Depp v. Heard: The Defamation Case Of #MeToo
“I felt as though I was on trial in the court of public opinion” - Amber Heard, 2018
Photo credit: Shutterstock
An article spanning just seven-hundred and sixty-nine words was the final feather needed to weigh the scales of justice in the favor of abuse. It was within these parameters that Amber Heard, former spouse of Johnny Depp, penned a short op-ed piece naming herself as a public figure for domestic abuse. No names were mentioned, but most guessed Depp. The actor, previously acclaimed for his work but now more noted for his erratic behavior on set and close friendship with the likes of Marilyn Manson, believed this op-ed to be the true hindrance to his quieting career and waning reputation.
Depp asserted that Heard’s following three statements damaged his career:
“I spoke up against sexual violence — and faced our culture’s wrath. That has to change.”
“Then two years ago, I became a public figure representing domestic abuse, and I felt the full force of our culture’s wrath for women who speak out.
“I had the rare vantage point of seeing, in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse.”
As such, the ferocious years-long public battle between the two gained unprecedented momentum as the public encouraged a six-week-long court battle, where Johnny demanded $50 million dollars for defamation and Amber counter-demanding $100 million dollars for the same cause. This trial, exceeding the length of most American murder trials, proved to be the greatest spectacle of abuse in the modern age.
““This trial, exceeding the length of most American murder trials, proved to be the greatest spectacle of abuse in the modern age.””
Powered by the media and an unsequestered jury, the actual judge of this trial was the public.
A public—desensitized to violence as a consequence of true crime culture, frequent viral police brutality videos, and its right to bear military-grade arms before the drinking age—is a dangerous judge. Yet, this is the public that determined the verdict in the defamation trial against Amber Heard and consequently, all women who aren’t “the perfect victim.”
Photo credit: Shutterstock
The “True” Victim Trope
The perfect victim. The true victim. A real victim.
It’s all the same meaning: phrases and ideologies used to discredit survivors under the belief that victims of abuse should behave in one specific manner. This belief opens the floodgates of intrusive scrutiny. Therefore, the survivor must respond to this scrutiny by retelling overly detailed accounts of the traumatic abuse they’ve suffered to whoever may ask, including detectives, nurses, their friends, family, and even the media. This is what we know as ‘revictimization,’ and this trial was a harrowing documentation of what that can look like.
Every syllable, sound, and hair on her head was highly scrutinized and immediately weaponized against her. YouTube body language “experts” explained that by holding her chin up and speaking with assertion, she’s aggressive, not confident. Still photos of Amber frustrated mid-speech and Johnny blowing kisses to fans or looking down were what even reputable media sources used to cover the trial in order to maximize engagement. Viral tweets exclaimed that by wearing her hair in a low side-part bun, she was tormenting Johnny who frequently wears low buns. As time raged on, reactions to this trial focused less and less on the claims of importance and more and more on the sensational headlines and clips.
““As time raged on, reactions to this trial focused less and less on the claims of importance and more and more on the sensational headlines and clips.””
Amber was in no way a “perfect” victim. She’s documented to have mocked and belittled her alleged abuser going as far as to imply that no one will believe a male survivor. That is a part of what makes this case difficult to comprehend for most viewers who watched this recounting of documented traumatic events—it can only be described as pure entertainment. The relationship between Johnny and Amber was one that included a primary abuser and a primary victim. It is important to note that the phrase “mutual abuse” is another form of survivor discretion. At worst, relationships such as these can be described as a relationship riddled both with abuse and reactionary abuse. This concept did not seem to be received by the public. In the eyes of most people, a “true” victim never speaks back and certainly does not strike back.
““Powered by the media and an unsequestered jury, the actual judge of this trial was the public.””
On June 1st, 2022, when the jury concluded that Amber did indeed defame Johnny in those three statements, the court of public opinion uttered the following:
No victim is allowed to stutter, misquote, or misspeak while on the stand—no matter what emotion they are feeling at that moment. Doing so proves the defense’s—and the people’s—theory that they are a callous liar.
Each victim must cry appropriately. Lack of tears, too many tears, or unflattering sad faces further prove that the victim is acting on the stand.
All bruises from the alleged assault(s) must appear and heal in a unanimous manner, regardless of skin tone, genetics, or original impact.
Smiling or laughing on the day after an alleged assault is proof that no abuse occurred. Victims must appear solemn in the immediate aftermath of an assault.
A survivor's court wardrobe must in no way resemble that of the alleged abuser. Wearing similar clothing, even the same common suit color, demonstrates just how far a survivor is willing to lie and torment the alleged abuser.
All victims must receive medical attention following abuse. Failing to do so means that they were not as injured as they want others to believe.
If a former partner of the alleged abuser states that the accused is a good person who would never harm anyone, that former is to be believed and not the survivor with evidence of abuse.
Victims must document their abuse for it to be believed. However, too much documentation proves malicious intent on the victims part.
In the end, every victim wants to be believed. However, reactions to this trial have shown that not every victim believes each other, and there are a few reasons for that, detailed by Dr. Nicole Bedera in a recent article. In summary, victims often compare their experiences to others. This dangerous pedagogy reinforces the widespread misconception that all experiences should be similar. The truth is, each victim has a unique story that should never be judged in comparison to another’s.
Photo credit: Shutterstock
““The truth is, each victim has a unique story that should never be judged in comparison to another’s.””
The Misuse of #MeToo
There is a sense of unfortunate irony in the growth of #MeToo. The #MeTooMovement garnered international recognition as a result of prominent white actresses coming forward, finding solace within the comforting phrase in 2017—eleven years after its inception—and in the midst of the turbulent relationship between Amber Heard and Johnny Depp. Though #MeToo undoubtedly includes all victims, Tarana Burke coined this phrase and began this movement with the most silenced and abused demographic in mind: Black women. It is important to note the widespread acknowledgment of #MeToo was dependent on women, not of color, but of privilege—a feat that ironically continued the silencing of survivors already cast at the intersection of multiple systemic disadvantages. It also should be noted #MeToo primarily aims to support victims and survivors of sexual violence and harassment. Although intimate partner sexual violence is included in the movement, domestic violence is a different battle.
““#MeToo originated to spotlight the experiences Black women endure, but the movement does not exclude any victim—including male survivors.””
The weeks-long trial saw the grave misunderstanding of what exactly #MeToo is in great numbers. Consequently, an overwhelming amount of the public began rallying cries, demanding the end of #MeToo. They believed it to be a mistake that all women are supported. They believed this to mean that all men are unfairly judged and punished. However, this is not the case. #MeToo originated to spotlight the experiences Black women endure, but the movement does not exclude any victim—including male survivors.
Photo credit: Shutterstock
Still, male survivors deserve their own fight. Organizations such as 1in6, named after the disheartening statistic that 1 in 6 men have been sexually abused or assaulted, exist to do just that. The viral #MenToo response to this trial appears more akin to #AllLivesMatter than to be a genuine movement in support of male survivors, especially when preexisting movements and organizations for male survivors are continuously overlooked in pop culture.
Both domestic violence and sexual assault organizations have been under fire as another consequence of this trial by social media, enabling a deafening silence in the field. Prominent organizations are selecting not to comment on this trial for unspecified reasons, though the verdict directly impacts the communities in which they serve. Me Too International was one of the very few organizations to make a statement, and they did so on May 28, 2022, days before the lengthy trial concluded. This statement took a neutral approach while simultaneously attempting to reassert the movement’s original intention. The press release noted that this high profile battle between “two privileged white celebrities” has detrimentally provoked a defamation suit against the movement itself in its crosshairs. The reaction to this statement was similar to the reactions to this trial: if you are not openly supporting Johnny, even more openly berating Amber, or condemning the Me Too Movement, you are disappointingly supporting violence against men.
““Over the last six weeks, we have been confronted with the mockery of assault, shame and blame. Countless headlines proclaiming the death of #MeToo. News stories full of clickbait, having nothing to do with the actual work happening to interrupt sexual violence, have come across our screens with haste. No mention of the fact that, not only was this trial not about sexual violence at its core, but there has also been no headline asking the question that really matters – “What do we need to do to prevent anyone else from having to say #MeToo?”
What we experienced in the Depp-Heard trial was a public retelling of intimate partner violence between two privileged white celebrities. And the accounts are as equally harrowing as the public humiliation and harassment thwarted against Heard. It is a case study for how social and political movements get misused and weaponized against the very people it’s meant to serve.”
The Precedent Has Been Set
This trial can be described as the personification of an abuser’s wrath, a final attempt to further control the narrative. The single greatest grievance in a trial of this nature was its daily broadcasting. The people—our public—should not have been exposed to minute-by-minute salacious details, due to one simple fact: a trial held in the court of public opinion will never favor the woman. We are a society crippled under misogynistic and victim-blaming beliefs, behaviors, and laws. As a result, trials such as Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard are imbalanced from the moment the suit is filed.
““The people—our public—should not have been exposed to minute-by-minute salacious details, due to one simple fact: a trial held in the court of public opinion will never favor the woman. We are a society crippled under misogynistic and victim-blaming beliefs, behaviors, and laws.””
The outcome of this trial was determined far before the jury reached its verdict. Amber’s small victory of winning one count of defamation by way of Johnny’s lawyer was in no way a win. The public had declared a war on Amber, #MeToo, and the concept of believing all women years before the verdict was even read. With no tangible charges against Donald Trump, the release of Bill Cosby due to technicalities, and the quiet nature of Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial, there has been a wave of increased silencing of sexual assault and domestic violence survivors for years.
Photo credit: Shutterstock
In the quest for the sole “perfect” victim, we have made way for every abuser. On the journey to support one male actor, we have shunned millions of female survivors. The trial that could have been the catalyst for a male victim movement quickly spiraled into the regression of all survivor rights. Domestic violence and sexual assault have always been difficult to prove in a court of law. Yet, astonishingly, this event has made proving abuse seem nearly impossible. The outcry and verdict have established the ideal safe haven for abusers, an environment where it is easier than ever to claim defamation in response to a victim speaking out.
““When a woman privileged with wealth and whiteness is subjected to hoards of foul-mouthed chastisement based on one-sided media press and the resulting public opinion, we have proven that we are not far removed from the Salem Witch Trials.””
When a woman privileged with wealth and whiteness is subjected to hoards of foul-mouthed chastisement based on one-sided media press and the resulting public opinion, we have proven that we are not far removed from the Salem Witch Trials. The question is, how many centuries will it take for today’s discredited survivors to be vindicated like women deemed witches in 1692?