Amber Heard vs Johnny Depp 最新戰況 （2）
Magical_Owl
1001 回覆
17 Like
5 Dislike
第 1 頁第 2 頁第 3 頁第 4 頁第 5 頁第 6 頁第 7 頁第 8 頁第 9 頁第 10 頁第 11 頁第 12 頁第 13 頁第 14 頁第 15 頁第 16 頁第 17 頁第 18 頁第 19 頁第 20 頁第 21 頁第 22 頁第 23 頁第 24 頁第 25 頁第 26 頁第 27 頁第 28 頁第 29 頁第 30 頁第 31 頁第 32 頁第 33 頁第 34 頁第 35 頁第 36 頁第 37 頁第 38 頁第 39 頁第 40 頁第 41 頁
所以
Why Is the Johnny Depp Trial in Fairfax, Virginia?
Heard and Depp are Hollywood actors who do not live or work in the Commonwealth of Virginia. But Depp was allowed to sue in the state because the news outlet that ran the article, The Washington Post, “houses its printing press and online server in Fairfax County.” The Post is not named as a defendant in the case.
Depp’s lawyer acknowledged in a pre-trial hearing that one of the reasons they brought the case in a Fairfax County courthouse is because Virginia's anti-SLAPP law is not as broad as the one in California.
SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation and are commonly used to intimidate and silence criticism through expensive, drawn-out legal proceedings. Thirty-one states have laws protecting defendants from anti-SLAPP cases to prevent powerful interests from using lawsuits to intimidate critics from exercising their First Amendment rights, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. The laws allow defendants to file a special motion to dismiss a case when they believe it is a frivolous SLAPP suit.
Heard’s lawyers had sought to have the case moved to California, where the former couple reside. Under California's anti-SLAPP legislation, a person being sued for defamation can file a motion to dismiss a case because it involves speech about a matter of public concern that is protected under the First Amendment. If the judge agrees, the plaintiff would have to pay the defendant's legal fees.
Depp is among a string of politicians, corporate interests and celebrities, who have filed defamation claims in Virginia in recent years, despite their loose connections to the state, in what critics call "libel tourism," according to The Washington Post.
In response the dubious litigations, the Virginia's legislature passed bills in 2020 to to strengthen the state's anti-SLAPP suits. However, amended law doesn't include a mechanism for frivolous cases to be dismissed before the trial begins or a provision requiring plaintiffs to pay the legal fees of the defendant if they lose the case.
係 Virginia 告唔係單單因為 WAPO 個 server 係 Fairfax County
Heard and Depp are Hollywood actors who do not live or work in the Commonwealth of Virginia. But Depp was allowed to sue in the state because the news outlet that ran the article, The Washington Post, “houses its printing press and online server in Fairfax County.” The Post is not named as a defendant in the case.
Depp’s lawyer acknowledged in a pre-trial hearing that one of the reasons they brought the case in a Fairfax County courthouse is because Virginia's anti-SLAPP law is not as broad as the one in California.
SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation and are commonly used to intimidate and silence criticism through expensive, drawn-out legal proceedings. Thirty-one states have laws protecting defendants from anti-SLAPP cases to prevent powerful interests from using lawsuits to intimidate critics from exercising their First Amendment rights, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. The laws allow defendants to file a special motion to dismiss a case when they believe it is a frivolous SLAPP suit.
Heard’s lawyers had sought to have the case moved to California, where the former couple reside. Under California's anti-SLAPP legislation, a person being sued for defamation can file a motion to dismiss a case because it involves speech about a matter of public concern that is protected under the First Amendment. If the judge agrees, the plaintiff would have to pay the defendant's legal fees.
Depp is among a string of politicians, corporate interests and celebrities, who have filed defamation claims in Virginia in recent years, despite their loose connections to the state, in what critics call "libel tourism," according to The Washington Post.
In response the dubious litigations, the Virginia's legislature passed bills in 2020 to to strengthen the state's anti-SLAPP suits. However, amended law doesn't include a mechanism for frivolous cases to be dismissed before the trial begins or a provision requiring plaintiffs to pay the legal fees of the defendant if they lose the case.
係 Virginia 告唔係單單因為 WAPO 個 server 係 Fairfax County
消化唔到佢地可以睇番記錄。好多時都唔會記得d濕碎證人。 通常都只會記得d重要證人好似turd咁。所以做律師都要有表演才能，你要係盤問重要證人個時用表演力去話畀陪審團知重點係邊。
加美由個cross係上得教科書級數嘅水準。 佢問嘅問題好多都唔係真係問緊turd，而係用問題去話畀陪審團知 d證據入面邊d位有問題，叫佢地自己去睇證據，自己去諗。
加美由個cross係上得教科書級數嘅水準。 佢問嘅問題好多都唔係真係問緊turd，而係用問題去話畀陪審團知 d證據入面邊d位有問題，叫佢地自己去睇證據，自己去諗。
佢countersue從一開始就係錯誤嘅決定，開左太多門畀jd去帶一大堆近期野去指證佢
女拳 = 精神病
樓上巴打句政治光譜中間溫和真係解釋晒點解咁多亞裔中老年人
英美啲亞裔移民真係傳統上最離地最無視政治甚至社會議題既族群，可能去到土生土長移民第二第三代價值觀先會唔同啲
英美啲亞裔移民真係傳統上最離地最無視政治甚至社會議題既族群，可能去到土生土長移民第二第三代價值觀先會唔同啲
由第一個大話開始就返唔到轉頭
同埋你睇佢上庭都感受到佢癲婆嚟，作故仔然後自己真係會信啲故仔，咩都係人哋嘅錯，班LAPD講大話，班保鏢講大話，所有人都講緊大話除咗佢自己，甚至班律師佢都會推去死
係佢眼中佢做咩都係啱，佢根本唔覺得係「絕」，佢覺得啲錢係佢應得，佢覺得自己出手打JD係解決緊問題好noble
同埋你睇佢上庭都感受到佢癲婆嚟，作故仔然後自己真係會信啲故仔，咩都係人哋嘅錯，班LAPD講大話，班保鏢講大話，所有人都講緊大話除咗佢自己，甚至班律師佢都會推去死
係佢眼中佢做咩都係啱，佢根本唔覺得係「絕」，佢覺得啲錢係佢應得，佢覺得自己出手打JD係解決緊問題好noble
你見個律師自己問完條問題但係即刻走去objection hearsay就知啦
聽到個judge把聲勁無奈
可能心諗條友係咪弱智
聽到個judge把聲勁無奈可能心諗條友係咪弱智20 幾唔算中年掛大佬
其實唔係絕, 女方決定要離婚,係離分前屈 (製造証據) 男方家暴同性侵啲仔女係美國 family court 經常發生
第一佢個人本身係癲既，佢同JD開關係本身就係一個toxic cycle,第二係真係錢
有人leak左TMZ收到AH發俾JD離婚封律師[信
佢要求JD每個月俾五萬生活費直到佢死
要返佢依家揸緊既黑色Rand Rover
要JD俾三間penhouse佢，仲要JD俾埋mortgage同水電
跟住再要JD俾埋離婚律師費
有人leak左TMZ收到AH發俾JD離婚封律師[信
佢要求JD每個月俾五萬生活費直到佢死
要返佢依家揸緊既黑色Rand Rover
要JD俾三間penhouse佢，仲要JD俾埋mortgage同水電
跟住再要JD俾埋離婚律師費
都唔單只係明星同有錢人, 美國好多地方離婚庭都對搵錢多嘅一方 (好多時係男方) 好 harsh
但有好多證據 / 證詞 / 證人
同埋案中有案
枝節多到不得了
真係好考記性同專注力
就算叫你煲你最中意既Netflix 片
要你無間斷煲足兩個月
你都唔會專心到或者記得前面講過乜
同埋案中有案
枝節多到不得了
真係好考記性同專注力
就算叫你煲你最中意既Netflix 片
要你無間斷煲足兩個月
你都唔會專心到或者記得前面講過乜
因為borderline + histrionic personality disorder
有啲律師講過陪審圑好多時都係靠 Primacy (第一印象) 同 Recency (結案陳詞時嘅印象)去落 verdict
講有冇無法律效力之前
唔好唔記得條癲婆連個pledge(donate by installments一年350k)都冇簽名
Pledged佢老母咩
唔好唔記得條癲婆連個pledge(donate by installments一年350k)都冇簽名
Pledged佢老母咩
真
加美由cross個陣表演力爆燈，無返咁上下表演才能係唔會逼到turd親口承認自己只係pledge the donation而非done the donation，呢個位可以比大家知證供上嘅前後矛盾，二嚟經佢把口自爆自己講大話，可以打擊到佢本人嘅誠信度，繼而大大減低turd證供上嘅可信性
加美由世一
加美由cross個陣表演力爆燈，無返咁上下表演才能係唔會逼到turd親口承認自己只係pledge the donation而非done the donation，呢個位可以比大家知證供上嘅前後矛盾，二嚟經佢把口自爆自己講大話，可以打擊到佢本人嘅誠信度，繼而大大減低turd證供上嘅可信性加美由世一
第一代移民就係, 你啲仔女就未必, BLM 個時好多後生 Asians 出嚟撐, 特別係 1X-3X 個班
prenup 係法律界廁紙, 好多時一上庭就會被人 tossed out, 唔信你自己上網 research 吓
唔關事, 學校個 curriculum 好自然會令佢地比你依一代傾左