Amber Heard has opened the door for Johnny Depp to sue her once again after she doubled down on claims that he beat her in a new interview with the Today show, with an expert telling DailyMail.com that her latest statements are grounds for ‘a third lawsuit.’
During the explosive interview – which was pre-recorded on Thursday in New York City and is airing in three parts throughout the week – the actress, 36, called the verdict in her defamation trial against Depp, 59, ‘unfair’ and insisted that she is going to ‘stand by every word of her testimony until the day she dies,’ less than two weeks after she was found guilty of defaming her ex by claiming that he abused her during their marriage.
The 36-year-old doubled down on her allegations that Depp was physically violent towards her during their one-year of marriage, and accused him of ‘lying’ on the stand when he said that he ‘never hit her,’ while speaking to Today host Savannah Guthrie.
Now, New York-based entertainment lawyer Nicole Haff, who works at Romano Law, has revealed exclusively to DailyMail.com how Heard’s comments could well backfire – and result in her getting sued by the Pirates of the Caribbean star once again.
Amber Heard has opened the door for Johnny Depp to sue her once again after she doubled down on claims that he beat her in a new interview with the Today show, an expert said
During the explosive interview the actress called the verdict in her defamation trial against Depp ‘unfair’ and insisted that she is going to ‘stand by every word of her testimony’
The 36-year-old doubled down on her allegations that Depp was physically violent towards her, and accused him of ‘lying’ on the stand, while speaking to Today host Savannah Guthrie
‘Yes. This interview could count as a new “publication” under the law, which could spur a third lawsuit,’ the attorney explained, when asked if Depp could sue Heard for defamation over her Today interview.
According to MincLaw.com, ‘An individual who repeats or republishes defamation will be subject to the same liability as the publisher of the original defamatory material,’ something known as republishing.
‘A defamatory statement is considered “published” when it is communicated either intentionally, with actual malice or reckless disregard, or negligently, to someone other than the person being defamed,’ the company added. ‘The statement must also be reasonably understood by the recipient to be false.’
However, Haff added that she isn’t sure it would be a smart move for Depp to pursue a third trial against Heard, adding: ‘Heard’s lawyers have already stated that she cannot pay the original judgment.’
DailyMail.com has reached out to Depp’s legal team for comment.
Exes Heard and Depp – who tied the knot in 2015, and were married for one year before Heard filed for divorce in 2016 – battled it out in court to determine if a 2018 Washington Post essay written by Heard, in which she accused the actor of domestic abuse, defamed Depp.
After a months-long trial, Heard was ordered to pay the actor $10 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive damages, although the second payment was reduced to $350,000 per Virginia law by the judge.
Heard was awarded $2 million in compensatory damages out of the $100 million she was seeking in her countersuit against her ex.
After the trial concluded on June 1, Heard’s lawyer Elaine Bredehoft told the Today show that the star ‘absolutely’ couldn’t pay Depp the full amount of money.
Back in 2020, Depp also sued British outlet The Sun for labelling him a ‘wife beater’ over Heard’s claims, which he ultimately lost.
New York-based entertainment lawyer Nicole Haff has revealed exclusively to DailyMail.com how Heard’s statements could backfire on her – and result in her getting sued once more
‘Yes. This interview could count as a new “publication” under the law, which could spur a third lawsuit,’ the attorney explained, when asked if this was grounds for another defamation trial
Despite a jury ruling overwhelmingly in her ex-husband’s favor in the recent trial, finding Heard guilty on three counts of defamation against him, the Aquaman alum refused to walk back her claims of abuse against him while speaking to the Today show, blasting Depp as a ‘liar’ and reiterated her accusations that he beat her during their marriage.
‘He said he never hit you. Is that a lie?’ Guthrie, 50, questioned during the interview, to which Heard responded bluntly: ‘Yes it is.’
She added: ‘To my dying day, I will stand by every word of my testimony.’
Heard also accused Depp’s lawyers, Camille Vasquez and Benjamin Chew, of trying to ‘distract the jury from the real issues’ during the trial, conceding that they had ‘done a better job of that’ than her own legal team.
She also suggested that the trial had called into question her First Amendment right to free speech, claiming that she had ‘spoken her truth and spoken it to power’ only to have ended up ‘paying the price’ for that.
When grilled by Guthrie about audio clips that were played during the six-week trial, which took place in Virginia, in which the 36-year-old could be heard admitting to being physically abusive towards Depp, she insisted that she only ever ‘responded to [physical violence]’ but that she ‘never instigated it.’
Haff added that she wasn’t sure it would be a smart move for Depp (pictured in court back in April), adding, ‘the public views Depp less favorably than they did before the trial’
Heard and Depp battled it out to determine if a 2018 Washington Post essay written by Heard, in which she accused the actor of domestic abuse, defamed Depp. They are pictured in court
‘I never had to instigate it, I responded to it,’ she claimed. ‘When you’re living in violence and it becomes normal – as I testified to – you have to adapt.’
Heard added that, while she ‘has so much regret’ over the ‘horrible’ and ‘ugly’ things she did and said to Depp, she was only acting as a ‘person in extreme psychological distress’ who felt that their ‘life was at risk.’
‘I know much has been made of these audio tapes,’ she said. ‘They were first leaked online after being edited.
‘What you would hear in these clips [was] not evidence of what was happening, it was evidence of a negotiation, of how to talk about that with your abuser.
‘As I testified on the stand about it. When your life is at risk, not only will you take the blame for things that you shouldn’t take the blame for, but when you are in an abusive dynamic – psychologically, emotionally, and physically – you don’t have the resources or the luxury of saying, “Hey this is black and white.” Because it is anything but when you are living in it.’
Heard also insisted that the jury’s decision was influenced by what she called ‘unfair social media representation’ and by her ex-husband calling on ‘paid employees and randos’ to testify on his behalf.
***
Read more at DailyMail.co.uk