The Guardian
Amber Heard was asked in court last week if she recognized the name Carly Simon, soon after her attorneys introduced an exhibit of a mirror that Johnny Depp had defaced in tight, punctuated script after severing part of his middle finger in what his former wife described as a drug- and alcohol-induced blackout.
Depp’s note read: “Call Carly Simon. She said it better. Bye.”
Heard testified she wasn’t familiar with Simon or her work. But Depp, one can reasonably speculate, was referring to You’re So Vain, Simon’s 1972 hit. His attorneys may take up the issue on cross-examination the week after next. Or the week after that.
So, it goes with the Depp-Heard defamation case in Fairfax, Virginia. A cautionary tale, certainly, with disturbing allegations of domestic and sexual violence. But also, a man-woman fight, part gender-switch Sunset Boulevard, part Mean Girls, with flashbacks and still images taken – appropriately enough given the sinister if not vampiric nature of the relationship – in Bela Lugosi’s old house.
Which narrative jurors choose will not be known until after May 27, when attorneys will deliver closing arguments. For now, with the court out next week – the judge, Penny Azcarate, is at an unrelated judicial conference – jurors are left to mull the last two days of Heard’s take on her turbulent marriage.
“Two skilled actors on the stand as witnesses could be equally resonant without regard to exactly where the truth is in their narratives,” said Nancianne Aydelotte, a New Jersey lawyer. “This is very challenging for jurors, who might find what the plaintiff said to be compelling and is then equally moved by the defendant.”
Heard’s testimony, highly charged at times, has been delivered while keeping eye contact with jurors. Depp has kept his head down, occasionally consulting with his lawyers, usually when he seems to find something implausible – for example, that he ingested eight to 10 ecstasy pills in one sitting in Australia, or took quaaludes in Los Angeles.
Heard’s overall story is that she was courted and seduced, was bought a colt, and fell madly in love with a movie star – “when I was around Johnny I felt like the most beautiful person in the world” – while the world beyond their “bubble” was kept in abeyance.
“We weren’t doing normal life stuff,” Heard said. “We weren’t stuck in traffic with each other, we weren’t going to the grocery store and doing life. We were hiding in these places around the world.”
That bubble, she testified, started to deflate when Depp began to disappear and she didn’t know how to find or reach him. Heard argued that Depp became threatened by her career and jealous of her co-stars.
She testified that Depp threatened her life shortly after the pair were married, and that just weeks later, in Australia while filming the fifth Pirates of the Caribbean movie, he sexually assaulted her with a bottle of Maker’s Mark.
“I’ll fucking kill you,” Heard alleged that Depp yelled. “I was scared,” she added. “I had just married him.” Months later, Heard alleged, Depp broke her nose and ripped out chunks of hair in another violent encounter.
Depp has testified that he never hit Heard, and that she was the one who was the abuser, including when she threw a bottle of vodka at him, severing his finger.
Heard testified that in her effort to help Depp get sober, she sought help through Al-Anon, and sought to distance herself from the relationship, but was drawn back in whenever Depp achieved brief periods of sobriety and when the “monster” that the pair called his intoxicated persona was subdued.
But at each turn, she said, his efforts were hindered by an entourage – his security team, assistants, hangers-on – who shielded him from the consequences of his drug and alcohol use. In London, she said, his security carried him into their rented home “like a baby”.
Some of the most interesting testimony of the past week came from Depp’s accountants. One estimated that Depp had lost $40m in earnings as a result of Heard’s 2018 Washington Post opinion piece, in which she described herself as “a public figure representing domestic abuse”.
Hollywood dealmaker Richard Marks, a Depp witness, told the court that the film-making community had interpreted Heard’s message loud and clear.
“That actor is synonymous with the product,” Marks said. “When hiring that actor or actress, you want a reputation that supports the value that you spent on creating that product. Especially in the last five years, with the #MeToo movement, you wouldn’t want negativity hiring an actor who, quote-unquote, had been canceled.”
Outside of the proceedings, Heard’s PR team have accused Depp of failing to take responsibility. “One of Ms Heard’s disappointments is Mr Depp’s inability to distinguish fact from fiction – a malady which appears to have spread to his legal team,” a spokesperson said in email to reporters on Friday.
