Jack Whigham, Depp's talent manager, failed to convince Pirates of the Caribbean producers to continue to employ Depp. Video / AP
Johnny Depp and his legal team will be breathing a sigh of relief, as the exhausting defamation trial has reached a scheduled week-long break.
This comes after a long parade of witnesses testified against Depp, including his ex-wife Amber Heard who Depp is suing for defamation.
Depp, 58, filed a libel case against Heard, 36, and is attempting to prove to the jury that the actress defamed him in a 2018 op-ed she wrote for the Washington Post. In the article - despite not naming Depp - Heard claimed she was the victim of emotional and physical abuse.
Depp is seeking NZ$79 million in reparations from his former wife. He has maintained from the outset that he is only making the claim to "clear his name" and recoup the millions of potential earnings lost after being fired from two major Hollywood franchises.
Speaking to Fox News, entertainment lawyer and high-profile defamation case expert Daniel Gutenplan explained how this week-long break came at the perfect time for Depp and his legal team who he stressed will be doing their best to leave the jury feeling as if they "can't believe any of" Heard's testimony.
He said considering the details that emerged from Heard and her witnesses, this adjournment period will give Depp's team plenty of time to prepare for their cross-examination.
'Poke every little hole' in Heard's testimony
"They're going to poke every little hole in her testimony that they can," Gutenplan told Fox adding the attempt will be made by Depp's team to highlight "so many inconsistencies that they're going to (tell) the jury, 'If she can lie to you and misrepresent or change her story in these small ways, the entire testimony is polluted. You can't possibly believe any of it."
'Another challenge to the case'
Gutenplan also noted the additional challenge presented by the fact both the plaintiff and the defendant "play roles for a living".
He said Depp's team's strategy is to "sling as much mud as possible" in an attempt to "discredit Heard" and expose aspects of her testimony in such a way as to lead the jury to believe she was "just acting".
Amber Heard gave an emotional testimony against ex-husband Depp. Photo / AP
Gutenplan illustrates just how challenging a libel case can be when dealing with people who act for a living. Determining where the truth begins and ends becomes significantly more difficult, he said, adding that it would be foolish to try and draw any conclusions from the trial at this point.
'The uphill battle'
Gutenplan also told Fox News Depp's team has a big challenge ahead "... because they have to prove, first of all, that anything that was said [in the op-ed and Heard's testimony] is completely false."
"The Washington Post piece in question, of course, doesn't mention Mr Depp by name, although, his camp will argue – and I think it's a compelling argument – that a reasonable reader will assume that the article was written about Mr Depp."
However, the lawyer notes that in addition to not mentioning Depp it also doesn't mention any specific instances of abusive events, just that abuse occurred which could be an important sticking point.
Depp's legal team 'knows how to try this case'
"Truth, as we know, is an absolute defence to a defamation claim. So if Ms Heard can establish that she is a victim of abuse – even if we are assuming for sake of argument that she was talking about Johnny Depp – then he can't win his claim," Gutenplan explained.
He added that Depp's legal team "knows how to try this case" since "they know where they're weak, they know where they're strong".
Unfortunately, says Gutenplan, he found Heard's testimony extremely "compelling".
The lawyer explained how the combination of Heard's believably emotional testimony along with specific dates and details that could be corroborated by witnesses, helped raise the actress' story to "another level".
'Burden of proof'
"So let's remember the burden of proof here," Gutenplan added. "Johnny is the plaintiff. He has to prove by a preponderance of the evidence and convince the jurors that literally none of this happened."
Even if the jury were to think that Heard was embellishing even a small part of her story, it still wouldn't be enough to sway the trial in Depp's favour, the lawyer explained. To win he needs to convince the jury that her entire story is a fabrication.
In her testimony, Heard described multiple disturbing instances of sexual assault inflicted by Depp.
Depp's team has fervently denied all of Heard's allegations that he assaulted her.
A spokesman for Depp said in a statement that Heard "did indeed deliver the performance of her life in her direct examination".
The spokesman argued that, unlike Depp's recollections which have remained exactly the same since they were first made six years ago, Heard's allegations continue to grow new and convenient details.
"His truth – the truth – is the same no matter the environment in which it is has been presented. The upcoming cross-examination from Mr Depp's team will be most telling and will certainly highlight the many fallacies Ms Heard has now attempted to pass off as fact throughout her convoluted testimony."
