EXPLAINER: Each count the Depp-Heard jurors considered

Advertisement

Advertise with us

As a public figure, Johnny Depp faced a high bar to win his libel lawsuit against his ex-wife Amber Heard. According to seven unanimous jurors, he cleared it.

Read this article for free:


or

Already have an account? Log in here »

To continue reading, please subscribe:

Subscribe and receive a limited-edition Free Press branded hat or tote.

Digital Subscription

One year of digital access for only $205*

  • Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
  • Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
  • Access News Break, our award-winning app
  • Play interactive puzzles

*First annual payment billed as $205.00 + GST for one year. This annual subscription will automatically renew at $233.00 + GST every 52 weeks (10% off the regular annual price of $259.35). Offer available to new and qualified returning subscribers only. Cancel any time.

To continue reading, please subscribe:

Add Free Press access to your Brandon Sun subscription for only an additional

$1 for the first 4 weeks*

  • Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
  • Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
  • Access News Break, our award-winning app
  • Play interactive puzzles
Start now

*Your next Brandon Sun subscription payment will increase by $1.00 and you will be charged $17.95 plus GST for four weeks. After four weeks, your payment will increase to $24.95 plus GST every four weeks.

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 01/06/2022 (1593 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

As a public figure, Johnny Depp faced a high bar to win his libel lawsuit against his ex-wife Amber Heard. According to seven unanimous jurors, he cleared it.

Depp said his ex-wife defamed him in a 2018 newspaper op-ed in which she alluded to abuse allegations against Depp. His name was never mentioned.

The Virginia civil jury ruled in favor of Depp on all three of his counts Wednesday, finding that Heard had not only made false and defamatory statements, but that she’d done so with “actual malice” — a higher threshold for cases involving public figures. Jurors concluded Depp should receive more than $10 million.

Actor Amber Heard listens in the courtroom in the Fairfax County Circuit Courthouse in Fairfax, Va., Wednesday, May 25, 2022. Actor Johnny Depp sued his ex-wife Amber Heard for libel in Fairfax County Circuit Court after she wrote an op-ed piece in The Washington Post in 2018 referring to herself as a
Actor Amber Heard listens in the courtroom in the Fairfax County Circuit Courthouse in Fairfax, Va., Wednesday, May 25, 2022. Actor Johnny Depp sued his ex-wife Amber Heard for libel in Fairfax County Circuit Court after she wrote an op-ed piece in The Washington Post in 2018 referring to herself as a "public figure representing domestic abuse." (Evelyn Hockstein/Pool photo via AP)

Depp’s victory was not absolute, though. Jurors also concluded that part of Heard’s counterclaim had merits. They rejected two of Heard’s three counts, but found she was defamed by a Depp lawyer who accused her of roughing up their apartment to look worse for police. The jury awarded her $2 million.

A look at each count jurors considered:

FIRST COUNT AGAINST HEARD

Jurors considered whether Depp was defamed by the online headline of the op-ed in The Washington Post: “I spoke up against sexual violence — and faced our culture’s wrath. That has to change.”

Heard’s lawyers argued she didn’t write the headline.

But jurors concluded Heard “made or published” it and that it was defamatory.

SECOND COUNT AGAINST HEARD

Jurors considered the op-ed’s third paragraph: “Then two years ago, I became a public figure representing domestic abuse, and I felt the full force of our culture’s wrath for women who speak out.”

Depp’s attorneys said it clearly referenced Depp, given that Heard publicly accused him of domestic violence in 2016.

Heard’s lawyers said a mountain of evidence showed Heard was abused numerous times, and that just one instance of proven abuse would make the line not defamatory. They also argued the statement was objectively true, because it was focused not on Depp, but on Heard’s experience speaking out.

Jurors disagreed, finding the statement defamatory.

THIRD COUNT AGAINST HEARD

In a second passage in the op-ed, Heard wrote, “I had the rare vantage point of seeing, in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse.”

Depp’s attorneys again said it clearly referenced Depp.

And, as with the other two counts, the jurors found Heard had defamed Depp with “actual malice” — there was clear and convincing evidence that Heard either knew it was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.

FIRST COUNT AGAINST DEPP

Heard levied three counts of defamation against Depp, saying she’d been repeatedly defamed by his former attorney Adam Waldman, who called Heard’s abuse allegations a hoax. Heard said the comments hurt her career.

Jurors considered a statement from Waldman that appeared on The Daily Mail’s website April 8, 2020: “​Amber Heard and her friends in the media use fake sexual-violence allegations as both a sword and shield depending on their needs. They have selected some of her sexual-violence hoax ‘facts’ as the sword, inflicting them on the public and Mr. Depp.”

Jurors concluded that Heard’s attorneys had not proven all the elements of defamation.

SECOND COUNT AGAINST DEPP

Heard scored her only victory over a statement Waldman gave to The Daily Mail. He accused Heard and her friends of fabricating abuse allegations following a 2016 fight in the couple’s Hollywood penthouse that prompted Heard to call police.

The statement reads: “Quite simply this was an ambush, a hoax. They set Mr. Depp up by calling the cops, but the first attempt didn’t do the trick. The officers came to the penthouses, thoroughly searched and interviewed, and left after seeing no damage to face or property. So Amber and her friends spilled a little wine and roughed the place up, got their stories straight under the direction of a lawyer and publicist, and then placed a second call to 911.”

Two officers testified they saw no signs Heard was injured, though she appeared in public with a mark on her face a few days later seeking a temporary restraining order.

Jurors agreed with Heard’s attorneys that Waldman’s statement was false and defamatory and that he’d acted with actual malice.

THIRD COUNT AGAINST DEPP

The final count against Waldman involved a statement from the same article: “We have reached the beginning of the end of Ms. Heard’s abuse hoax against Johnny Depp.”

Jurors concluded Heard’s lawyers had not proven the statement to be defamatory.

Report Error Submit a Tip

More Stories

Jets’ game flies south against Ducks

Mike McIntyre 7 minute read Preview

Jets’ game flies south against Ducks

Mike McIntyre 7 minute read Yesterday at 10:38 PM CDT

The Winnipeg Jets sure looked like a team that was running on fumes Friday night.

Playing for the fifth time in eight days, the club suffered its first regulation loss of the young season — a lacklustre 5-1 showing against the Anaheim Ducks at Canada Life Centre.

While we won’t question the effort, the execution was a different story. Sloppy plays, missed passes, porous defensive-zone coverage and iffy goaltending made this a tough watch for the 13,693 fans in attendance.

“Just some mental things that happened. Obviously some physical things as well,” said head coach Scott Arniel.

Read
Yesterday at 10:38 PM CDT

Is this the season of secession?

David McLaughlin 5 minute read Preview

Is this the season of secession?

David McLaughlin 5 minute read 2:01 AM CDT

Canada has entered its season of secession. Like El Nino, the currents of grievance can blow hot and cold. Today, they are hot. But how hot for how long? The odds of Alberta and now Quebec separating from Canada are not high, but they are never zero.

After a year of waving the flag in a surge of national patriotism to confront Donald Trump’s attacks on Canada — economic and verbal — it is both jarring and frustrating for most Canadians to be reminded of the pervasive and persistent tensions that come with governing our federation.

When we need new national purpose to confront big economic sovereignty and security challenges from outside, that purpose is undermined and diminished by having to confront homegrown grievances.

We’ve seen and seen off two separation referendums in Quebec. Now we have a newly elected separatist party coming to power. In Alberta, voters will soon decide whether the independence road is one they want to travel.

Read
2:01 AM CDT

A Rocky day on the mayoral campaign trail for Kevin Klein

Malak Abas 12 minute read Preview

A Rocky day on the mayoral campaign trail for Kevin Klein

Malak Abas 12 minute read Yesterday at 12:00 PM CDT

Kevin Klein acknowledges it’s hard to foresee what he’ll wake up to each morning in the final weeks of a mayoral campaign.

But the seasoned politician, who has served as both a city councillor and a provincial cabinet minister, couldn’t have predicted the events — what he describes as “drama” — that unfolded last Sunday.

Fellow mayoral candidate Mike Vogiatzakis accused Klein’s campaign team of offering him a job to drop out of the race, while a guest writer’s column in the Winnipeg Sun that questioned the deaths of Indigenous children at residential schools, just days after the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, sparked condemnation from a prominent Indigenous organization. (Klein is the CEO of the Klein Group, the company that owns the Sun. He has maintained he is not involved in its operations while running for mayor.)

The Free Press had already been scheduled to join Klein on the campaign trail Monday, intending to document a day in the life of the front-running candidate to unseat incumbent Scott Gillingham, before the controversies hit.

Read
Yesterday at 12:00 PM CDT

Bit of creepy consultation could go a long way

Maureen Scurfield 5 minute read Yesterday at 2:01 AM CDT

DEAR MISS LONELYHEARTS: Halloween has always been my favourite time of year. I do my house up with lots of spooky lighting and characters on the lawn with eerie sounds booming out.

But last year I got seriously hassled by some people in the neighbourhood who thought it was too creepy. How do I get them on board this year? I don’t want to fight with them again.

— Want to Be Good Neighbour, River Heights

Dear Good Neighbour: Go to your close neighbours and explain what you want to do with your yard for Halloween this year, and also provide them with a firm time by which the celebrating will wrap up and things can quiet down.

Get to know your Jet: Mario Ferraro

Mike McIntyre 8 minute read Preview

Get to know your Jet: Mario Ferraro

Mike McIntyre 8 minute read Thursday, Oct. 8, 2026

A one-on-one conversation with a Winnipeg Jet about the stuff you don't always hear in the media scrum

Read
Thursday, Oct. 8, 2026

Piece of Winnipeg’s magic history disappears

Kelly-Anne Riess 5 minute read Preview

Piece of Winnipeg’s magic history disappears

Kelly-Anne Riess 5 minute read Updated: 9:38 PM CDT

A piece of Winnipeg’s magic history has vanished, and internationally renowned escape artist Dean Gunnarson is offering a $500 reward to anyone who can make it reappear.

The plaque marked the birthplace of what has become the world’s largest organization of professional and amateur magicians, the International Brotherhood of Magicians, which was founded in Winnipeg more than a century ago.

Gunnarson said fellow magician and local magic historian Bruce Thompson discovered the disappearance Tuesday while on his way to work.

Thompson returned to inspect the site and found what appeared to be evidence it had been forcibly removed.

Read
Updated: 9:38 PM CDT