In our last article in May 2021 we reported on how Johnny Depp came to the UK to seek justice and was deprived of the right of a fair trial. A story all too familiar with many thousands who come to the courts in the UK to get justice, only to be served more injustice.
The USA courts are more focused on delivering justice. Earlier this week, on 17th August the Chief Judge in Fairfax, Virginia presiding over the Depp v Heard 2019 case dismissed Heard’s claim of res judicata (stating all matters had been tried in the UK), endorsing our view and citing in the 11-page pre-trial opinion that: “The Court is not persuaded by Defendant’s argument that Plaintiff had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the UK Action. Defendant was not a part in the UK action and was not treated as one”.
“In fact, Defendant could not have been a named defendant to the U.K. litigation because her allegedly defamatory statements were made after the U.K. action commenced” said Penney Azcarate, the judge presiding over the case.
After our intensive investigation, it is our view that the allegations by Heard and the assistance by the UK’s corrupt judiciary is nothing other than an elaborate fraud designed to discredit Johnny Depp (“JD”) whilst using the high profile allegations to drive traffic to The Sun newspaper.
An obvious conflict of interest
Let’s face it, the UK trial was a sham. The Judge, Andrew Nichol is intimately connected with Dan Wootton, The Sun’s journalist who posted the defamatory allegation that JD was a “wife beater”. The connection is through the Judge’s own son, Robert N Palmer, who works alongside Wootton at TalkRadio, part of the same group owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. Wootton, is a journalist and broadcaster from New Zealand, an executive editor of The Sun newspaper and a regular host of TalkRadio’s drivetime show. An incestuous conflict of interest, putting it mildly. Why, knowing of this conflict did Mr Justice Nichol preside over the case we ask? Why, in such a high profile case did the Lord Chief Justice allow Mr Justice Nichol to preside over the case, when any other judge could have done so? We believe the answers are naturally, self-revealing.
Johnny Depp’s counter allegations and evidence was ignored
We went much further into the court papers and it is our view that all Nichol J was interested in is Heard’s evidence and submissions that would solidify The Sun’s defamatory allegation that the superstar was a “wife beater”. There was in fact, no such evidence whatsoever.
The central allegation by Heard was that on the evening of 21st May 2016 JD “violently” attacked her and in a rage had thrown a mobile phone at her face with “extreme force”. The resulting “evidence” of injury resulting from the mobile phone at Heard’s face was nothing other than what would resemble a mere zit and upon analysis of the various versions of the photographs of the alleged bruising, we conclude that many of the photos posted by the mainstream media are entirely inconsistent.
You can make up your own minds by reviewing the photos of the “injury” and how the purported bruising seems to migrate from a small zit on the left cheek to a black eye. Don’t just take our words for it, have a look at the photographs in the Daily Mail article on 27th May 2016. Even the Daily Mail hinted that something was obviously not right.
Analysis of the mobile phone attack allegation
A 2016 mobile phone, taking into account the latest brands out in May, weighed between 140g and 200g. If thrown with “excessive force” as claimed by Heard, even if the flat side of the phone made first contact, there would be instant and significant bruising. Whereas, if the corner of the phone made contact with the upper left cheek bone or at the base of the eye, we would expect to see rapid and substantial swelling and blood redness from a periorbital haematoma. The photographs are entirely inconsistent with such blunt force injury.
The police officers at the scene, both domestic violence trained, saw no evidence of injury or damage to property, again, wholly inconsistent with Heard’s evidence and testimony by her witnesses. Officer Saenz, after conducting a sweep of the scene and meeting with Heard testified that “I did not identify her as a victim of domestic violence”.
The 15th December 2015 alleged assault – Fabricated allegations?
There was an allegation that JD had given Heard two black eyes, claiming that JD assaulted her just one-day prior to appearing on the Late Late show on 16th December 2015. However, Samantha McMillen, JD’s long term make up artist testified that she spent “much of the afternoon and early evening” with Heard on 16th December 2015, doing her make up for appearance on James Corden’s show later that day.
Ms McMillen testified that she saw Heard “in good light and at close range, wearing no make- up” and that she “could see clearly that Ms Heard did not have any visible marks, bruises, cuts, or injuries”. Once again, witness testimony undermines Heard’s allegation of assault and once again, there is no evidence whatsoever to substantiate.
We provide analysis of the photos provided by Heard’s lawyers to substantiate the 15th December 2015 alleged attack:
It is our view that there is no conclusive evidence of any domestic violence whatsoever and the witness testimony from credible witnesses, including police officers is entirely inconsistent with the accounts given by Heard and her supporters. Our own analysis of the photographic evidence against the testimony leaves many unanswered questions.
Denial of the right to adduce fresh evidence on appeal
JD was denied the right to adduce fresh evidence in support of the fact that Heard’s evidence and testimony is false. Pursuant to CPR 52.21(2), the Court of Appeal will not generally consider oral evidence or evidence which was not before the lower court. In Hamid v Francis Bradshaw Partnership, Jackson LJ held that the default position under the CPR is that fresh evidence is excluded. However, that does not undermine the quality of JD’s fresh evidence, namely from the attending officer’s bodycam footage, which once again provides a completely different scenario than as portrayed in Heard’s evidence and testimony. In absence of the Court considering all evidence from both sides, the proceedings cannot possibly have been said to have been final, fair and concluded.
Summary of the proceedings
A key part of the High Court trial was the testimony from Heard that her $7 million divorce settlement had been donated to charity, with the money divided between the Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Heard claimed that “the entire amount of my divorce settlement was donated to charity”.
It was found however that Heard gave just £72,000 to the hospital and £322,000 to the ACLU, claiming that a further £358,000 donation to the Children’s Hospital was made anonymously. The finding was substantially different once again to Heard’s claim that the entire amount was donated and yet Mr Justice Nichol was not prepared to further drill down into the matter.
Acting for the Newspaper conglomerate, Adam Wolanski QC said that whether or not Ms Heard actually did donate these sums “was not a pleaded issue and the Judge was therefore not required to decide it“. We disagree, as demonstration that the statement made by Heard was false would have undermined her credibility as a witness and should have therefore given the fact finding tribunal cause to further investigate what we have herein demonstrated to be very dubious evidence and testimony.
Mr Justice Nicol concluded 12 of the 14 alleged incidents of domestic violence relied on by the newspaper did occur, yet the evidence and conflicting statements suggest otherwise.
The proceedings are mired in the usual spin of trickery and deceit that our group has seen so many times over in the way these UK judges operate, favouring the corrupt corporations and their regular magic circle law firm attendees. There is much more to this case than meets the eye. More will be revealed in our next article.
Finally, an article that actually looked at the evidence & saw the clear bias and discrepancies. The judge was constantly contradicting his own logic. He disregarded ALL of Depp’s evidence and based his entire decision on Amber’s testimony, despite her being caught in many lies. All of Depp’s witnesses, he deemed unreliable including the officers. He didn’t care about the tapes with her admissions of violence. He didn’t care that she was arrested for DV. He did care she plead guilty to lying on official government documents. He didn’t care she smuggled the dogs in Australia & lied about it. He didn’t care that she lied to Homeland Security about her assistant. I’ve never seen such a blatant disregard for the evidence, the truth, and witnesses. The judge had already made his decision, then he accepted the evidence that supported his decision & agenda. Everything else was irrelevant. Johnny didn’t get a fair trial in the UK.
I agree 1000%! And AH supporters constantly use the UK judgment as a crutch. How can they not see the injustice? Or do they just turn a blind eye? It is ridiculous. Glad to see more people are looking into this as it goes to show we are still seeking justice in this case. VA already proved AH’s lies in the UK were indeed lies. UK trial was a travesty of justice.
This article is rubbish. Andrew Nicol is the name of the judge in Depp vs. NGN / Dan Wootton, not Andrew Nichol
You can read Judge Nicol’s ruling in Depp vs. NGN / Dan Wootton here https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2020/2911.html
Judge Penney Azcarate opinion where she denied Ms. Heard’s motion to dismiss was full of neo-conservative arguments which attempt to elevate US jurisprudence above all others.
She mocked Judge Nicol’s letter in which Judge Nicol described a series of events where Mr. Depp failed to disclose evidence as directed in a “final order” that threatened Mr. Depp with a dismissal of his case if he did not comply. Mr. Depp was proven to have not complied with the court’s orders when Ms. Heard provided proof to the court. Mr. Depp threatened Ms. Heard by claiming she was in violation of orders from the Virginia court.
Mr. Depp also argued before Judge Nicol that he desired that his case be heard in England. In order to allow NGN / Dan Wootton to rely on Mr. Heard’s evidence and testimony, Mr. Depp agreed to not seek sanctions in the Virginia court if Ms. Heard provided NGN / Dan Wootton with materials which were deemed “confidential” by either party in Virginia. This allowed Ms. Heard to mount a more robust defense in England than would otherwise be possible. Judge Nicol did not force Ms Heard to provide information to NGN / Dan Wootton and did not force her to provide all photos she held. But, Judge Nicol did say that he would listen to any challenge of this decision on a case by case basis. Since Mr. Depp had full access to the full set of photos from Ms. Heard’s devices collected as part of Depp vs. Heard, he was armed with the information he needed to argue his point.
This approach allowed Mr. Depp to address his concerns about discovery not be compelled by the court agains Ms. Heard, but apparently not in a way that Mr. Depp liked.
But, you have to remember that Mr. Depp was just caught being in breach of a final order to finish disclosing but failed to do so. Mr. Depp was also found to be lying about audio recordings that he held but failed to disclose to the court. Mr. Depp was also in breach of signing a statement declaring he had complied with the court’s orders regarding what should be disclosed.
What you should get from this list of failures on the part of Mr. Depp is that his case was hanging by a thread, and he asked the court to allow him to continue hear his case. He wanted a ruling from the English court.
So, knowing this it is very odd that Judge Penny Azcarate is so hostile to these decisions regarding evidence by the English court while apparently ignoring the actions of Mr. Depp which forced Judge Nicol to act. It is somewhat hypocritical of both Mr. Depp and Judge Azcarate to complain about fairness when Mr. Depp had done all he could to keep damaging evidence from coming to light. This was against the rules of discovery and was (in my view) a major reason Judge Nicol was not inclined to force Mr. Heard into discovery at such a late date. This was when the trial was still expected to start within a matter of days.
But even with Mr. Depp’s gross violations of the English court, the English court was still open to forcing Ms. Heard to explain specific pieces of evidence which were known to Mr. Depp via Ms. Heard’s forced participation in the discovery process in Virginia.
Judge Azcarate also mentions the Declaration of Independence. This is a clear indication that she has not interest in accepting the results of the trial in London. One of her reasons is that it would promote the idea of venue shopping. This is super strange since that is exactly what Mr. Depp did by suing Ms. Heard in Virginia vs. the more logical California. She either doesn’t care or fails to see that her court chosen by Mr. Depp as part of a venue shopping exercise in the US. Just like he participated in venue shopping when selecting England.
Hypocracy or willful blindness to the actions of Mr. Depp? I tend to think it must be both.
This article is about the UK case and Nichol J.