KiigelHeart said:
I know actual malice is a legal term and I still think it's easy to establish here. She knew him personally and made statements about something that happened between them. She was there so she knows the truth. Yet her claims were found untrue. The basis is she's intentionally lying. Idk who Alex Jones is but it's difficult to establish actual malice if someone is talking shit about someone they don't personally know or events they didn't witness themselves. They can always say "well my sources told me this and I'm dumb enough to believe it" etc. Or if you claim Biden flashed his dick to you "well I've never seen him in person before, I really thought it was him". Interesting case from legal aspect though. |
It really depends on how you interpret the terms abuse or sexual abuse. I would argue, if I were on Heard's side, that the statements only meant that Heard found his behaviors to be abusive. If abusive means abusive by Heard's standards, then you would need to show that she didn't actually consider the behaviors abusive. And again, when she has a personality disorder, as Depp's team argued, I think you could make a case that she simply had a warped perspective, and believed herself to have been abused. But she didn't want to make that case. On the other hand, you could take her statement to mean that Depp's behavior met the standards that society in general would find to be abusive. In that case, actual malice would not be super hard to prove.
The really weird part to me is that the jury also found that Johnny Depp's statement, through his lawyer, that the whole thing was a hoax designed to hurt him was also found defamatory against Heard. And I'm not quite sure how the jury could seemingly hold both that Johnny Depp was lying when he said it was a hoax, but that she knowingly lied about the abuse. Those two things don't square up for me. It's possible that the jury kind of compromised, which sadly happens alot. Like, there was one person on the jury who wanted to find for Heard, but they appeased them by calling one of Depp's statements defamatory. Or of course, it could just be something I'm missing. Unfortunately, jury deliberations are private, so I guess we'll never know.