what are your biggest takeaways how do
you think they're doing right now uh
it's their
priority to go ahead and attack all of
the claims that amber amber heard has
made
how do you think they're doing at this
point
you know there's an old latin saying
falsely sununo falsus and omnibus
meaning if you're lying in one instance
everything you say must be considered
false and they have pointed out so many
inconsistencies and poked so many holes
in her credibility that it's gonna be
hard to take anything she has to say at
this point at face value
so what exactly do you think they can do
to make changes in the trial right now
is it too late is the case too far gone
we've seen amber heard's attorney step
up there and try to counteract a lot of
the claims object to a lot of the claims
is this just kind of a stalling
technique or is she trying to do
something with that
well look i i think something's getting
lost in the noise here and that this is
not a trial about repairing amber heard
or johnny depp's reputations i mean as
far as i'm concerned and most of the
american public is concerned both their
reputations are ruined he has massive
substance abuse issues and she seems to
be
you know willfully engaging in deceit on
a near daily basis but we can't lose
sight of the fact that this is a
defamation trial that mr depp has
brought claims against amber heard
relating to a 2018 washington post
editorial that she wrote about domestic
abuse now you can go read that editorial
johnny depp's name is not mentioned once
in that editorial no mention of her
husband but she does point to the fact
that she is a domestic abuse survivor
and she does reference a quote unquote
powerful man in the article now does
that constitute defamation that costs mr
depp 50 million dollars that's the real
question here
and with that being said uh from the
evidence that they have presented and
the claims that they have counteracted
do you think that's enough to convince
this jury that he has been defamed and
he has been defamed enough in multi
millions of dollars
well look here's the thing she wrote
that editorial in the in the aftermath
of a very very public divorce where
there are allegations of domestic
violence flying back and forth for her
to take the stand now and say that that
article was not directed at johnny depp
it was not about johnny depp in any way
it was about the aftermath of her
divorce and her history is ludicrous you
can't read that article and be divorced
from the fact that she was married to
the man america all knows edward
scissorhands you know captain jack
sparrow johnny depp we all know who you
are married to we all know who your
husband is we all know who you are
referring to when you say you're a
survivor of domestic abuse now mr depp's
legal team did produce evidence in the
form of his agent's testimony that those
allegations of hers cost him the role of
captain jack sparrow in pirates of the
caribbean i don't know what are we up to
26 now you know and that he was going to
be paid 22 million dollars for that role
so there has been evidence introduced
that he was damaged i don't know that
they can tie it
so neatly to that to that editorial
though hmm
what do you mean by that expand that on
that i mean they've
they've really got to prove that that
editorial that that article which was so
public and read so widely by the
american public that that is what cost
him the role of captain jack sparrow
that because it damaged his reputation
that much and that that damaging to his
reputation was based on falsehoods that
that is what cost him the 22 million
dollars and again he's not mentioned by
name in that article at all now i think
something her team maybe could have done
differently and i hate to you know
monday morning quarterback another
lawyer is that you know why say that the
article is not about johnny depp in any
way why not just say yeah it is partly
about him and everything i said about
him is the truth because the truth is an
absolute defense in a defamation case
right she has stood by the fact though
um that she has been the victim of all
of this although i feel like johnny
depp's legal team
trying to paint this picture that
he's the victim going as far as to bring
up
other situations in the past
with amber heard and her ex-girlfriend
alleging that there was domestic abuse
in that relationship playing out audio
recordings of amber heard saying that oh
yeah i did hit you but it wasn't that
hard you know um
you know what have you made of of this
evidence that has been presented
really making her out to be kind of the
villain
i mean recorded admissions are some of
the most damning evidence you can
produce in a case if you have your
adversary on tape admitting that they
did what you're accusing them of doing i
mean how do you walk that back how do
you say to a jury well i didn't really
mean it or i was being hyperbole but the
fact of the matter is she does have a
history of domestic violence she was
arrested in a seattle airport for
assaulting her ex-girlfriend some years
back and you know
this was something witnessed by the
police even though the charges were
inevitably dropped and believe me
charges get dropped a lot guilty people
news flash sometimes have their charges
dropped and the reality is police
officers witnessed this assault on her
ex-girlfriend which which is how she got
arrested in the first place and if she's
assaulting her ex-girlfriend publicly in
an airport it begs the question as to
how bad her judgment is
so with all of this being said
cross-examination is over amber heard is
off the stand she's probably ecstatic to
not be in the limelight anymore what
else can we be expecting uh through the
rest of the trial
well i mean
we're just gonna have to see
how they tie it back to this article and
that's really gonna be the crux of it i
think we have closing statements uh
scheduled on the 27th and it's going to
be really interesting to see how this
jury rules um you know because it is
again a defamation trial it's not about
who we like better do we like are we
team johnny are we team amber uh whose
reputation is being rebuilt it's not
about whether or not we're gonna see
more of amber and aquaman two or you
know the 39
with johnny depp it is about whether a
specific article damaged mr depp to the
tune of what he says to be 50 million
dollars
all right and we will be watching it
through the rest of the week here legal
analyst ken belkin joining us here on
live now from fox we appreciate it and
we'll talk to you soon for sure