Johnny Depp dating a private lawyer, will beat Amber Heard with "defamation by implication"?

Currently, information about Johnny Depp and his lawsuit with his ex-wife always receives attention from the public.

According to TMZ, in recent days, many clips of intimate actions above the lawyer-client level between Camille Vasquez and actor Johnny Depp have been widely shared by fans on social networking platforms.

Notably, Johnny Depp often turned his eyes to lawyer Camille Vasquez during each hearing. The two whispered into each other's ears several times and smiled. At the end of the trial, Amber Heard's ex-husband did not forget to wave, goodbye to his personal lawyer.

Based on the two's body language, viewers speculate that Johnny Depp and Camille Vasquez may be dating.

However, a source close to lawyer Camille Vasquez said that the two's relationship was purely for work.

"They are very professional in their work. I confirm that the two are not dating," TMZ quoted the source as saying.

Johnny Depp and Amber Heard got married in February 2015. Not long after the wedding, the couple encountered problems such as smuggling dogs and illegal guns into Australia. In May 2015, Heard applied to the court for an injunction to prevent Depp from coming near him. She said she was feeling "extremely afraid" of her husband because he repeatedly abused her.

At the beginning of 2017, the star couple divorced. In March 2019, Johnny Depp filed a defamation lawsuit against Amber Heard and demanded $50 million in damages after the Washington Post published an editorial about the actress's experience of being a victim of domestic violence. pen.

Since divorcing Amber Heard, Johnny Depp is said to have not dated anyone.

In another development, famous lawyers in the US recently raised their views on the case of Johnny Depp against his ex-wife. They argue that whoever wins, the lawsuit will not become a landmark in the history of defamation law.

According to on Katz - a lawyer who has defended many clients and acted as a spokesman for many parties (including the Westboro Baptist church), he said that no one would win in this story. "On the contrary, I want a verdict against the two of them," he insisted.

Eugene Volokh, a law professor at the University of California, said: "Johnny v Amber seems like a pretty simple defamation statement. I haven't seen any details or anything that really affects the law. ".

Back in 2018, Amber Heard wrote of herself as a victim of domestic and sexual violence in an editorial published in the Washington Post. The actress did not mention Johnny Depp by name, but she linked her experience to the #MeToo movement.

On this, Depp argues in the light of being defamed by Heard by implication - neutral, unnamed statements that can still generate defamatory insinuations.

The concept of defamation once appeared in the trial between James Fenimore Cooper - a writer known for his articles on American social, political, economic, and cultural issues - and a series of editors of a newspaper. newspaper in the 1840s.

Horace Greeley, one of the defendants, said, "James will not bring the lawsuit to New York nor Otsego, because he is well known there", implying Cooper's bad reputation throughout the country. This statement caused Greeley to be considered defamatory by a New York court by implication.

In 2019, the Virginia Press Association (VPA) filed a summary of the Depp and Heard case, asking the court not to expand the term "defamation by implication".

Jennifer Nelson, senior attorney for the VPA, told Variety: "Widespread use of defamatory content by implication can cause journalistic indifference." Nelson believes that journalists don't risk making subjective inferences from someone's implications when reporting about them. The lawyer emphasized in such insufficiently grounded articles, the plaintiffs - here are the stars - are likely to be counter-sued for slander.

However, Bruce White - the judge of the Fairfax district court - denied the VPA's request and allowed Johnny Depp to continue his appeal, saying: "This is Virginia's old precedent".

Whatever the jury decides, the case doesn't worry Jack Browning, an attorney at Davis Wright Tremaine LLP who represents media clients including the New York Post and Last Week Tonight With John Oliver. .

He only viewed the war between Depp and Heard as a "sui generis" case (insiders' own will) without drawing much larger lessons for the public.

The trial over the past few days has touched on the #MeToo movement, celebrity violence and decadence with developments that are "as gripping as the TV series" and "more thrilling than a wrestling match", according to CBS News. . And finally, the audience is just waiting to see who will play the villain.

Entertainment lawyer Mitra Ahuraian watched every minute of the proceedings, saying, "The lawsuit is only helping Johnny Depp win the court of public opinion. He is using the court as a tool to convey his voice, to help him. body is heard".

"But what about the outcome?", asked the Variety reporter, and she immediately replied: "Neither side wins".

7 times Johnny Depp laughed implicitly at the trial against his ex-wife Amber Heard Hoàng Phúc16:06:55 11/05/2022The Telegraph commented that the trial of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard is turning into a drama interwoven with comedy. The court is the place where many stressful cases take place, and Johnny Depp's case against his wife is no exception. However, many times laughter appeared on...