A Virginia jury today ruled mostly in favor of Johnny Depp in a defamation lawsuit that dragged on for more than six weeks, awarding Depp $15 million against his ex-wife, Amber Heard, for a Washington Post op-ed under her byline (ghostwritten for her by the ACLU) that effectively branded him a wife-beater. There was evidence enough to support the accusation that it wrecked Depp’s film career, already balanced on a precipice between his always-compelling screen presence and the hot mess of his life off camera, which has apparently made him increasingly difficult to tolerate on-set. Heard was awarded $2 million of the claimed $100 million in her countersuit, reflecting that the jury generally sided with Depp but did not dismiss entirely Heard’s view of events. Once Virginia law is applied to reduce some of the punitive damages awarded by the jury and the two verdicts are offset against each other, Heard should owe Depp $10 million.
A lawsuit that our own Kyle Smith quite reasonably saw as an imprudent self-inflicted injury for Depp turned into a victory in court, a compelling TV spectacle, a black eye for the #MeToo movement, and a vindication for Depp in the court of public opinion, where fans rallied to his side and most regular viewers saw Heard as a liar who cried on cue and was the guiltier of two guilty parties in how she physically and emotionally abused Depp. What can we learn from all this?
First, of course, there is always a potential upside for fighting to clear your own good name even if you (like Johnny Depp) have a ton of dirty laundry. Depp has all manner of troubles with drink, drugs, and money. He has run through a lot of women. He is, at 58, no longer matinee-idol handsome, but visibly carries a lot of the same sorts of darkness and eccentricity he has brought to his characters on film. He is, in some ways, kind of pathetic. But he insisted that he was not what Heard painted him to be, and fighting back has done a lot to convince the public that there is more to his story. It might even get him back on film. Maybe he can work with Mel Gibson or Woody Allen.
Second, slogans are no substitute for facts. “Hear all women” is a pledge we should all make. “Believe all women,” however, is asking people to shut their brains off at the approach of a slogan and forget the fact that women are people, too. Sometimes they shade the truth or lie, sometimes they are the more abusive party, and sometimes they are cynical, show-business shams. The evidence at trial changed a lot of minds, all the more so the more people watched it. Just as in the Michael Sussmann trial, the verdict may dissatisfy some, but it reflects that the jury spent time with the facts and did its best to do truth and justice.
Third, it is hard to fight fame in court or in public. Heard is a modestly famous actress, whose name most people only know, if at all, from her marriage to Depp and the ensuing controversies. Depp has been an A-list Hollywood star for decades, first bursting into view with Platoon, 21 Jump Street, and Edward Scissorhands back in the 1980s and starring as the hero in a Disney franchise and the villain in a Harry Potter franchise. His public image started with a lot of people in his corner. He was much more famous than Heard, and he was much more successful in court.
Our systems of law, celebrity, true-crime television, and public moral judgment are not perfect, but they reflect the sensibilities of the American people. The people thought Johnny Depp may be a bad boy, but Amber Heard was worse — and they would not let her seize the role of victim simply because it fit a script.