Why Amber DIDN'T "WIN" the UK Trial and the Argument is FLAWED!

Please do check out Mrs BBB's views on this topic: • The REALITY Of Litigat...
More videos:
More videos:
Why I am talking about this:
• Video
Interview Part 1 Reaction: • UK Barrister REACTION ...
Interview Part 2 Reaction: • UK Barrister REACTION ...
Interview Part 3 • UK Barrister REACTION ...
Watch my UK #johnnydepp trial analysis
Amber Heard INTERVIEW REACTION PART 1:
• UK Barrister REACTION ...
JUROR SPEAKS OUT: REACTION:
• JUROR TELLS ALL! Amber...
UK Trial ANalysis:
PART 1:
• Video
Part 2:
• Depp v Heard UK Judgme...
PART 3
• INCIDENT 9 - "THE STAI...
Petition:
www.change.org...
#JohnnyDepp Playlist:
/ playlist
list=PLOu1C4wHKjG56JEzgHzNjfbgyJfPzHa9Z
Check out my exclusive content at www.blackbeltb...
Also me: kzbin.info...
My wife's cooking: kzbin.info...
Address for PAID Formal Advice ONLY: [e-mail]
Disclaimer: Neither this nor any other video, may be taken as legal advice. I accept no liability whatever for any reliance placed upon it, as there is no contract between us and I am not instructed by you.
For formal advice, please contact [e-mail].
💌 Become a channel member to access stripes and perks!
/ @blackbeltbarrister
MY CAMERA GEAR
🎥 Big Camera amzn.to/3yFFcFf
🎥 Small Camera amzn.to/2RB7ez9
🎙 RODE VIDEOMic Pro+ amzn.to/2QCJURi
Gobe ND Filter amzn.to/2R3eEuA
Neewer Ring Light amzn.to/3aOkLtT
Switch Pod amzn.to/3sZb8yA
JOBY Tripod amzn.to/3dXJYDT
External Media Drive amzn.to/3uxNDOQ 🎓 Brilliant contract law book:
amzn.to/2PHC2O1 🎓 Excellent book with an overview of criminal law:
amzn.to/3gTPEAV 🎓 Learn more about trespass and tort law:
amzn.to/32N6TLS
(Affiliate link)
LAW FAQS
• Common Law
CONSUMER LAW PLAYLIST:
• Consumer Law
TREE LAW PLAYLIST:
• Tree Law Miniseries
ROAD TRAFFIC LAW PLAYLIST:
• Road Traffic Law
FAMILY LAW PLAYLIST:
• Family Law
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:
I'm a Barrister of England and Wales.
Videos for educational guidance only, Always seek advice before taking action. Videos on my channel are not legal advice and should not be taken as such. I accept no liability for any reliance placed upon the content of these videos or references, therein.
#blackbeltbarrister #lawyer #barrister
Description contains affiliate links; I will occasionally earn commissions from qualifying purchases or leads generated. Description may contain affiliate or sponsored links, for which we may receive commissions or payment.

[@derek.....]

Big shout out to Johnny Depp’s legal team for proving Amber Heard a liar.

[@notonmywatch4291]

Well said Derek. JD team did an amazing job.

[@petebennett3733]

Derek keeps saying the same comment on most vids about DP and AH. I reckon derek may well be a bot

[@sebassanchezc-1379]

@@petebennett3733 bot comments matter🤡👌

[@petebennett3733]

@@sebassanchezc-1379 so bot lives matters as well I think not

[@caroldaniels5505]

@@sebassanchezc-1379 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@kathaRoo]

She didn’t win she was a witness. She will never win against Johnny, he has the truth on his side

[@CaliWeHo]

👍😉

[@jenjennitrite8146]

I concur wholeheartedly, 💯!

[@SketchieRecordsUK]

I love your analysis, after each one it becomes even more apparent to me that this whole sorry saga was a pre-planned, spiteful, badly thought out SCAM. I cannot for the life of me understand (apart from the monetary gain) why any serious legal team would have touched this (AH's case) with a bargepole 🙏😅

[@bevmacdonald9008]

It is my opinion that this legal fight was planned as far back as when she was made dv ambassador for the ACLU. Here is why: They have a gender based narrative supporting legislative reforms that she was to be their female superhero celebrity face of. Her first lawyer bailed, imho, either because she realized AH was lying about JD, or AH was too arrogant to work with. Elon had promised her an army of lawyers would be at her disposal, that is what the ACLU is. Elon became their major donor. I don't think the ACLU knew AH was lying, at least not at first. I don't think they ever imagined AH would, let alone how long she had been, creating false evidence. Now, they still have their gender based dv narrative and their good reputation to defend, they think that's what they're doing by defending their ambassador against the Truth. I think Elaine is hoping for repeat business from that organization and to maybe add more to these 15 minutes of fame. I think that besides her earnings, she is aiming to have her name on future litigation that drives legislative reforms, or perhaps even to be noted as consultant or co-creator of future proposed legislation. If she were able to get some perspective, if she were on the outside looking in right now, I think she might feel differently about defending AH and about how that may affect her career in the future.

[@majordomoto442]

When she is charged criminally for perjury in USA, UK AND Australia, when she is charged criminally for glassing in Australia, and when she pays (not pledge) JD in FULL, when these things happen, only then justice is served for her imo. Besides, i dont buy her sob story "look at me i'm so poor now i'm shopping at TJ Maxx". She lied about donating to sick children in hospital, she lived in a mansion during the trial, she definitely has money, but she doesnt want to spend a penny of it to fight JD. Someone else must pay for her. That is how greedy she is.

[@twiggystardust9573]

I don't think AH realizes how insulting these little photo ops and interviews are. If she's trying to convince the public she's a sweet, innocent damsel and Johnny's a monster, she's going about it the wrong way. The whole "I'm so poor I have to shop with the peasants" thing is only proving how awful she is, and insulting the jurors by implying that "of course they couldn't resist Johnny's charm and celebrity. They're just a bunch of dumb, TJ Maxx shopping commoners," was a very bad idea. She's just... full of really bad ideas.

[@markmathisen3908]

@@twiggystardust9573 With her obvious mental and personality deficiencies I HIGHLY doubt she's ever had a GOOD idea. 🤯

[@sfcmp7005]

AH obviously thinks the general public are going to believe she has to shop at TJ Maxx, when in reality we all know that she had clothes prior to this verdict. The verdict didn't take away the clothes she already owns. I suspect she has quite a big wardrobe. One that would last quite sometime before she would ever have to shop at TJ Maxx. What an insult to our intelligence.

[@simsim876]

She was on a private jet recently..poor my *ss

[@stefania-eleni1347]

@@sfcmp7005 She will start to walk naked....🤣

[@Cleffa168]

Great video, nice and clear in explaining the contradiction with the statement that "AH won the UK trial". If she won the UK trial, then she is the main party of the procedings, and hence she must make disclosure, and because she didn't, that makes the entire trial unfair. But if she didn't make disclosure because she's not the main party of the procedings, well then she didn't win the UK trial. Therefore, either AH didn't win the UK trial, or she did win but it's an unfair trial because she didn't disclose, and therefore shouldn't be taken seriously and the UK court is a joke and should be laughed at around the world for making a joke of themselves.

[@aClownBaby-]

Real and true

[@caroldaniels5505]

Absolutely spot on and I’m English. Sick of seeing some trying to defend the U.K. judge !!

[@kellyfalletta1949]

I’m so disappointed, and yes angry, at the judge’s corruption in the case. The information shows that this judge in this case reflects conflict of interest, bias, and inconsistencies that lead to a total miscarriage of Justice. Sure not all judges in any country are corrupt. But for a judicial system that will not investigate or hold this judge accountable for his corruption, then one has no faith in the judicial system at all. If you can’t trust the justice system, then it looses any credibility or respect.

[@mystifeyed]

The fact that she claims victory in a case she WAS NOT a party to is ridiculous on its face. Sadly the UK case was decided without all the evidence, although from the decision it doesn’t appear this judge would have cared what evidence JD provided he was determined to find AHs lies true. Even when evidence proved she lied this judge would not consider it against her credibility. Sad for Justice.

[@wapperjaw8282]

Agree ... there was also too much at stake at his end (the judge). He has family associated with the Sun Newspaper. He should have recused himself since it is obvious he couldn't perform his job fairly. It's called corruption ... *I think he should be charged for willfully depriving and or causing to be deprived of any person of those rights, privileges, or immunities for a fair trial.* All the cases of this Judge should be looked at for fowl play ...

[@mystifeyed]

@@wapperjaw8282 I agree 100%

[@allenfortenberry9924]

@@wapperjaw8282 Not only does he have family connected to the Sun I am pretty sure I was that he has family/close friends that are friends with AH

[@Tinmann_77]

Yet leftists beleive it.

[@wapperjaw8282]

@@allenfortenberry9924 yep ... I heard that also ...

[@dianejohanson98]

Thank you for your words of wisdom. I agree with you that AH didn’t “win” as she was not a party to the suit. Her lawyer, Elaine, going on a few rant interviews here in the US, and Amber following that up with one long lie interview of her own, just made me mad. She lies as much as her client. I had not read anything about the trial in the UK, but I did go back and watch some videos reporting on this. I did watch the entire trial in Virginia. I think this whole AH fiasco was a horrible joke that hurt other people. The trial in Virginia came out right!

[@andreas5968]

If AH lawyers are now back tracking their position from the uk trial - that is to say that AH was the effective opponent - then does this strengthen the case for the reopening of a possible appeal with the disclosure? Second question sir is this: the changeorg petition. Is it worth also having a petition to parliament to request they look at the lies in the same way that the Aussies are doing? I.e. At a high level as justice appears to have taken a severe knock now even average people can see through the inconsistencies and outright lies?

[@stefania-eleni1347]

True! She had played this game quite a number of times, denying things flat in the face and then using the same thing as some shield at another point. Like when she was spitting in everybody's eyes with that pledge/donation at one point, and then saying that she didn't need to donate everything in order to be believed. Despite the fact that she actually hasn't donated anything herself, that was never the issue of not being believed because she didn't donate the money, but because she made such a fuss in admitting that. The reason why Johnny Depp has even picked on this matter is because when he saw she undisclosed to the masses that she is going to donate to this and that, when that was supposed to remain between them, he guessed her next move and so he sent the money straight away. Now, she didn't want to loose that "market" from him so she didn't allow him to continue. If he didn't know at this time her true colours he would have never checked on her regarding donation, which was actually such a simple thing to do. And then she will take all her lifetime to "fulfill that obligation". So funny she used these words in her defense. They will be used against her ever and ever.

[@Maren01ML]

This is so ridiculous. The article by the Sun was perpetrated by AH's allegations against JD. She was not a party of JD"s lawsuit in the UK, only the Sun was. They didn't just obtain the allegations against JD out of thin air, it came from somewhere. JD sued the Sun for defamation, but lost. JD sued AH for her defamatory op-ed, and he won the suit. You're absolutely right, they can't have it both ways. AH was not a direct party of the UK trial. They keep forgetting that, or won't accept it. Anyhow, that's my take on the matter.

[@brightlight8852]

Exactly the UK judge himself rejected the idea that she was a party and thus she was never named party to the UK trial so the case was between Johnny and The Sun newspaper, not her. She's asking to be given special treatment because she can't accept that lying has consequences.

[@Lesley-AnneLA69]

I will only catch 10 minutes of this but better than nothing, I just wonder how ah told so many lies on stand and nothing is done!

[@annstar4306]

Me to ,I feel the same. There is a perjury law ,why is it there if nothing is ever done???? Amber has lied sooo much and her sister and many more on her side as witnesses ! 😡

[@Lesley-AnneLA69]

@@annstar4306 yes see if you have to swear to tell the truth and then you don't well surely has to be consequences doesn't there!

[@annstar4306]

@@Lesley-AnneLA69 exactly 🙋

[@urahara264]

Thanks for this content, Also want to ask about the impact of the trial of JD & AH on the UK trial and if the law could be changed according to the recent event that has exposed particularly in this case the inability of the court system in the UK to assert justice with tangible , concrete arguments and evidences provided

[@AliRadicali]

I can see that the arguments made during the UK trial and now, after the US trial are inconsistent and mutually exclusive. But that really pales in comparison to just how truly awful the UK trial ruling was and how incredibly biased the judge was in that case.

[@swordablaze9259]

Does Elaine just not understand how the system works when she says that Amber won the UK trial? She talks about evidence being blocked that shouldn't have been in the recent case yet Amber got to choose what she entered for the UK trial.

[@kewikid68]

Thank you for showing so clearly that there was a complete other trial in UK, because so many people haven't understand! I think it's very importent. Thank you for your explanations! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

[@andreayoon1096]

AH all this mountain of evidence of abuse and wants to defend her rights wanted to dismiss this case?!! what a joke

[@lawrencelawkc]

I appreciate your clarity; it goes a good distance to promote the legal profession.

[@TheOneSoulMate_]

Always well informed and reviewed. I love your content. Always legally based and researched!

[@martingraham4272]

# Justice for Johnny Depp only this time give him a fair trial purging his name of all the derogatory and abusive lies...

[@alexstewart9747]

How are “That Woman’s” legal team allowed to lie then ??

[@notonmywatch4291]

The analagy of yours relating to the football match and participation can be extended further. Judge Nicols was the referee in this case between JD and the Sun newspaper. The referee (Judge Nicols) refused to use VAR (Video Assistance Referee) evidence and wrongly awarded the match to the Sun. Meanwhile the substitute to the winning team (AH) did not participate in the match and still wanted a winners medal. 😅

[@mumo9413]

Just watched a video from the channel 'Eric Hunley' he has interviewed the TMZ camera man/reporter who was the one who was sent to the court when AH filed for the injunction against JD. His account is really interesting. The leak, the exit method, choice of courthouse, amount of other reporters there when it was meant to be an exclusive. I've told him about your channel. Would be great if you gents did a joint video?

[@thomasroach5150]

UK NEEDS TO SHOW THEY CARE ABOUT THEIR JUSTICE SYSTEM AND CREDITABILITY IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM /PUBLIC NEEDS TO TRUST THEIR JUSTICE SYSTEMAND WHEN REVIEWING ASK THEMSELVES HAD WE HAD A JURY HOW WOULD THIS HAVE COME OUT IN UK ...CANNOT HAVE A JUDGE APPEAR CROOKED...EACH JUDGE REVIEWING THIS SHOULD BE HONEST AND ASK WHAT CONCLUSION AND HOW THEY WOULD HAVE HANDLED THIS AND HOW THEY WOULD HAVE RULED IN CASE AND APPEAL/SEPERATE SET OF JUDGES SHOULD REVCIEW APPEALS TO APPEAR FAIR PLUS KEEP CHECKS IN PLACE CUZ HE MIGHT NOT HAVE DONE THIS IF HE KNEW HE WOULD BE CHECKED

[@nopewmopan]

Every time she and her team say "we won in the UK," I'm like "but you weren't a party..." 🤔

[@ivankosasih1406]

Her claim of winning UK Trial is as true as supporter on sideline claiming they won the game they watch.

[@margaretvanwaning9882]

Ohio here!🥰🌻🙏💙🇺🇸♥️

[@KarrierBag]

Good afternoon 🙂 just got back on my boat for a cuppa and some food and what do I find....... this! 😁

[@martadeteresa9432]

Thank you , please look for JHONNY to win in UK

[@zephyrbear]

Emily D Baker did a piece on this very document a day ago and she really went deep into the reasons why the UK trial result was irrelevant to the Virginia trial. Perhaps the two of you should get together and present it from both the UK point of view and the US. She is in total agreement with you on AH's different roles in both trials. kzbin.info/www/bejne/n2nXZYKtoaaiocU

[@inspectregadget3561]

AH's team isn't about to let facts get in the way of a bad argument

[@gabymeyer8003]

Well explained. Thank you.

[@bernardcassidy6497]

Well explained, the interest in this case and the forensic discipline in examining every facet of it has proved fascinating to lay people, the truth is being exposed more and more, the jigsaw puzzle is almost complete, even the mainstream media and apologists for , basically liars, cannot dispute hard, unequivocal evidence, absurd contradictions , Amber must wish she had never sauntered down this path of malicious slander , she could never have guessed that instead of Johnny being despised and made unemployable and $ 100 million poorer, it would be her, if she had any sense she would repent, make amends, begging forgiveness of Johnny and all the real victims of domestic abuse and the judge and jury and the public and if it was sincere, people would forgive.

[@meganpayne7371]

Thank you for the analysis and showing the actual documents. Makes more sense under your logic.

[@banethereckoning2638]

That Ivana lady on twitter, Dr. Proudman, hell none of Amber's supporters will actually debate anyone on the two trials. One trial had a judge who was fair, the other had a guy who said someone couldn't throw a red bull because she doesn't drink them.

[@aisle_of_view]

1) UK has puddings, but not well known for muffins. Dr Curry could not testify. 2) When Amber’s punching allegations came up, Brad Pitt suddenly appeared as Mickey from Snatch and exclaimed “Aw…ya look like a boxer!”

[@BrodyBaddis]

Elaine is as deceiving as Amber. They’re trying to claim ignorance of the meaning of the words! Why is this argument even part of Elaine’s post trial b.s.? She’s so rank.

[@katherinegarza05]

The Judge (allegedly) knew the Reporter from the Sun and wasn't that a conflict of interest?

[@lisahawes5329]

I hope with the outcome in the USA trial, the UK trail will be appealed. At the least the judge in the UK trail should be investigated. How can our legal system (UK), sit by and allow this happen without a thorough investigation.

[@jethroscotty1]

While I realize it would be bad legal strategy for Amber Heard not to resist third party disclosure, it might have been the best thing that could have happened to her given the way the judge in the UK trial handled the evidence presented as it was. He discounted so much evidence that otherwise should have undermined Amber Heard's credibility, it's hard to say what amount of evidence, if any, might have changed the outcome. If Amber Heard had been compelled to give full disclosure in the UK trial, the result would likely be the same. But the case for banning the Virginia trial would be stronger and it might not have been.

[@tmac2139]

Well said and explained. Thank you!

[@martadeteresa9432]

Thank you for the true comes in UK … THANK YOU

[@Kari.F.]

If only a British lawyer would whip out their crayons, apply all the patience they can muster, and explain that to Elaine Bredehoft...

[@tammylaronde8593]

It's astounding how many people still believe that the UK trial was a Johnny vs Amber Heard case. 🤦

[@OP-1000]

She was so pleased with herself during the UK trial. 🤮

[@jsz116]

I think the UK decision to not name AH as an effective defendant is such a problematic precedence. It means people can route their defamatory claims through a third party while also using them as a shield from disclosure. I realize that already happens all the time, but in this case, it is much more obvious that it happened. As an American, I find it puzzling that a media outlet would run a story worded like this. Even though we have a constitutional freedom of press, most outlets are still careful with the wording. We often joke about how someone can be caught in the act, and the news still uses words like "suspect" and "allegedly". Any personal opinion will come with disclaimers throwing the liability for the statement on the person making the statement.

[@mmcmiddlechild]

Thanks for all your work and analysis.

[@Ocean1688]

** Questions Please ** Is it true that the Judge’s son (in the UK) works for the Sun paper?

[@dorothystrickland379]

Ah not only tried to get case dismissed in Virginia, I believe ah team tried 4 times before judge was agitated and said enough!

[@eabeab1938]

JD was lucky she was not a party to the UK case as the UK judge would have ignored all the extra evidence and she could have correctly claimed she won in the uk

[@margaretnicol3423]

How is the appeal petition coming along? The JusticeForJohnnyDeppUK'' one?

[@pattyforrest933]

I appreciate what you are doing and teaching

[@jencorea8748]

Oh my… …. Besides differences in certain technical structures and processes The Main difference between uk and usa in the understanding of law and the perceptions of verdicts … is the innate understanding, meaning and use of the English language. Fascinating ?

[@niknoks6387]

What was the cuddling badgers reference? it cut off before the answer.

[@scrantonstrangler8301]

Why did JD team allow EB n team to even mention the UK trial???

[@karaokeprincezz]

I definitely think it was an unsafe verdict. I don't know why they didn't sue both parties in UK. My understanding was that at the divorce she was asked not to say anything about their life together. So... It just doesn't seem right.

[@hazelhadley-britt6396]

They both agreed and signed a document and made a statement of silence to their marriage / life together. She broke the agreement.

[@roberthayes9842]

I'm curious could Miss Heard be called to a retrial in the UK on the base of the now known evidence, or is the said judge final refusal the end of any further litigation

[@karenstrong8887]

I just signed the petition. Do you think an appeal will go through in the UK?

[@xTerminatorAndy]

thanks Mr. Belt :-)

[@davidbroadley2983]

Sir, Judge Nicholl wrote a book with Geoffrey Roberton on media law. Judge Nichol was a mentor of Jennifer Robinson. There seems to be a conflict there?

[@joannemorris9081]

she was a witness for the sun in the UK not a party she won nothing there

[@shakunvashisht342]

I AM CURIOUS TO KNOW WHAT THE JUDGE AND THOSE LAWYERS THOUGHT WHEN JD WON IN US?

[@jeanpetisce-lynch4416]

Thank you

[@basilrose]

In US terms, would it be correct to say that AH was a 'witness' at the UK trial?

[@casperwallace9685]

So any signs in JD getting this quashed yet ?

[@tweetybird8968]

Exactly, I just don't see how anyone can't see that Amber is lying. ..periodt

[@KE-hr4sb]

The judge in the UK case was extremely biased and should have recused himself. Let's see if I can remember this right cause it's been a minute... 1) He had dinner with Amber and her lawyer. 2) His son works at the Sun, on occasion. 3) He says it "doesn't carry weight," yet found her "I donated all 7 million" lie so compelling he decided to believe her based on that (over the testimony of cops, btw), and admitted as much. Something along the lines of "that doesn't strike me as the actions of a gold-digger, so she sounds believable to me." But it's been a while so I'm paraphrasing here.

[@KE-hr4sb]

@@scifinut111 ^ Yes that.

[@5h0ckblock]

Saying Amber won the UK trial is like saying Isaac won in Virginia.

[@carolineyates4746]

thanks for explanation, Ambers attorney elaine kept bringing up the english case and saying amber won, she should know better and never spoken about it, she actually annoys me intensly

[@rhondakennedy819]

Yes

[@lorisanchez6083]

Can lawyers just consciously lie in court like Heards lawyer did? That seems like they are as bad as she is! Knowing by watching how lousy Elaine was.. to stoop to Heards tactics in front of the judge seems unfathomable.

[@Noah60]

totally agree

[@stephaniekhoo890]

After the case closed, she still can post the voice audio in the twitter, which is not in the court and still can post anything that related to the case?

[@aroemaliuged4776]

A recent tweet from dr charlotte proudman call her out…

[@bushycrib8732]

It was the "tale of the two trials" yes very different trials lol

[@whathappenedtomyYThandle]

Maybe lost in translation but there are no two ways. There is nothing to have because she wasn't a party to the lawsuit in London period. All this does is add confusion and can see ppl saying she should have won both.

[@ThePurpleYarnivore]

In her mind, she won bcuz she was a spectator at the game making noise for the Sun.

[@irenedemarco1354]

Good morning.... it amazes me that Elaine would even verbalise this nonsense... Elaine would know full well the difference between the 2 countries, 2 different "defamation standards" and Jury V Judge Alone trials... Many dont understand the Nuances Of Law, but a lot of the general public arent as silly as Ambers team thinks... JD didn't lose in the UK, he exposed the actual corruption of "conflict of interest" and "limitations of law" within the case... Its done, the UK is not the US... The cases were completely different A case in one country, is not the Judgement in another country when The Case needs to be heard.... Regardless, Heard was found to be a liar in both countries....

[@danabiehn8611]

Depp turned over years of texts. Can you imagine Amber doing that?? Can you imagine turning over all of YOUR texts over the last years? He opened up his entire life in order to be heard.

[@markmathisen3908]

In fact she fought like hell to NOT turn her texts and phones over. She was terrified that proof of the hoax could be exposed with her electronic devices. She is one underhanded walking fecal sample. 😒

[@jonfreeman9682]

She would never do that cause she's too guilty and knows that.

[@caroledwards3289]

And those were unflattering to himself, yet he did that to show what he was saying about AH. But he did make those available to show the truth.

[@flyonthewall8122]

She was actually court ordered in Virginia to turn over all her phone info by October 2021 & she did not. She simply ignored the order & I don't know why this wasn't addressed at trial. Possibly, that info was made known to the jurors only, but we'll never know. Maybe, since it didn't affect the outcome, that became a moot point, but I would think she should've received a hand slap, at least, for defying the court.

[@AmolJadhav-fi8pt]

If she did disclose her life, I wonder how many marriages will be ruined.

[@mandycmorris]

Being a UK citizen I am so very embarrassed by the actions and decisions of the judge in this case. He seemed sloppy and biased and obviously just wanting to retire. However far better for JD to win in the USA trial where the world was able see the entire case and the decision made by 7 jurors.. The truth is always easier to tell than a lie.

[@Swansong321]

I hate seeing comments where people are calling into question the entire English justice system based on this one flawed judgement

[@caroldaniels5505]

@@Swansong321 then sign the petition to have it appealed/reheard ! That’s what you can call justice, having all the evidence in open court. I’m English and this case just makes a mockery of our judicial system DON’T you agree. As always your last deed is the one that defines you (the judge tarnished any reputation he had, he will always be the judge that supported DV) 👍 This case also shows all Brits how unfair our judicial system is ! Ergo suck it up or do something about it 🤣🤣🤣👍

[@Swansong321]

@Carol Daniels obv I signed the petition already..I'm just saying you cannot define the entire English justice system based on this one flawed ruling...and I don't think that people should accept this..but I also think that his reasoning was flawed

[@aum0aumgood]

@@Swansong321 how can One #dishonorable #conflictofinterest #AndrewNicols #colluding #criminal #verdict...NOT be swiftly dealt with by #HerMajesty #QueenElizabeth ...¿ the #PublicTrust the #PublicFaith is breached. the #Judiciary is compromised. ie no Justice ... a public fraud.... to reopen Appeal and correct the record and liablty that is Guilty #DontBuyTheSun NGN RupertMurdoch pressoflies and Editors responsibility to print only true acurate news...

[@G.Danielle2911]

The trial in the UK was JD Vs The Sun. It's about their article calling him a wife-beater. Amber was just a witness for The Sun. So it's not her trial.

[@michellekirby5050]

Totally agree with you. AH just refuses to see how entitled she's acting. Completely different trials. Thank you for the in depth analysis and thoughts. Appreciate your efforts!!

[@hargitsingh4971]

The whole point imo is that if AH had been subject to disclosure in UK trial, JD's side would have made it impossible for the "learned" judge to rule the way he (the judge) ultimately did.

[@gypsygem9395]

@@hargitsingh4971 that's so true

[@kidcharlemagne926]

It is clear that the judge in the UK was biased and used every manoeuvre to make it difficult for Johnny to win. Despite the judge's best efforts, the defence case was still so bad, and Amber was caught in so many lies, that Johnny clearly won that case. The judge knew what he was doing when he took the last resort of deciding the whole issue purely on the credibility of one witness (not JD, the LAPD officers etc), that being the most non-credible witness in the case, AH.

[@markmathisen3908]

Well if you can't trust AH, then WHO can you trust?! 🤔😂

[@jonfreeman9682]

UK judge is bent.

[@jonfreeman9682]

Judge son works at the paper and was buddy buddy with execs he's known for a long time as part of the ol'boys club.

[@paulchristian7693]

The ‘Me too’ women’s political movement was going on that time? 🕵🏼‍♂️

[@dgonz565]

The Sun and Dan Wooton won the UK case, she was a mere ‘witness’. That was not her win under any circumstance.

[@notonmywatch4291]

Won the UK case based on lies and falsified evidence!

[@bevmacdonald9008]

True, but Amber's testimony was on behalf of and instead of Mr Wooten. Dan was not compelled to testify, I think he should have been. I think the Sun article was ghost written by AH and was published by request. I think publishing the slander abroad was part of a strategy to prevent her from being held liable for violating the divorce nda in America, while she gads about defaming Depp, as the DV Ambassador for the ACLU. I think she planned to continue defaming him as far back as their joint press release stating "no false claims of abuse for money"; she thought that would deflect a defamation suit because she thought the statement would count as proof her allegations were true in the future.

[@Linda-dr7vp]

Be angry at The Sun and Dan Wooten.

[@Emily-KRZ]

When the UK judge sided with The Sun, Johnny lost his role in The Fantastic Beast. When Amber published her malicious op-ed, Johnny was let go from Pirates 6 and his career was over. Both the judge and Amber were responsible for destroying this man's life and legacy. Johnny left his ex-partner of 14 yrs who was the mother of his 2 children and gave the ex $150 million in settlement so he could be free to be with Amber. Why the hell would he give up that much money so he could beat the s*** out of Amber throughout their entire relationship as Amber tried to gaslight us with. You can hear in the audios that Johnny genuinely loved her but she was so physically and verbally abusive to him that she broke him.

[@davebellamy4867]

Therein lies the truth. He made that destructive decision to leave the mother of his children and go with AH. Maybe his previous relationship had already ended anyway - but what a choice to make! 🙄 It shows that choices matter.

[@robg521]

So to get this straight, you are confirming that in the UK trial she was not a ‘party’ therefore could cherry pick which evidence she wanted to produce. Where as in the USA she was forced to hand over ALL evidence. I think that fact explains a lot on its own as to why Jonny lost in the UK and Won in the USA.

[@MerelvandenHurk]

Yeah that's pretty much what happened. Which makes it even more annoying that the judge "found" 12 cases of abuse to be "substantially true". Had he only stuck to NGN and Wootton, I might have given it a pass that she didn't have the same evidentiary obligations. But he didn't do that, he decided to form a judgment on whether or not those instances of abuse occurred or not. And if you're forming a judgment about THAT, you HAVE to look at both sides equally. You can't look into that and actually write down a formal judgment about something while only one party has had to go through full discovery and the other didn't. That's pertinently and patently unfair.

[@emma9348]

Im baffled as to why AH and co. keep reiterating the fact AH won in the UK. They know full well it was not her win, so by repeating themselves, do they think it will change the outcome?

[@RachelGedney]

I wonder if she's related to Trump? Both need psychiatric assistance, both behave like stroppy teenagers 🤦

[@Card_Crazed]

AH is so Histrionic, that she doesn't even see the reputational harm she is causing herself. She NEEDS to be the centre of attention, no matter how, or who it may hurt. I still of the opinion that AH's legal team is delusional, and that they, along with AH, need to have full psychiatric assessments. I don't know if the group has believed the lie for so long, they think it's truth, and are being delusional about it, or AH's legal team just wants money. Either way, AH and her legal team will be having epic fail after epic fail if they try to appeal the decision in the USA.

[@markmathisen3908]

To be honest it's all they have; there is NOTHING else they can point to because they know for a FACT they deserved to lose because their case relied on the least credible and most reprehensible client ever: Amber Heard.

[@bevmacdonald9008]

Amber's testimony was instead of Dan Wooten testifying. I think the author should have been compelled to testify. I believe AH was the true author, "Gone Potty..." in the headline was to tip-off Depp to that fact too. I think the article was published in the UK under Wooten's name to prevent her from being held responsible for violating the divorce NDA in the USA, and to sow the seeds of rumours started by unnamed others, to protect her from being successfully sued for defamation while she represents the ACLU and their gender based dv narrative. imho.

[@ryanbyrne7584]

It's like saying "But we won that football game" when they were just a cheerleader, not a player on the field. That was a great reference Black belt Barrister, btw I'm really enjoying your vids, Thank you for covering this topic. It's especially helpful that you ARE a Barrister in the UK, so your insight into the UK trial is more credible.

[@irenedemarco1354]

A young lawyer in australia explained this 2 years ago, and predicted JD would "lose".... BBB has acknowleged her.. Lost Beyond Pluto.... Gives great explanations...

[@ryanbyrne7584]

@@irenedemarco1354 Yeah, I've been watching Pluto & Zach for about 2 yrs now, since she 1st started covering JD / AH. We even got into the Rachel aka me again (meghan) Markle stuff, even though she hasn't technically ruined a man's life, YET, I see so many similar traits between MM & AH and being a citizen of the U.S. it's a little frightening to see MM pushing herself into politics. She'll never make it to Presidency, but even if she influences a few people, that's a few too many.

[@szendrich]

I can't even imagine why there should be a basis on that at all. The UK and the USA are two different countries with two different systems of justice. Even if Amber Heard's team had the truth on their side, there would still be no basis for throwing out the Virginia defamation trial just because there was a "similar" one in the UK. Never heard such nonsense in my life!

[@darkmage9252]

Well Heard's team is inept

[@campbell1446]

You are absolutely correct. They are two completely different creatures. In the UK case, the Sun newspaper was sued. The author of the article, employed in some fashion by the newspaper, did not know Depp personally. In the US case, the author of the article, Depp's ex-wife, was sued. If anything, there might be an argument for looking at the UK case again, now that the main source of the information the Sun relied on was found to have falsified it, intentionally, and with malice. Is there such thing as "fraud upon the court" in the UK? If so, could it apply here?

[@jonfreeman9682]

Judge is bent and only works if judge is unbiased and ethical but sadly the real world isn't so pure.

[@sharronjones1017]

That’s Amberturdalert logic! It doesn’t matter that it’s not true only that she believes it & anyone who doesn’t is wrong & she is always innocent & not a victim, & doesn’t do drugs except when it’s someone else’s fault😳😳🤨🤥🤥🤥🤥

[@michellecluney9092]

That was very informative about the uk trial, I personally think JD should have won that trial also, but can see now why he didn’t looking at AH connections to the Judge.

[@michellecluney9092]

@@dianaspencer719 yeah there is a chart with all the connections, that’s what I was referring to, a lot of people all connected and leads towards the judge also.

[@MizpahMoo]

It makes me jolly angry that anyone thinks it’s the same! It’s not! Amber didn’t win anything! Johnny was really treated unfairly, with Amber getting away with murder as she didn’t have to disclose things, she never donated there for lying and actually being a violent lying gold digger! Please god #JusticeforJohnny will come about with your kind petition.

[@dianawatton7570]

Sir, it is both an honor and a pleasure to listen to your explanations of both cases, UK & USA. Thank you.

[@patriciadiamond1305]

May l ask how long this PETITION for Johnny will go on before we can see any fruitful results,if any??.. Love to watch you on your Channel. I then skip over to Lawyer You Know. Any news on your live stream together?? Can't wait for that. You shine SIR for the person you are.

[@JustAgamer-sf1yl]

Need more ppl to sign the petition

[@jonfreeman9682]

Need about 10 million

[@bernadettecallinan4139]

@@JustAgamer-sf1yl where do we sign?

[@tomriley5790]

I doubt it will make any difference either way.

[@neilcassey1421]

I have a strong suspicion that AH's team might soon stage a physical attack on her or on her home and blame it on someone who supports Depp. This would be fairly easy to do and would then allow her lawyer to demand the sealing of evidence for 'safety reasons'. It's also the ONLY thing which might change public opinion. That's why Depp's team should release a statement RIGHT NOW condemning anyone who wishes physical harm on AH or goes too far with the hate. They need to have this covered. I would also advise all 'analysis' sites to do the same, including this one, which is one of the very best.

[@jasondyrkacz8270]

Amber's going to pull a Smollett? I hope she's dumb enough to use a check.

[@jenjennitrite8146]

@Vintage Bollinger I wouldn't put it past her staging such an agregious action ....or one of her pos cronies!

[@sfcmp7005]

Actually if JD's team comes up with a statement like that, just out of the blue, and then something actually happened, it would be more suspect than if the statement was never made. People could claim the statement was like a secret signal to go ahead with the plan. In my years with the Military Police, I have seen some pretty shady things happen, and have dealt with some pretty shady people. Usually the ones who do the dirty deed, foul up somewhere. It is not always immediately evident, but most of the time we were able to root out the real truth. This case is so public that it would be hard for them to do something like that, and not foul up somewhere along the line. Especially with AH involved. Too many loose ends to cover. I know AH almost got away with this, but she just wasn't able to control her mouth, and actually lie in a believable way. There in lies their problem.

[@aroemaliuged4776]

You are being overly dramatic, Stick to facts and evidence

[@nonacee5065]

I'm sure that a Smollett attack on Amber will be seen for what it is, smoke and mirrors.

[@davidjbiscoe957]

She loves mind games. She did it on Johnny constantly.

[@davidjowett8195]

The more you reveal about AH in these videos, the more I think the term "spoilt brat" is applicable to her behaviour!

[@connielandron6432]

Finally someone said what I thought was the truth of the UK case. Thank you for doing this video. I still can't see how anyone could possibly support ah are even say she was ever telling the truth. the woman couldn't tell the truth if her life depended on it. Narcissistic people never accept any wrong they did and abusers can't stand losing control over the one they abuse. I have been on the receiving end of abuse and she definitely was the abuser in that situation. the tapes clearly show that fact. Once again thank you for doing this video to clear up this point.

[@EricKolotyluk]

You are quite the legal wonk... and you do tease out issues that too many people gloss over. Too often it seems that legal strategy is to muddy the waters, but you seem enthusiastic to find clarity. The world needs more people like you...

[@patriciatreslove146]

Thank you as always for digging into this case, the truth has to be told, even though it may be uncomfortable for the UK Judicial system, the Judge clearly had a conflict of interest. As a UK resident, I am ashamed of what happened in this so-called trial.

[@dawnc1419]

No way can anyone say that Nicholls was neutral in this trial. Forgetting all the allegations of ALL the back-door back-handers, his own judgement shows a willful ignorance of the evidence and witnesses. This matter needs re-trying with a background check of the judge and his personal connections so this can be finished and any outcomes be safe!