Jerry Atrick wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 11:46 am
The Guardian and independent have consistently had headlines that were incongruent with the day to day proceedings and general reporting on this freak show - but that's to be expected I suppose

armchairlawyer wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 10:45 am It's interesting that a UK case that Depp brought against The Sun involved similar evidence but the UK judge reached an opposite conclusion in 2020.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-54779430

Depp's UK lawyer at the time said he would likely appeal that ruling, saying:
Jenny Afia of Schillings law firm, who represented Mr Depp, said: "This decision is as perverse as it is bewildering. "Most troubling is the judge's reliance on the testimony of Amber Heard, and corresponding disregard of the mountain of counter-evidence from police officers, medical practitioners, her own former assistant, other unchallenged witnesses and an array of documentary evidence which completely undermined the allegations, point by point." "The judgement is so flawed that it would be ridiculous for Mr Depp not to appeal this decision," she added.

But he did not appeal it. Instead he pursued the US case and won that.

IMHO, this was another example of the male UK judge falling for the damsel in distress (see also Mary Archer and Meghan Markle) and reaching a wrong decision. Probably also the cross-examining of Heard was better in the USA, although, without a jury in the UK trial, that could have just provoked the judge's protective instincts further.

US justice system in libel cases 1 - 0 UK justice system in libel cases

Big Daikon wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 11:43 am