. "given that newspaper article, would Disney be interested in using Depp for further movies?" That should get an objection for hearsay. How is that guy supposed to know what Disney would or would not do.
Who hires a drunk pirate & then ‘supposedly’ fires him for being a drunk pirate?!?!? Disney! Not only does this trial shed light on traumatic abusive partners, but it is definitely shedding a different light on Disney corporate as a whole. Disney can thank Amber Heard for any future boycotts & loss. So much coming to light in this trial. Makes you look back at all the things other famous people have said about Disney but it was just swept under the rug.
7 Companies owned by Disney, Walt Disney (DIS): 21st Century Fox (TFCF Corp.) Capital Cities/ABC Pixar Animation Studios Lucasfilm Ltd. Marvel Entertainment Fox Family Worldwide BAMTech LLC
“You would agree that the bus that someone you’ve never met or heard of but who said you were on, stopped at the square on January 22nd 2015 at around 10am and that the driver was not wearing a hat,correct?” Listen, I’ve met some seriously confused stoners in my time who made more coherent arguments than Heard’s defence team. I’m amazed that the people taking the stand are being so patient.
Never paid much attention to JD before this whole saga.. but must say, becoming a huge fan of how he’s been able to put up with this crap throughout his life. All those complaining about his drug addiction should be put up on trial for causing it in the first place.
You can clearly see the character of a person from the team they hire to defend them. The AH team is seriously rude, and clearly with no integrity. Clearly she found the best team to represent her.
what's even the point of the question? agreeing if something exists? wouldn't the more logical question be if he agrees with the content of the article?
@@agbrenv I think that's the exact point of the question... I honestly think Heard's defence are ultimately trying to suggest that Heard's article is one of thousands of negative articles about Johnny, therefore it doesn't matter, and it had no meaningful impact on his career.
The lawyer isn't speaking to the witness, that's why he isn't interested in his answers. These are not questions, these are statements quoting tabloid headlines to the jury to try to depict Depp as a bad person.
Johnny Depp is one of the most versatile actors I have ever seen. He plays different roles and characters brilliantly. I can't think of too many actors who have such range.
“We’re talking about Johnny Depp’s reputation.” Dude if you wanna know his reputation, just look at the video of Johnny leaving the court room with all his fans giving him gifts.
It's a big brain play.Modern day court is just 4d Chess with laws. If they don't discredit their use of tabloids, they can in turn use tabloids as their own evidence without fear of being shot down.
It's not hearsay. Copying from what I wrote above: There's an exception to the hearsay rule here (actually it's not even an exception -- by definition it's not hearsay). What is said in the articles is not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in those articles (e.g., whether or not Johnny was drunk for example); rather, it's being used as an example of negative publicity. This is why Depp's lawyers aren't objecting. Trust me, they would if they could, and they have objected to hearsay many times. Hearsay would be, for example, Amber Heard testifying "My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit" -- because she's offering an out of court statement ("My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit") as evidence that she did indeed suffer a broken arm. Of course, if her team called her doctor, he could testify that she suffered a broken arm, since that's not hearsay.
"the most overpaid actor" and Johnny's look of agreement is hysterical 😂😂🤣 PS the lawyer is bringing this up and not allowing him to completely answer to get the accusations out there. Whatever the witness has to say is irrelevant, the defense just wants the jury to hear there could be a multitude of other reasons he lost new roles. Its clever to a point and in this case it just hurts the defense, their credibility is shot.
I really thought he got MORE for being Captain Jack! As much as Disney MADE off him🧐! Guess he got some perks but, I thought he would have gotten more pay.
I totally agree with the witness. Every actors have ups and downs in their film career in terms of box office success. If we take the articles at their face value, then a fair justice to JD would not be possible because sometimes, tabloids, newspapers have their own vested interests when it comes to judging performance of an actor. At some point of time, Robert Downey Junior was not successful in his film career, but he turned his career upside down in terms of success after he got a role in Iron man.
Everytime rottenborn speaks, he makes a stronger case for depp. It’s almost like he is working for depp, just from the other side, hehe! I like that the judge and depps lawyers are letting him badger and misbehave. More public sympathy for depp, when we see what madness Amber Herd is capable of bringing to the table.
A few people have said this that it’s like he’s secretly working for Johnny especially when he looked at Johnny and smiled after the penis incident lol xx
The fact that they need to resort to "gossip rags" shows how desperate they are to find anything against Depp's character. Plus it seems so embarrassingly unprofessional. Top that with his horrible rudeness.
It’s painfully obvious that, in society, there is a difference between self destructive behavior such as occasionally being too drunk and looking silly, and being the abuser in an abusive relationship. Heard’s lawyers are trying to equate the two, but the jury won’t buy it. They are in no way equal. Society tolerates people getting drunk and being silly, as long as they don’t hurt anyone. Society doesn’t tolerate someone being physically abusive to their spouse.
The witness is smart! “Does she(AH) have other husband than JD?” This definitely fought back on AH’s trick that taking out JDs name from the OP Ed. As she admit herself as the DV in 2016 during their marriage
desperation showing, they went from trying to prove he is guilty, to trying to say it wasn't her accusations that hurt his career. They know she is a liar, and now just trying to say it doesn't matter.
I agree with everything you said, exept for "desperation showing". What they are doing is a tactical approach: defend on every ground, contest every issue.
@@andrewvelonis5940 there is simply NO ground to defend. An article of a web site visited by a hundred bored fans is not something that will influence a 800M deal. The further it goes, the more ridiculous it sounds. "Did she have another husband during that period?" - this is an open mocking.
The lawyer here mentions, like, a million articles painting Johnny in such a bad light and yet doesn't even show any of the articles he was saying. Dear god, that begs the question if those articles actually did exist
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 87 วันนี้!! คู่เอก "ก้องชัย vs โชคปรีชา"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YN6e7HVnekw/mqdefault.jpg)
![กี่หมื่นฟ้า | Your Sky Series EP.1 [1/4]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vLGjxFL6U_I/mqdefault.jpg)
Can’t believe the lawyer is using tabloid gossip as a measure of proof to gauge Johnny’s integrity. Absurd beyond reproach. Speechless!
As Marks pointed out, there's hundreds of articles about Depp all the time, cheery picking the gutter press to try and suggest the op ed had no effect on JDs career backfired spectacularly, Marks was just too strong a witness and Heard's lawyer was definitely out of his depth..
yup it's insane that this is somehow allowed, while "hearsay" applies to any counter to any of it!
They should be required to put the person the article states directly heard whatever the claim in the article is onto the stand or not be allowed to use any of it! IE, if they want to claim he's the most overpaid actor, they should be required to produce someone who provided that information to the article & that person should be held to hearsay rules & subject to cross examination to see if they really have the financial information on all actors in hollywood to be able to make that claim or not
Never interrupt an enemy when he's making a mistake.
Actually they're proving that Heard caused damage. 100s of articles = JD is still "most overpaid actor" - 1 article from H = his career is over.
My thinking is that Heard's defence team are trying to suggest news articles are meaningless and harmless (such as Amber's article about Johnny).
Look!... everyone's written a harmful article about Johnny... Amber's article was just a drop in the ocean.
Many levels of unsubstantiated earsay ...and that judge just let's it be said
More infuriating is the fact usa courts are using spent legal documents to trail twice on Dv .. in USA that's called double jeopardy by exposed prejudices
Can’t believe this guy is a professional lawyer. He doesn’t even let the person finish their answer before asking another question. Every time he asks a question you can tell he doesn’t even know if he should be asking it.
And then he objects to himself
This “lawyer” deserves to get a thank you gift from the lawyers from Mr Deep. 😜😁
At this point you can see they're trying to argue with the witness instead of asking questions lmao, I know intimidated and being Aggressive towards witness is one of lawyer tactics or whatever but at this point the way he spoke himself just like a teenager on social media spewing random trivia without anything backing up his argument
@@OrdinaryMemer6969 props to them for sticking to their plan even though all it is doing is helping Johnny haha. Interrupting to create anger and trying to create an image of him being an abuser with no evidence except that he loves to drink and take drugs.
Unfortunately that doesn’t equal violence in all people.
Unprofessional, rude LOSERS LOL
Imagine having “a journalists opinion ” as a credible source in court? Like they really having nothing to serve.
Yeah, and then all those objections about 'hearsay' by Amber's lawyer but none from Depp's lawyer about this. Journalists' opinions are literally hearsay.
Yeah doesn’t that qualify as hearsay haha
OBJECTION! Hearsay
True! Basically the entirety of the defense is hearsay!
If all they have is articles they really have no case
the fact that TABLOIDS were even allowed to be used as EVIDENCE is absolutely INSANE... LITERALLY the definition of HEARSAY...
going the way of the U.K. case. i have said i do not trust this judge!
My college rubric was a lie
They may be trying to draw a parallel with Amber Heard’s article. If the witness says something like “those tabloid articles don’t matter”, then it goes to show that Heard’s article wouldn’t matter either.
@@invoker619 never thought of that aspect. Nice.
You realize this is a defamation trial and that Depp claims the negative press coverage arising from Heard's statements injured him?
I just don’t understand how the defense objects to everything as hearsay, yet uses tabloid articles as proof - aren’t those a prime example of hearsay????
Yes, they are hearsay papers too.
Exactly! This team she has is a joke
I would be appalled at how JD's team allows all this tabloid use without objecting as hearsay if this wasn't the sh1tshow it is right now. I guess they let it roll because AH's team is pretty much sinking themselves and making everyone dislike them with such childish/dirty methods.
Because Heard's lawyer have lost the plot and they are desperate.
@@vaizyh I agree with you, but maybe his lawyers are allowing it because it's actually helping JD's case. Unintended consequences.
All of her lawyers don’t let anyone finish speaking. Why doesn’t the judge stop this from continuously happening?
It's because all her lawyers get a taste of that action too and know it'll be worse when she loses
the lawyer's job is to ask questions, and the witness is supposed to answer them exactly how the lawyer wants.
when they start adding context or explaining, theyre cut off b/c it's the lawyer's cross examination not the witness'.
Imagine if you had a lawyer that was asking the a witness of the murder of your family: "is it true the defendant jumped in the car and took off?" and the witness kept answering slightly off like "well, he certainly didnt jump. both of his feet were on the ground.... (and on and on)" not a great example but its the best i could do at this time in the morning lol
@@toericabaker but is it allowed to interfere when the witness is answering and giving his testimony? these lawyers are a joke! worse than the lawyer in kyle rittenhouse case
Because thats how trials go
Right? They say, "Just answer the question. I asked you a yes or no." It's to the point of disrespect.
The fact that these lawyers are going off on “posts/articles” made from people who have never once spent a second with both or either one of these people as facts is laughable. Anyone can write anything to get a second of recognition or infamy
OBJECTION! Hearsay your honor!
Objection: relevance
The channel Legal Eagle made a video explaining that to prove defamation in the case of a public person, you need to prove malicious intent and some kind of negative impact (if I remember correctly). So I’m guessing the lawyer and bringing up all this articles to try and show that Amber Heard is not the one responsible for problem’s with his career.
@@yogajourney9519 Being drunk and disruptive on set is vastly different to being a accused of domestic violence. Drunk and disruptive can be deemed normal in Hollywood, historically speaking. Wife beating not so much.
@@MrJackydragon except he didn't beat his wife
I cannot believe how absurd this lawyer is!!! Almost trying to force the witness to make a claim/statement based on articles written by others?? I mean, is he REALLY a lawyer??? If HE is, I TOO can be a lawyer!!!
The reason they do that. Is because Amber Heard has nothing no evidence. They have no claims. What else can he do.
Right. I understand he is trying to establish their were other bad articles but the difference is none of those publications had first hand knowledge.
Obviously everybody is going to believe the one written by someone b with private knowledge of him
Lawyers play mind games to make evidence up when they have none. These attorneys could PERSONALLY like JD way more, but they were hired by AH so they gotta work for her lol
😂 yeah agree, all JD lawyers have calm tone in questioning, but hearing AH lawyer just makes my blood boils
His tactics seem to be just to bully and be rude to the witnesses .
How can this type of hostile questioning keep going?? It’s pathetic and unprofessional! AH’s lawyers are plain rude.
It's so annoying, but I'm hoping it's making the jury loathe them as much as we do.
OMG I could not agree more. I get it, they are her Defense Attorneys, but there is no reason for any of them to behave the way they are. Rude, disrespectful, not letting them answer. There is no need for the lack of respect. They're losing, they know it. It's going to be hard to for AH to dig herself out of this. She lied. She didn't even right the op Ed, Johnny never hit her.
Extremely unprofessional and rude
@@northerngirl1637 oh of courseeee . It has to be
To be fair...these are hostile witnesses to their client. It will be interesting to see the tone and persistence when his lawyers talk to AH.
Lawyer: Calls hearsay on everything.
Also that same lawyer: Uses articles based on hearsay as evidence.
And Johnny's lawyers are smart enough to let them hang themselves with that "evidence."
Show some respect, his name is ROTTENborn!!!
@@hamricmike8 no one cares
@@rFawnnr Ever hear of sarcasm?
@@rFawnnr No worries 😎
watching johnny smile throughout all this gives me life
I love when he smiled and nodded about "depp being the most overpaid actor"
he is always drawing doodles :D
@@Boss-jl4ue he knows he has cleared his name and we're all on his side. He couldn't care about the 50 million. Bless him
his reactions are so funny
Meanwhile you got Amber lookin like a complete psychopath lmfao
This line of questioning is beyond desperate.
It's amazing how much nonsense this judge has allowed, how disappointing.
Reminds me of the Speaker of the House of Commons
don't be surprised if she rules in Amber's favor.
She’s bias
@@MusicforMe123 I thought there was a jury?
@@TheHungryPigeon yeah, jury is there
This lawyer is disgusting. He keeps saying "you would agree" when he never outwardly says he agrees. This is a joke. This case is going to kill his career.
The lawyer will make so much money from this case that he'll be set for life, he won't need a career lol.
so that's not leading 🤔 or Johnny's lawyer would have objected
That is how you ask questions during cross examination. It’s a normal practice, not exclusive to this lawyer
@@ezay8694 this shows us how miserable is the continental law system. Manipulation and deception.
This attorney's career was over the minute he objected to the answer of his own question.
Her Attorneys have “Anger Issues” just like their client! So rude & definitely NOT Professional! It’s painful to listen to them! 🤯
For real
I hope JD wins but I'm really wondering why literally everyone in the trial keeps repeating the same words and stuttering a lot before they can say most of their sentences with so many things they are talking about. It's very strange to me
So agree.. he speaks like he's on trial not Amber. The slick comments and shade is so unprofessional.
It’s like nails on a chalk board listening to that old lady on ambers team talk. It really irritating
yes! like why is her lawyer yelling at this guy
This gentleman is extreeeeemely patient. Much respect!
If the public is getting annoyed with Heards lawyers then you know the jury is as well. Guy kept asking different versions of the same question over and over and over.
Very good observation.
it's too aggravate the witness before asking the question they actually want the answer for, it's a very aggressive way to do things but often effective.
@@Jeff-rm3lv I appreciated the reminder to imagine how the jury is perceiving all this testimony!
@@Jeff-rm3lv Swing and a miss here.
Not to mention he was asking the witness for hearsay answers any time he asked "would disney want this actor associated with them"
Marks has a lot of patience with those insufferable lawyers. Not everyone can handle such annoying gaslighting.
Depp is a gaslighting.
Agreed! I would be all over the incompetence of this legal team! Utter fools.
AH lawyers are not questioning at this point, they're testifying. They're putting this into the juries mind by a backdoor and it should be stopped.
Gaslighting! Excellent choice of words. Thank you
@@carolburnette2019 "Gaslighting" means tricking a person into doubting their own perceptions or memories. It comes from an old play named _Gaslight,_ and movies based on it.
the fact that this lawyer is getting so heated, argumentative and almost yelling says A LOT. not to mention cutting the witness off and bombarding him with questions without letting him answer the previous ones. so unprofessional and inappropriate. they really are grasping at straws and have NO case xD
The witness gained control so easily the lawyer doesn't even know he's lost and getting buried alive he thought he was winning some of those questions
Seems real unprofessional lol... Asking questions then talking all over him wth
Where's the judge?
@@christinemarrinan5781 I swear the judge is against Johnny she sustains every ridiculous objection that comes out of rottenborn’s lips
@@christinemarrinan5781 get some fudge
“No sir, Im afraid I don’t have a picture perfect memory of every specious clickbait article written in an obvious effort to dog pile Depp.”
Yeah pretty much lol
😂
Richard, nice one. 👍 😁
So much of what Heard’s lawyers did, from Muffin-gate to these tabloid quotes, backfired badly. A lot of times it backfired because they just went on too long, other times it was like this where they were using rags that everyone in the country knows are rags to support their opinions. By the time Rottenborn was finished he’d have had more credibility if he’d asked about an article in the Enquirer and just left it at that.
@@rickbateman2401 Yes, it felt to me like Heard's lawyers were scraping the bottom of the barrel... There was nothing tangible.
I have said this before and I will say it again and again and again: the whole world is with you Johnny!!!
Blind Male Feminist
@I melt snowflakes What?
No the whole world isn't.
You do not speak for the world.
No, we are not.
@I melt snowflakes Exactly. Karma is a b*tch, Johnny!!!
Imagine being a junior lawyer talking to a practicing attorney of 50 years like this. Man that must be embarrassing, Amber's career isn't the only one she ruined, this defense team won't see another trial anytime soon.
To be fair, they are trying to defend the impossible.
oh well they shook their heads yes and took the case in the first place
They can become public defenders
Yeah after this when they lose they’re better off looking for new careers or retiring
They’re ruining their own career’s by being a bunch of smug and petty dickweeds, she didn’t tell them to be incompetent.
He's asking someone to AGREE to a news article title that specifically says "allegedly". So the reporter didn't even know for sure....yet this lawyer is using it as fact? Unbelievable.
Even better:
He doesn't ask them whether they agree with the article, he asks them whether they agree that the article exists.
It all comes down to the credibility of the witness testimony. Marks was crushing in his response to some very weak cross examination. When asked by the judge if they might want to recall Marks, there was no doubt from JDs team, who wouldn't want this guy on the back burner?
I think the point is to repeatedly state that allegations against Depp have been made consistently, so what makes this one so damaging?
I don't necessarily think it's going to work as a strategy, but I think that's what he's going for.
@@epr8974 exactly my thoughts, like what does it help either case if he agrees about the existence of the article or not
@@epr8974 THIS! Its the most moronic thing and I truly question this guys intelligence.
How can a lawyer use random news articles as facts! This is ridiculous
I like how the judge is allowing us to see that these lawyers have NO CASE, suck at what they do and loose emotional control while on the job. I think she's doing a service by letting us and jurors see workers like this, they are terrible at what they do.
I totally agree some said “she seems to be leaning towards AH’s team” but honestly she’s just letting them make fools of themselves lol
Unless Johnny lawyer object to the question she doesn't necessarily have to overrule those questions. If the judges decides it on their own on every little questions like that she can be said to be biased.
🙌🙌🙌
When you say “no case,” are you referring to the actual case here? Johnny Depp’s claim of defamation?
Yep!
This trial is a perfect example of the old saying: Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake.
is it because how pointless the statements they are bringing up just makes them look dumber?
@@kayjay. I think thats exactly it :)
That’s exactly what I was thinking!!
Art of War
This is what I called the Art of Tzu Sun
I really hope the jury isn't taking these questions seriously. Shouldn't questions about tabloid articles fall under a hearsay objection?
I don't think there is a jury. This isn't a legal court case, this is civil court. I'm not sure tho.
@@MaybeGodwillsaveMe you can have a jury in civil court
tbh i think johnny's lawyer just let it play out because of how bad it looks. digging their own grave
@@MaybeGodwillsaveMe They have a jury
I’m sure the jury is looking at this like we are. Like, what’s your point? Every star has articles written about them that are 90% lies. Not everyone has one written by their ex wife that she claims as fact though. This is irrelevant to the case. Articles written before by journalists aren’t relevant. Only the one written by Amber is his issue
"Does she have another husband?"
Knowing that Heard has lied about pretty much everything, she probably does.
If men are smart none of them will ever marry this woman!
@The Amber Heard Playlist!! You believe in amber heard when its so obvious she is a pathological liar and a narcissist. I mean its obvious karens like you are on her side. Good luck on your soul though
This comical court case is making Johnny Depp’s popularity soar instead of bringing hate to him.
Good job Amber👏🏽👏🏽
I screen shot his instagram after his testimony was completed and Ambers…Ambers has stayed the same and he has gained almost a million followers in less than a week!
He's the guy who got a child killer of death row. Johnny Depp's Karma is Amber Heard----
Johnny is suing Amber for defamation from her previous allegations, this court case is supposed to make Johnny look good.
@@samhead9836 and it's def working and Im not complaining
She Will has her karma that is sure¡¡
Amber’s lawyer tried to break this witness with ridiculous and pointless “hearsay”, but the witness did a great job by not busting out laughing.
This is possibly because its a cout of law Not a school of higher learning
witness is a lawyer himself, he knows that Amber's lawyer is asking redundant questions to aggrevate him before asking their real question
Hes literally asking questions where the answer would be hearsay as well. "disney wouldnt want to be involved with an actor whos drunk all the time would they?" Idk why you think one man can legally speak on behalf of all of disney
@@Jeff-rm3lv how do you know so much
You musta missed the part where depps attorneys on ejected to hearsay continuously without success
"Most overpaid actor"
Sounds like it was written by a jealous underpaid actor. Johnny Depp is a fantastic actor. There will always be people in life who try to drag others down with mob mentality
For real written by salty bae much
Asked by maybe the most overpaid lawyer? 😁
This witness was so strong it was embarracing watching Heard's lawyer try to discredit him. His mistake was letting the witness flesh out his answers rather than keeping him to yes or no answers. This guy was as good a witness as JD is an actor and the result was crushing.. This is definitely someone you want on your side..
also he cant be overpaid when he is one of the best actors
Most overpaid lawer 🤪🤪🤪
I love how they're trying so hard to prove Johnny Depp has struggled with addiction. He's never tried to hide it. He has even talked about it in TV interviews.
It’s actually beautiful how Johnnys Lawyers are letting AH lawyers ask these ridiculous questions over and over. They know it’s annoying the jury and only helping Johnny. They could have objected with “hearsay” lots of times but just let the guy keep digging his hole deeper.
Exactly.
😅🤣🤣I actually keep thinking the judge is on meds now, she's just going with the flow 🤣🤣🤣JD did Raoul Duke in 98' and these guys talking about Pirates of the Caribbean🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I'm a little confused as to why the judge doesn't cut Amber's lawyers off from time to time. They're extremely unpleasant and almost belligerent in tone whenever they're trying to juice the "right" answer out of the witnesses. I don't feel like it's an equal playing field for the two plaintiffs.
@@hasselett I'm praying it's all just being flushed and dismissed and the jury actually has common sense, JD laughing and blasting reggae to court, now that comforts me, lots lol😅🤣.
Hearsay, or speculation… “Disney wouldn’t want to be involved with someone like that, would they?”
Love his remark, “ think I already testified…” “are you just going to keep reading these?”, “I don’t know currently right now Netflix seems to have a running joke…” such great counters! I especially love how he pointed out, “I don’t know did Amber have another husband who she claimed was abusive in 2016?’ Such great responses! Whew!
Couldn't agree more. He roasted him with swaggs!😂
I liked the ‘was that written by the second underpaid actor?’ In response to Johnny being the ‘most overpaid actor for the second year in a row’
Totally agree!
🤣🤣🤣🤣
He actually kept reminding me of Jack Nicholson so strongly I had to keep reminding myself it was real life and I wasn't watching A Few Good Men. Great dude.
This lawyer is unbelievably discourteous to anyone he’s interviewing. This was super interesting and actually quite comical to watch 🤣
Let's see how he acts towards witnesses when he presents Heard's case. I think there'll be quite a difference.
Is it a coincidence that Heards lawyers are aggressive and rude and Johnnys are kinds and patient? Probably not lol wonder how the tables will turn when Heard is presenting her case 😬
You should see Elaine. She’s the worst one out of the bunch. Extremely aggressive and throws a tantrum when her questions have objections that get sustained 😂
@@Rich-94 that’s the older lady with the bowl cut right? Lol
That's what lawyers do. Push witness to the limit of their patience to tilt them.
I love this guy. The lawyer is using tabloids, literal pieces of teen gossip, and this guy is just dealing with him like he's a snarky child (which, at this point, all of AH's lawyers are).
How is the Judge allowing the lawyer to just interrupt the witness like that? It's just inappropriate.
Unless it's because it's not in the defence's favour and the Judge just wants it to be over and is having a laugh.
Defense interrupting every single witness.
Just as the witness is expected to be respectful in Court so does the lawyer. If not more so.
Disrespect left and right from AH's attorneys. A complete an utter shambles on top of weak questioning of witnesses and lack of basic principles/courtesy and information.
Can't wait to see her take the stand.
Well if the Judge interrupted, she could be labelled as biased if so. I think Johnny's Legal Team is just letting Amber's Team clown themselves but allowing them to speak everything. They dont really do objections, or as I have observed. Its mostly Amber's Team doing the most nonsense objections, and safe to say, the Jury overruled those objections and allowed the questions (Johnny's Team). Man Amber's Team is just, a whole circus.
That is for the show
I've seen a lot of comments on various videos saying what you are saying. This is cross-examination. They want yes and no answers. They in fact are also entitled to those. The opposition can then clarify those questions after cross if they feel like context was required. The exact same will happen with Ambers witnesses by Johnny's lawyers.
I know this is a show because any judge would have interrupted by now and said every single one of these questions is hearsay and irrelevant.
@@ruukinen not exactly. You can't confine a witness to yes or no if they have an explanation right then and there. They are allowed to explain their answer as long as it doesn't turn into a rambling monologue. Judges don't allow a lawyer to elicit a yes or no answer and then not allow the witness to explain
The lawyer was trying to make him lose his temper and say something like: "Well, articles are articles and whatever they said isn't really that important" therefore implying that what AH wrote wasn't that meaningful to JD career after it was published. Glad he didn't fall for it.
I didn't think about it 😕 you are so right
If that was true, it would be pretty weak. It's a complete different story when some third-party journalist writes about you vs your own wife in a high-profile marriage. Still a nice observation regardless.
@@smigglesmiggles614 it also would run counter intuitively to heards article. To try and create the assumption that the articles are viewed as non-factual and therefore can’t harm one’s reputation then that also applies to Heards article. Whic mean her own lawyers are trying to say her story and retelling of events must be viewed as lies and isn’t truthful.
wooooww👏thanks for spotting and telling. it is like a Chess move! Now that i think, he said u dont think this article is important?. Great.
How would that be losing his temper 😂
The Attorney now is grasping at straws. You can hear it in his voice. He’s so proud of himself. pfft.
Literally. He's not even asking a question that means anything. "Do you agree that these headlines exist?" Lol like wtf are you talking about dude?
@@bigboi301slg He is trying to show that Johnny's reputation was not great before Amber's op ed. That perhaps Johnny's inability to get work is due to his behavior and his addictions
@@LindaC616 and the witness didn’t agree
@@LindaC616 the evidence is so against it though lmfao. he lost all his work immediately after the op-ed. there is no coincidence since he lost multiple jobs after this and his drug use was already known WELL before any of this happened and yet he still had acting jobs
This attorney puts a lot of pressure on witnesses, that’s for sure! Heavy artillery is working, speaking metaphorically.
The judge should have stepped in here and said "enough." What a waste of time.
Her lawyers were constantly reading articles from trash magazines. They literally collected them all. I was surprised that the judge allowed that. And this are highly paid lawyers? So ridiculous.
Because there being paid and they actually couldn't give a rats arsh at this point. It's all about MONEY 💰
They're basically testifying via questioning. The way they cut him off without regard to his answer a few times is evidence that they're just trying to build a narrative on their own.
Expensive lawyers with no case who get paid for every minute they spend in that court room. If it costs Amber more money more power to em I say. Their billable hours are probably sky high at this point
They literally only keep bringing up those freaking articles
I was lowkey waiting for "you agree in 2016 an article was written that mr.depp is a lizard person who cheated on Amber with a Martian? From the onion news"
I now have a different opinion about her lawyers it’s not just that they’re bad lawyers it’s that her case is so full of inconsistencies & lies it’s impossible to get a clear side across and not look insane.
No idea why they agreed to this case. They might win but seriously I don't know how they come out of this looking anywhere near competent - all because of her evidence and stories being impossible to reconcile to make a somewhat comprehensible case lol
@@alliedarda7375 I’ll tell you why they agreed… 🤑
@@alliedarda7375 My guess is that they made her agree to allow them to write a book about their experience after the case was finished. I also don't think they expected quite as much public support for JD. It must be a 5000:1 ratio if you go by YT comments alone and now the 5 hour Australia tape no one knew was recording is starting to pick up momentum, it will easily double.
@@alliedarda7375 money is a very good motivator 😂😂😂
I really don't think AH s team can win . Because of her borderline personality disorder and because she is so needy and wants JDs attention on her and only her . She was also unfaithful to him but we don't know how many times
This guy is brilliant for asking for the SOURCE of the articles. You could tell how embarrassed the lawyer was when he had to admit that he was using "insidethemagic" and "moviemagic" websites. Hilarious how they cropped it out, hoping no one would ask that question but the witness was too smart for that. The source is KEY. Anyone can write anything online. There is the expectation that the Washington Post is a reputable source and what it publishes is credible. Also her attorneys are so incredibly unlikeable and rude...I don't know how/why they would think that this is the way to get the jury on your side. I know they have been on the defensive, but it will be interesting to see how Mr. Depp's lawyer's comport themselves during their cross examinations. I will be shocked if they are are as abrasive as Heard's lawyers have been. Maybe for a murder trial this kind of strong arming of witnesses might be effective, but I really think it is the wrong tactic here. The public is reacting violently against Miss Heard and in favor of Johnny. While it's true that she has yet to present her case, I just don't think the public can be swayed. Her lawyers have painted themselves as bullies...we'll be biased against whatever they say from now on. Hard to believe the jury, composed supposedly of ordinary people, is reacting differently than the general public.
I missed that. Can you give me the timestamp?
@@susmanandakumar2377 1:45 ?
Exactly. Well said.
Absolutely! Same thoughts, observations and conclusions going through my head! ❤️
Well said
What is wrong with this lawyer?!? Omg he’s insane
at this point these guys are just asking the dumbest questions so that amber can fire them too
good theory hahaha
they’re getting payed 300-700 an hr I’m sure they’re ok with drawing this out
Lol
🤣🤣🤣🤣
OMG！ Sounds so reasonable！ never thought about that!
Great strategy by Depp's lawyer here: they could have made so many objections that probably would have been substained, but they let it play out instead to let everyone see just how bad Heard's lawyers are.
They basically let AH & her team dig their own graves XD
@@idfrancisco5057 Could not agree more. I also love how they let Heard's psychological expert give lengthy explanations rather than trying to force her to answer only 'yes' or 'no' on cross - I see it as demonstrating that they actually want all of the information to come out rather than manipulating the testimony to fit their narrative.
True !!!
You can literally see the lawyer to his right smiling a few times. Chess vs checkers.
@@englishish well remember, the judge told both sides that they have a limited amount of total time for testimony so the longer Depp’s team let’s the other side the more they cut the defenses strategy.
The level of anger i have for these attorneys
Seriously this lawyer is like:
"So you are aware of Johnny's existance?
Yes
"So you are agreeing that he is guilty"
"You agree that Johnny Depp is guilty? He said mean words to Ms Heard. Somebody wrote an article about it. That's how you know it's true! Admit it! He's guilty!"
Perfectly stated!
When Heard's lawyer introduced a fan blog as evidence I died laughing.
Lmfao I didnt catch that but I cant rewatch I just cant so I'll take you on your word
Requesting a time stamp..🙏
@@artpela2020 🙏🏾
I didn't see that
@@artpela2020 I’m just guessing because I’m not certain, but he mentions articles starting at 2:18. I’m not sure if one of those that he mentioned is the fan blog 🤷🏻♀️
Why is this judge allowing all this nonsense in court? This is ridiculous to me.
So unprofessional.
It's not up to the judge. Depp's lawyer could object but they know this questioning is normal and appropriate.
Depps lawyers aren't objecting because him (hearsay lawyer) rambling his nonsense is actually helping their case lol
@@hmacklemore2226 what kind of trial are you seeing? there is nothing normal in interrupting and treating in that way the witnesses. It is insane and ridiculous
@@saimonldable what he meant was the question was valid, even if it wasn't directly relevant or socially acceptable. It's up to the lawyers to make objections anyway.
@@hmacklemore2226 Wrong. It’s not appropriate at all but that’s why they’re not objecting. Amber’s lawyers and making themselves look like clowns, so why object to that?
For lawyers that love to say “OBJECTION HEARSAY” they sure do love hearsay in these articles. Like is that the core of your argument? Article titles? Really? That’s the base of your case? That’s pathetic
And they can’t even be bothered with things like the specific dates and headlines and writers of these articles. I mean, produce a printed copy or a screen grab or some other concrete thing-ANYthing-or move the fck along to a real question.
Hearsay is what they have to resort to when truth is not on their side so...
To me i just saw an attorney with a personal goal to ruin jd nothing more. And taking his own personal feelings into play vs being an actual attorney.
It's a defamation lawsuit, so it makes sense to bring up articles defaming Johnny Depp before Heard did to make the point that Depp's career failed due to those articles and not Heard's lies. The argument has little merit, but since they have nothing to work with, I think it's a valid attempt.
“You would agree that… right?” Is that leading the witness? Glad that no objections were made. This was funny to listen to.
You can ask leading questions during cross-examination. You cannot ask leading questions of your own witnesses on direct examination.
@@djm55 exactly
that was basically an objection to smart defense . lmfao
WHAT IS WRONG with this lawyer lol. He sounds like he is having a panic attack just firing one after the other... desperate questions that make NO SENSE 😳
Yes!! Good point. Panic attack lol. What's his deal? Lol
He knows he is losing 😁
It’s a train wreck & downright embarrassing watching/listening to him … but I find it hilarious. Adding nail after nail in the coffin for amber.
It is on purpose, he is trying to confuse the witness and get him to agree to something that would hurt Johnny case. If he is successful he will latch onto that. Luckily the people giving testimonys have not played into his BS.
He´s a virgin. At 50. Imagine his frustration 😁
I cannot believe her team has built their case solely around tabloid articles.
And makeup. Dont forget the makeup
@@sherpaderpdingo3405 and muffins. don't forget the muffins!
@@laincoubert7236 😂
@@laincoubert7236 and objections hearsay.. Don't forget the objections
opinion articles are MY TRUTH, said amber heard
This case has become an absolute joke. Asking a barrage of questions without stopping to hear a response, just plain rude. I take my hat off to all of the professional people that have been questioned in this way as none have truly lost their tempers. What is the judge doing? I would think that a lesson in decorum is required.
Educate yourself. Depp's lawyer could easily object to this questioning if it was inappropriate. As they know, it isn't. Nothing to do with the judge.
I think that everyone should take every angle into judgement. Yes, her team sucks and has no defence, Yes her lawyrrs suck.. but they jury is supposed to look past all of that bias and should rely purely on logic and reason, leaving emotion and pre-conceptions at the door.\
On that note, Amber has no defence whatsoever, and I don't see how she could win this case - as noted above, her case has no ground to stand on.
@@hmacklemore2226 it is rude and obnoxious thus inappropriate. But Depp team is giving Heard's team enough rope to hang themselves.
She is letting Jhonny Depp win 🤣
Actually, if Johnny's lawyers know that the witnesses are well-prepared and know how to defend themselves, they don't have to object. The jury is watching everything - they're watching the behaviour of the lawyers of both parties and both Amber and Johnny - so far only Amber's team has been impolite and only they have embarrassed themselves multiple times. The jury notices that, and I think Johnny's team are allowing Amber's team to embarrass themselves further.
I love how JD's lawyers are not objecting to any of this, instead letting her lawyer make a total fool of himself!
I love when the witness says "Are you just gonna keep reading this?" AH's lawyer should have realized his mistake in his line of questioning if he was a truly good & professional lawyer...but none of AH's team is good at what they do, so....ugh.
And he literally tried to explain himself to the witness, as if he's a bad student and witness is a charismatic teacher lol
"He's trying to avoid it! I got him!"
Lol they didn’t realize anything. They’ve been doing this the whole trial. Literally just reading off tabloid headlines to all of the witnesses who have come on stand. They know what they’re doing. They’re just idiots
The lawyer isn't actually speaking to the witness, he's speaking to the jury. That's why he isn't interested in the witness' answers. He reads tabloid headlines aloud to try to smear Depp's name. He's trying to convince the jury that Depp is a bad man, and the witness just happens to be the means to that.
they are all bad, but I believe this is the one that objected to his own question last week, so he's the worst out of the lot...
Thank god Amber hired the 3 stooges.
Can someone legally trained actually explain why the lawyer is asking this guy whether or not he agrees that these articles exist?
I'm not legally trained but I believe he's trying to establish that Johnny's own behavior and addictions had as much to do with his inability to get contracts as Amber's op ed
it’s a defamation case, johnnys lawyers have to convince the jury ambers allegations caused financial losses.
Ambers lawyers are trying to build a case that johnnys own behavior cost him his movie roles and the money that would’ve come with them. Not ambers allegations.
They're trying to proof that Johnny defamed himself, but the only thing this guy had was the initial lawsuit which as we all know by now, was all a bunch of lies, so he's got nothing and is trying to get the witnesses to screw up by putting pressure on them
he is trying to make an absurd connection that somehow him losing the movies after amber lied is bc of his other "issues"
Linda C,
Which is complete BS, of course.
The idea that Disney sacked JOHNNY DEPP for being drunk rather than the allegation of wife-beating is just ridiculous. That's quite a reach. I doubt any of the parents of the kids he visited in a hospital or whose days he's made in full character were concerned about his personal issues before the allegation of physical violence.
If Disney started drug testing their actors they wouldn't have any left.
I’m sorry but the end 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Considering that the Disney movie that makes money on a drunk pirate who loves rum? I think they'd take the drunkenness' as ADVERTISING
@@WonderLady EXACTLY! He would be in character if he was “drunk”
Disney is a bunch of groomers anyways so i doubt they have those sorts of standards. Theyd only get rid of Depp because the allegations of violence against women in this political climate will get you protestors and cancel culture, which affects the money they make. Money is all they care about. They'd have Depp back in an instant after this case is settled because there would be millions of people paying to see his next movie just to show him support.
If they started drug testing actors there wouldn’t be any left
This witness was the most honest down to earth you could wish for !
AH claims she did't mentioned Johnny Depp in the op-ed, and the witness said: "is there any husband that she have at the time?" is really on point.
Objection, hearsay
@@jdriz9669 lol
😂 I’m blonde 👱♀️ but wasn’t born blonde lol but ah lawyers is exploiting all her plot in the articles that isn’t allegedly false allegations of domestic violence to Seek revenge of ex-husband
Her lawyers is providing evidence that the article SHE wrote does pin point at Johnny Depp 🌽🎭🤪🐩🙈🤦♀️🤦♀️
“ARE YOU JUST GONNA KEEP READING THIS?” - Ambers lawyer expects this man to read and acknowledge all and everything written in rags.
lol xD
Gossip Mags are hearsay & made-up lies; to make money. You can’t believe hearsay gossip in a gossip rag at check-outs in a convenience store, drugstore or grocery store. Look how they gossiped & lied about Princess Diana. She had no privacy. In the end she was killed at a very young age, leaving behind her two beautiful boys, by the same paparazzi.
This comment is especially great coming from the witness.
a lot of people are saying how the judge appears biased with how she won't cut off Amber's judges when they make obvious mistakes, but I have to disagree I think the judge, for as impartial and educated as she seems, is having a little thrill letting heards lawyers absolutely destroy their own case themselves. they don't need a judge to stop them after every sentence to prove what a poor job they're doing, she just let's them go at it and utterly embarrass themselves.
Give them enough rope and fools & liars will hang themselves ... every time!
The judge allowing this nonsense is ludicrous!!!! How shameful. She is literally allowing these lawyers to bully every witness. It’s pathetic.
It's not the judges job to do that it's actually the other teams lawyers to do that.
No, this is good!
The judge, the jury, and the country are getting to see these idiots make fools of themselves. It's only hurting their case lol.
Depp already won the only victory that matters, public opinion. So the rest is just a show to watch with popcorn.
If he loses, he still wins lol.
^ Yeah… kinda weird that Depp’s lawyers aren’t objecting
@@timaa.4379 They're letting her lawyers make fools of themselves.
This lawyer legit gives me anxiety every time he speaks, how he tries to hurry through these absurd & repetitive questions in attempts for “slipped up” answers. It’s like you could almost hear the fear.
Sounds like Ben Shapiro lol
@@Nondualitty lmao!
I don't get why they are always referring to headlines and articles from some random magazines and trying to present them as serious evidence. Everyone knows that those headlines are lurid to catch peoples attention and increase sales. Sometimes there are even partly made up just to get publicity. No sane human being can take this seriously. No wonder that poor man loses it.
I think he's just trying to argue that Amber Heard was not the cause of that bad publicity, and shift the blame away from her in regards to defamation. The article headings can change the public view of Johnny, make him lose favor with people and cost him future projects. If they could prove that none of the bad press Johnny received was a result of Amber, then she would be innocent of defamation, which is ultimatly what this trial is about and why Johnny sued her in the first place.
No, someone (me) not following the situation prior to this trial had no idea. Good point to bring up sources, made a marked shift in my consideration of all that. (Some of us are holding out for neutrality until all evidence presented. 😇)
Maybe they should read some headlines for articles about Amber??? Sure they’re all true too😂
Rottenborn knows that the articles are useless. He's just hoping that as he reads them out loud, the negativity behind the titles sticks in the mind of the jury and the public. It's pathetic but the psychology behind it is valid. But as he has used this monologue on at least 3 or 4 occasions now, even a blind man can see what he's doing.
Whether he wins or loses, his and his legal team's demeanor has won the internet and he can live in peace. If there is any justice in this world, he should win handily. But knowing how the law works, they may even screw this over
How much has Depp spent on PR to "win" the internet?
@@32braveheart probably nothing lmao, most mainstream media is actually against him
@@32braveheart Watching the videos and how AH and her lawyers are in a rapid process of self-destructing anyways, what he paid for PR was too much. If he has paid anything.
He and his lawyers asked to broadcast the whole thing, so I assume they were quite aware of what will happen. So why spend money on PR?
@@johnscaramis2515 So they can blitz the internet with their spin. This guy is an abusive alcoholic that they're spinning into a victim.
I love to create videos and my aim is to show you how beautiful the world is by taking you on a journey with amazing nature scenery and relaxing music!
I lose my patience every time her Attorney's start asking questions...
Johnny’s got this. We’re all behind you man!
No, we're not
@@lauragriffin6512 Yeah, cuz Johnny is behind you...peng peng
@@lauragriffin6512 hi Laura griffin🥰
@@lauragriffin6512 If you think Amber is the victim then I pray for whoever you end up marrying 😬
@@kirmak664 🐑🐑🐑🐑
This was the best witness testimony ever. He made AH’s attorney look like a buffoon.
What kind of questions are these?? My goodness
Respect for the witness who stood his ground.
All of his questions are "do you agree that this article was published?" "This article was posted, right?" Forcing him to say yes, because (of course) they exist, but that doesn't mean they are true in any way. If the lawyer is always objecting for hearsay, and his defense is based on articles made by rumors, you know he can't win this case
I mean he would definitely win this case if it weren't public. That's how trash the court systems are.
@@Lucifronz you wish lmao
This is a desperate maneuver used to bring a positive light to the defense in the absence of actual incriminating facts; they are using the same quality of hearsay that they are condemning with another breath.
exactly. they sound just like what any cheap paparazzo would write. in brazil, we have this video on Porta dos Fundos where they talk about creating new material, and the general title is: "[famous person] was allegedly seen doing something they shouldn't". like, they don't even have to look for a real information, they can just speculate and it's fine, there's no legal repercution for them.
@@Lucifronz Don't kid yourself. Rottenbum Strawman is grasping at straws in the wake of Ms. Elaine Strawgrasper. This wouldn't take all but 3 days to go in Johnny's favor without the cameras there to capture the sensational acting from Heard and hyperbolized strawman arguments from her defense goons. This is essentially the same psychological method used to get kids to eat their vegetables. Amber is a psychopath. I've met Johnny's, I've met Ambers; I wouldn't associate with any of them regularly more than a party night with Depp once in a blue moon, but I would change my address and phone number for someone like Amber. Those people are vampires.
It’s sad to see the civil courts allow this
"Allow this"? That's what courts are for.
@@andrewvelonis5940 i agree, i don’t see many other ways that this would go down.
Probate attorneys are far worse. I am experiencing currently over my mother and her estate....
Money is a powerful enticing instrument that creates corruption in the system.
What a waste of resources and time
@@claregale9011 A libel trial is about to start in the UK. The litigants are Rebecca Vardy and Colleen Rooney, wives of English soccer players. It's basically a huge disagreement over stuff that one leaked to the media about the other. A matter that could probably be sorted out in a face to face meeting is going to trial; like you say, a waste of resources and time.
These have got to be the worst most annoying lawyers ever…they ask a question and won’t let the person answer….
Now I believe *"would you agree that such and such article is true"* should only come after you've ascertained the witness has knowledge of the said articles in the first place 😂
Also why would articles written by people who majorly have no personal contact/relationship with the accused/defender be admissible in court as document a lawyer is *"really really wanting you to agree to"* or should I say is *"desperately almost forcing down your throat"* 🤦
Is this what lawyer was asking? I couldn't tell between "would you article this article exists" and "would you are with it's content". Witness seemed to answer the first one time and time again.
Goes to prove..
England is full of LAZY hanging Judges.
Why he lost the first law suit.
In London..
Over paid public Civil servants.
Only interested in PROCESS..
And the paycheque .
They hung the truth out years ago.
Lazy useless individuals traitors to Justice..
i don't understand why Depp's lawyers dont object to the questions regarding Disney - i.e. "given that newspaper article, would Disney be interested in using Depp for further movies?" That should get an objection for hearsay. How is that guy supposed to know what Disney would or would not do.
They're trying to affirm depp's reputation in hollywood and beyond, not accusing him of anything at that point.
@@brians9508 Likely because they're letting Amber's legal team sink their own chance of winning.
Who hires a drunk pirate & then ‘supposedly’ fires him for being a drunk pirate?!?!? Disney!
Not only does this trial shed light on traumatic abusive partners, but it is definitely shedding a different light on Disney corporate as a whole. Disney can thank Amber Heard for any future boycotts & loss. So much coming to light in this trial. Makes you look back at all the things other famous people have said about Disney but it was just swept under the rug.
Disney was friends with Aleister Crowley along with a few other Nazis. Should tell you all you need to know about that satanic company
the entire world knows how diesney works. and still keep watching disney movies
7 Companies owned by Disney,
Walt Disney (DIS):
21st Century Fox (TFCF Corp.)
Capital Cities/ABC
Pixar Animation Studios
Lucasfilm Ltd.
Marvel Entertainment
Fox Family Worldwide
BAMTech LLC
Can’t boycott a company like Disney unfortunately. They’re too large
I dont think Disney's gonna receive any blow back from this. Theyre too big to blow back......wait.
“You would agree that the bus that someone you’ve never met or heard of but who said you were on, stopped at the square on January 22nd 2015 at around 10am and that the driver was not wearing a hat,correct?” Listen, I’ve met some seriously confused stoners in my time who made more coherent arguments than Heard’s defence team. I’m amazed that the people taking the stand are being so patient.
brilliant comment! cheers for that!
This comment wins!
The most perfect comment ever haha! :)
Their strategy is to ask questions, which may cause doubt on JD's claim.
Hahahah😂brilliant comment
Never paid much attention to JD before this whole saga.. but must say, becoming a huge fan of how he’s been able to put up with this crap throughout his life. All those complaining about his drug addiction should be put up on trial for causing it in the first place.
Yes literal crap.
You can clearly see the character of a person from the team they hire to defend them. The AH team is seriously rude, and clearly with no integrity. Clearly she found the best team to represent her.
When you're losing the case, this is what you do xD
@@henrysimpson5995 yes. Hire the team that clearly is who she is. Lol
A bullies match made in heaven
Either way this ends these scumbags get paid out by Elon and get a book deal.
@@jw-hy5nq ya. Or JD gets cancelled on Twitter
He just roasted the lawyer and his entire cross examination.
Exactly!! 🤣😅😅🤣😂 I just love 3:00 on!! 😂🤣😅
@@Rebecca-hc5ju I agree with this though
Lawyer: "do you agree that an article was written years ago saying this?!"
Witness: "if someone wrote it, I guess it exists"
what's even the point of the question? agreeing if something exists? wouldn't the more logical question be if he agrees with the content of the article?
@@agbrenv I think that's the exact point of the question... I honestly think Heard's defence are ultimately trying to suggest that Heard's article is one of thousands of negative articles about Johnny, therefore it doesn't matter, and it had no meaningful impact on his career.
@@Zerobob26 Yeah but the article was written by his wife not journalist or other commenters. It’s not the same so it does have an impact on him.
The lawyer isn't speaking to the witness, that's why he isn't interested in his answers. These are not questions, these are statements quoting tabloid headlines to the jury to try to depict Depp as a bad person.
@@onigiri460 I think we all know that just Heard's team trying to twist logic.
I’m cringing everytime this lawyer says «correct ?»
Me too 😭😭 I can’t stand this man 😭😭
Johnny Depp is one of the most versatile actors I have ever seen. He plays different roles and characters brilliantly. I can't think of too many actors who have such range.
With such distinct looks, you tend to see such actors as themselves, but not in Johnny's case. You see him as the character which is quite a feat.
Im completely agree with you ¡
Christian Bale
he's awesome
He's a character actor.
Asking the same question over and over again is annoying
“We’re talking about Johnny Depp’s reputation.” Dude if you wanna know his reputation, just look at the video of Johnny leaving the court room with all his fans giving him gifts.
I don’t understand how the defense objects to everything as hearsay, yet uses tabloid articles as proof!?! Those are in fact examples of hearsay!!!
It's a big brain play.Modern day court is just 4d Chess with laws. If they don't discredit their use of tabloids, they can in turn use tabloids as their own evidence without fear of being shot down.
stolen comment
It's not hearsay. Copying from what I wrote above: There's an exception to the hearsay rule here (actually it's not even an exception -- by definition it's not hearsay). What is said in the articles is not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in those articles (e.g., whether or not Johnny was drunk for example); rather, it's being used as an example of negative publicity. This is why Depp's lawyers aren't objecting. Trust me, they would if they could, and they have objected to hearsay many times.
Hearsay would be, for example, Amber Heard testifying "My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit" -- because she's offering an out of court statement ("My doctor told me I suffered a broken arm from being hit") as evidence that she did indeed suffer a broken arm. Of course, if her team called her doctor, he could testify that she suffered a broken arm, since that's not hearsay.
@@kieran786 what?
@@andershebekk251 you just copy pasted a comment that was made 2 weeks before yours, from word to word.
"the most overpaid actor" and Johnny's look of agreement is hysterical 😂😂🤣
PS the lawyer is bringing this up and not allowing him to completely answer to get the accusations out there. Whatever the witness has to say is irrelevant, the defense just wants the jury to hear there could be a multitude of other reasons he lost new roles. Its clever to a point and in this case it just hurts the defense, their credibility is shot.
I really thought he got MORE for being Captain Jack! As much as Disney MADE off him🧐! Guess he got some perks but, I thought he would have gotten more pay.
Unbelievable!! Just got a George Floydish type Victim testimonial Advertisement.... FIRST EVER!!🧐
JOHNNY IS JUST HILARIOUS I LOVE HIM SO MUCH 😎❤️
“And who wrote that, the 2nd most overpaid actor?” Lol
Did Johnny lean over to his lawyer and say,😎 "I was." ? It sure looked like it 😄
They said the guy on the stand is a lawyer as well, so he knows how to play the game and you tell with the way he answers questions LIKE A BOSS
he's not phased at all. seems to enjoy it actually lmao
I would too. Its getting too hilarious when he realising that all this lawyer asking is tabloids.
These rapid fire questions are ridiculous... AH's lawyer is nervous you can hear it in his voice.
I’m not even being questioned and this dude is raising my blood pressure.
Objection
That's hearsay!
I totally agree with the witness. Every actors have ups and downs in their film career in terms of box office success. If we take the articles at their face value, then a fair justice to JD would not be possible because sometimes, tabloids, newspapers have their own vested interests when it comes to judging performance of an actor. At some point of time, Robert Downey Junior was not successful in his film career, but he turned his career upside down in terms of success after he got a role in Iron man.
Mel Gibson had some ups and downs in his career, some of which related to off-screen activities.
@@andrewvelonis5940 yeah, you are right.
What is the point of the lawyer asking those questions to the witness?
"Uh, Johnny was a drunk and his movies flopped" Some bs
One of his 'flops' made 800+ million......
That’s the reality AH attorney seems to ignored. Even the most beloved actor like tom hanks movies flop sometime
Everytime rottenborn speaks, he makes a stronger case for depp.
It’s almost like he is working for depp, just from the other side, hehe!
I like that the judge and depps lawyers are letting him badger and misbehave. More public sympathy for depp, when we see what madness Amber Herd is capable of bringing to the table.
A few people have said this that it’s like he’s secretly working for Johnny especially when he looked at Johnny and smiled after the penis incident lol xx
I like the way Johny says his name..Thank you mr.Rotten...born...: )))j
He's a blue spy
That's not Rottenborn
Its not rottenborn, this is the guy who objected to his own question earlier in trial. He’s an embarrassment, does anybody know his name?
The fact that they need to resort to "gossip rags" shows how desperate they are to find anything against Depp's character. Plus it seems so embarrassingly unprofessional. Top that with his horrible rudeness.
It’s painfully obvious that, in society, there is a difference between self destructive behavior such as occasionally being too drunk and looking silly, and being the abuser in an abusive relationship.
Heard’s lawyers are trying to equate the two, but the jury won’t buy it. They are in no way equal. Society tolerates people getting drunk and being silly, as long as they don’t hurt anyone. Society doesn’t tolerate someone being physically abusive to their spouse.
The witness is smart! “Does she(AH) have other husband than JD?” This definitely fought back on AH’s trick that taking out JDs name from the OP Ed. As she admit herself as the DV in 2016 during their marriage
DD knows MU but RK can't PP. However that was OK so GH spoke to KJ and then he was able to KK.
@@kreepieters8439 what the fk
@@kreepieters8439 objection, heresay!
desperation showing, they went from trying to prove he is guilty, to trying to say it wasn't her accusations that hurt his career. They know she is a liar, and now just trying to say it doesn't matter.
I agree with everything you said, exept for "desperation showing". What they are doing is a tactical approach: defend on every ground, contest every issue.
@@andrewvelonis5940 That.is.called.desperation.Andrew
@@andrewvelonis5940 there is simply NO ground to defend. An article of a web site visited by a hundred bored fans is not something that will influence a 800M deal. The further it goes, the more ridiculous it sounds. "Did she have another husband during that period?" - this is an open mocking.
Her lawyers are literally grasping at straws at this point. Actually, was there ever a point when they WEREN’T? 😂🙄
Literally or figuratively?
Exactly! Like come on, you really are going to use the tabloids as a way to make Johnny Depp reputation look bad
They will be BREATHING through those same straws soon, my friend; 'tis only a matter of time for them.
The lawyer here mentions, like, a million articles painting Johnny in such a bad light and yet doesn't even show any of the articles he was saying. Dear god, that begs the question if those articles actually did exist
“Wouldn’t you agree?”
No
“….and wouldn’t you agree?”
….No
“…..so you would agree then wouldn’t you?”