Johnny Depp’s legal team has composed a scathing clap back against Amber Heard with a memorandum.
It has all been referenced in the memorandum presented to the court by Mr Depp’s lead counsel, Ben Chew.
The document outlines Amber Heard’s prior knowledge of the issue, the acceptance from her legal team to follow through with the trial move forward despite the discrepancy in court, and also ‘unfounded’ calls for a mistrial.
The document obtained by Yahoo reads, “Following a six-week jury trial, a jury of Ms Heard’s peers rendered a verdict against her in virtually all respects. Though understandably displeased with the outcome of trial, Ms Heard has identified no legitimate basis to set aside in any respect the jury’s decision. Virginia law is clear that a verdict is not to be set aside unless it is ‘plainly wrong or without evidence to support it,'”
“The law in Virginia does not support Amber’s claim that she was denied due process because of the issue with juror 15. Her team had the opportunity to question the juror or to raise this issue at that time with the judge. Heard’s team accepted this jury panel with the information that they had then and there is no new information that come out since. They had the list of jurors that identified the juror information and birthdate. This motion is a grasp, not a real possibility,”
“Heard’s claims that the juror incorrectly served on the jury, without more, is unlikely to provide the basis for a new trial,” she tells Yahoo. “If, however, the facts bear out that the incorrect juror was also hiding other evidence that influenced the verdict in this case — she may have a shot at a new trial.”
“Trial judges normally do not disturb jury verdicts absent proof that an error occurred at trial and that error changed the outcome of trial,” says defamation lawyer Jeff Lewis. “Heard has also argued that the verdict was legally inconsistent and should be set aside because the jury awarded some relief to both sides. But as Depp pointed out, the core of the case: whether Depp ever abused Heard, was resolved by the jury completely in Depp’s favour. The jury’s finding against Depp did not relate to that core issue but instead on a side issue: whether Depp’s lawyer falsely stated that Heard dummied up a crime scene and falsified evidence. Depp argues that those jury findings are reconcilable and there is no basis to set the verdict aside.”
“These types of post-trial motions are commonly made as a precursor to an appeal but in practice are very rarely granted. These motions will likely be denied but they are a good indication of the types of arguments that Heard will repeat to the appellate court.”