Amber Heard's Post-Trial Motion is a Massive Fail! Legal Analysis - Johnny Depp Trial

Set aside the verdict? Dismiss the complaint?? I don't think so. This is a deep dive into the legal and factual basis for Amber Heard's post-trial motions. We're going to break down her arguments, look at the law she cites, and evaluate exactly how bad these arguments are. Spoiler alert: If you were expecting high-level advocacy from Amber's team, prepare to be disappointed - it's just more of the same misleading, skewed demagoguery that ignores inconvenient facts and pretends the law is more favorable than it is.

0:00 Intro
00:35 Everything she's asking for
01:36 The law of remittitur, or reducing the damage award
09:28 "No evidence," or just no evidence you like?
14:23 The attack on Camille's argument is a big loser
18:44 The verdicts can be reconciled pretty easily
20:19 The First Amendment law really doesn't say what Elaine wants it to
29:02 There's evidence of republication and the jury was correctly instructed
32:06 More "no evidence" where there's lots of evidence
35:59 WTAF is she thinking going after Juror 15??
42:14 Bottom line: It's going nowhere

The motion is available for download here:
Be the first to comment