By Syndicated Staff
- Be very sure you don’t have any previously unknown criminal acts in your background before you sue anyone because discovery goes both ways!
- Read or download Amber Heard’s APPEAL DOCUMENT (below)
- Read Johnny Depp’s property list (fascinating!)
- Listen to audio of Heard herself as she threatens to frame Depp unless he gives her what she wants!
The Johnny Depp – Amber Heard defamation trial has been an eye opener for everyone. It made many active business leaders and professionals around the world take a good look at what defamation is and what it is not.
During the trial an audio was played in which Amber Heard clearly states she is going to lie in court unless Johnny Depp states that their arguments were “fair fights”. Then she dares Johnny Depp to tell the truth about being a domestic violence victim. She challenges him that…
“No one, not the judge nor jury will believe you”.
There are only five defenses to defamation. The first on the list is “the truth“.
- The truth (legal documents, bank receipts mean everything!) If you can prove what you’re saying – the defamation case loses all standing.
- The allegedly defamatory statement was merely a statement of opinion.
- Consent to the publication of the allegedly defamatory statement.
- Absolute privilege (applicable to all victims).
- Qualified privilege.
- Retraction of the allegedly defamatory statement.
The remarks Amber Heard was held accountable for by the jury in the Depp-Heard defamation case began with a statement in which she identified herself as “a public figure representing domestic abuse”. That foolish line became her undoing.
People ask why the Washington Post was not named in the Depp defamation case. That is because the article appeared as an op-ed published by the Washington Post in 2018. The ACLU eventually came out claiming to have authored the article’s “draft”. However, the Washington Post was not named in the Depp lawsuit because of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY, Petitioner, v. L. B. SULLIVAN. Ralph D. ABERNATHY et al., Petitioners, v. L. B. SULLIVAN case which protects publications from defamation accusations if the newspaper has multiple sources cited. The publication need not identify the sources unless of course a judge demands the sources be produced in future (yes that’s happened in various cases on multiple occasions).
In my personal case, my phone rang several times when members of the public saw an article in a bi-weekly American Business Magazine (with a well established reputation) that had accepted and published an article about the establishment of a foundation in the state of Washington.
The article in question featured a “foundation” established by a male and female couple whose personal and business financial histories disqualify both of them from ever managing any charitable entity, 501(C)3 or foundations of any kind.
This is not “my opinion” on the contrary, the Internal Revenue Service prohibits people with negative financial histories and or who are heavily in debt, to establish or even run any kind of charitable organizations. It’s like leaving a fox in charge of a hen house.
Plainly speaking, one cannot be in debt to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars then get upset when people to whom you owe money, object to seeing the person that robbed them being promoted and applauded by a well known business magazine.
In this case, the protestors to the article were multiple, so much so that they began to collect their debts and pile them into a collection of debts. When the author of the article was asked if the article subjects had been vetted, it became clear that they had not.
The foundation’s male founder had wasted the last 15 years “couch surfing” throughout the United States and Central and South America as he talked business executives, indigenous individuals and organizations and elderly folk out of their cash. In fact, for the last several years, the male member of this couple lived off the largesse of a 96 year old New York City female socialite and felt absolutely no shame regarding his obvious, elder exploitation.
The foundation’s female partner with whom he lives in her state of Washington house, was another outrageous story but out of mercy for her children, we will not include details at this juncture.
This couple, established a foundation and had an article published about their new foundation without considering that the people to whom they owed money (in addition to myself) might see the article, start calling one another and jointly protest to publishers.
Rather than accept their foolish mistake and be embarrassed by their foolhardy (if not criminal attempt) the couple chose to become angry with anyone that objected to their proposed continuing on what amounts to a fraud if the entity’s founders are unqualified in fact prohibited by the SEC, the IRS and the FCTC.
A serious conversation one must have with oneself, is to question just how far is one prepared to go if when filing a defamation lawsuit.
And how much of a lawsuit can you afford? It’s important to know these things before you launch your suit because once the gloves come off and attorneys begin displaying every single detail of the parties’ lives, one has to question “Even if you win – at what cost?”
Last week, when the article with the couple’s actual photographs began appearing online – phones started ringing in multiple countries!
The couple didn’t consider how vast the Internet is (or how lasting). With Internet Satellite, even tribes relegated to mountain tops were able to recognize the couple’s images.
Neither of them ever considered that every time they dialed 911, or every time one of their neighbors called 911 to report a domestic abuse incident occurring at that home address, every time they boarded a plane, sent an email, wrote a text, borrowed money, all questionable financial or criminal activity of any kind, every phone call and every argument they ever had (with any one of their spouses or lovers) can be subpoenaed and published for all to read.
And this case also has domestic violence history – on the side of the man and the woman as well. Both in the USA as well as in Mexico. This is not gossip – arrest reports and domestic violence incidents are recorded forever.
And in this modern technological age of social media, any legal case, whether it is won or lost in any court room on the planet, after this Depp vs. Heard defamation trial, will remain publicly embedded on Blockchain for the rest of eternity.
Make sure you have clean hands!
When your hands are clean and you believe you’ve been defamed, you should proceed to mount a defamation case against whomever you feel has defamed you. But if your hands are not clean and you have a criminal record, it’s a bad idea to file a defamation lawsuit against your accuser if raw facts and evidence is easily available. You may wind up having your wages garnished for life.
And always keep in mind that the only thing that shuts down a defamation trial is the truth – most especially when it’s backed up by solid documentation, witnesses and video.
Pick your battles carefully because the defamation case you launch today, could destroy you, your family and friends and most especially affect your children negatively for years to come.
Amber Heard’s Appeal
Inventory of Johnny Depp’s Properties