On March 18, 2021, a court hearing was held in the case of Johnny Depp, who sued the newspaper The Sun for defamation when it called him “the female boxer” in 2018. The actor demands a reconsideration of the case.
The London Court of Appeal heard Johnny Depp and his lawyers on March 18, 2021, requesting reconsideration of the lawsuit against the publisher of The Sun, News Group Newspapers.
The main argument used by Depp’s lawyers was that Amber Heard did not donate $ 7 million to charities (she was obliged to do so as a result of a divorce case). The attorneys said it “manipulative lie” that “determined the outcome of the case”, when it was originally used in evidence.
The actor will have to face the next verdict of the court wait yet. Judge Underhill concluded the hearing by saying:
Today we will definitely not come to a fair verdict, but we will do it quickly and we will submit the result in writing.
The case originally ended with a court verdict in favor of The Sun newspaper. The court found that the term “female boxer” was “essentially true” in the light of the evidence.
Andrew Caldecott, Depp’s legal representative, tried to convince the court in January 2021 that Heard had lied to the office and her words that deposited 7 million dollars to charities were not real. Heard then listed the names of the organizations she had helped – among them was a children’s hospital in Los Angeles or the American Civil Liberties Union.
The court considered that this was sufficient evidence that it could not be determined “gold diggerką”what the side of Depp accused her of.
On March 18, Caldecott maintained his position. He stated it was the Heard deposit of money “from the beginning it influenced the outcome of the case” and he says Heard did “a planned manipulative lie”. According to him, the court was mistakenly convinced of Heard’s right when it heard by a deposit of 7 million.
The representative of the News Group, Adam Wolanski, stated that Heard didn’t lie about the payments, because she had a lot of checks and bank transfers to the accounts of the aforementioned organizations – just more did not pay the full amount (the reason was supposed to be various costs related to the court battle with Depp). Wolanski also added that naming her “gold diggerką” in court is extremely uncultivated and “very misogynistic”.
Judge Andrew Nicol, who handled the original case in the Supreme Court, warned Depp that the appeal in this case was very little chance of success. The appellate court’s decision will be made over the next few weeks.