The Depp-Heard trial verdict isn’t surprising. What I saw in the courtroom sickened me

I reported on this trial for seven weeks, and I never got over the cruelty

Watch moment Johnny Depp wins defamation trial against Amber Heard
Leer en Español

It took the jury in the Johnny Depp v Amber Heard trial less than three days to reach a verdict. They started on a Friday afternoon, broke on Memorial Day weekend, and returned on Tuesday May 31. By early afternoon the following day, they had made their determination and found that Heard defamed her ex-husband in a 2018 op-ed written for The Washington Post.

In other words, Depp won the trial in the US that he lost in the UK after suing The Sun’s publishing company over a headline calling him a wife-beater.

I reported on this trial over the course of seven weeks. It took over my professional life, and many of my personal conversations. It was a difficult, often grim assignment.

Through it all, the cruelty of those who mocked Heard never ceased to amaze me. From the onset, she — the defendant in this case — never seemed to benefit from the presumption of innocence reserved for those who ordinarily stand in a courtroom. Her every gesture, her every facial expression was scrutinized. Everything she did — from the ways she smiled or cried or wiped her nose — was immediately interpreted in the least hospitable light.

I could never get used to the online discourse around the case – the memes, the YouTube supercuts, the flippant tweets, the former boy band member overtly making fun of her on social media. It all defied, to me, the boundaries of acceptable human behavior.

On multiple occasions, I watched Heard fight through sobs to deliver her testimony. And then I watched as thousands of self-appointed internet detectives made fun of her, came up with new derisive hashtags, and analyzed her every gesture and facial expression with a level of focus I can only call worrying. It sickened me through and through. It still does.

Depp didn’t make it to Virginia on Wednesday to hear the verdict in person in the Fairfax courtroom. He was in the UK, where he’s been doing some concerts. Heard was in the courtroom as the verdict was read out: she and Depp each alleged they had been defamed by the other side on three statements. The jury found in favor of Depp on all three of Heard’s statements, and in favor of Heard in just one of the three statements she had brought up in her countersuit. Each side was awarded some damages, Depp significantly more than Heard.

“The disappointment I feel today is beyond words. I’m heartbroken that the mountain of evidence still was not enough to stand up to the disproportionate power, influence, and sway of my ex-husband,” Heard said in a statement afterward. “... I believe Johnny’s attorneys succeeded in getting the jury to overlook the key issue of freedom of speech and ignore evidence that was so conclusive that we won in the UK.”

We are not done talking about Depp v Heard. Not by a long shot.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in