Amber Heard reacts to the verdict. Photo / AP
Amber Heard's lawyer says there was "so much evidence" the jury in her defamation trial didn't see, including a text message from Johnny Depp's assistant saying her ex-husband was sorry he "kicked" her.
In an interview with NBC, Elaine Bredehoft said there were medical records and text messages that supported Heard's claims that she was physically abused by her Hollywood star ex-husband but that they had been suppressed by the court in Fairfax County, Virginia.
"[Depp's legal team was] able to suppress the medical records, which were very, very significant because they showed a pattern going all the way back to 2012 of Amber reporting this to her therapist, for example," Bredehoft told the programme.
"We had a significant amount of texts, including from Mr Depp's assistants, saying when I told him, he kicked you, he cried, he is so sorry. That didn't come in."
Bredehoft told NBC that Heard was "absolutely not" able to pay the US$10.4m in damages and confirmed that the actress would appeal.
"Oh, absolutely [she will appeal]. And she has some excellent grounds for it," she insisted.
"We even had tried to get the UK judgment in his case because he [Depp] already had his shot - and that's one of the issues but also a number of the evidentiary issues. There was so much evidence that did not come in."
Bredehoft said Heard's case was also impacted by the fact they "weren't allowed to tell" the jury that a UK court had previously found that Depp "committed at least 12 acts of domestic violence – including sexual violence" against Heard. Depp, who sued The Sun tabloid in London in 2020 for calling him a "wife-beater", lost that case.
"We weren't allowed to tell them about the UK judgment," Bredehoft said.
"So the damages is completely skewed … there are no damages."
Bredehoft said Depp's legal team worked to "demonise" Heard and suppressed crucial evidence in the trial, preventing the jurors from examining evidence of the actor's alleged abuse.
"Well, you know, really what happened here is it's a tale of two trials. Johnny Depp brought a suit in the UK for the same case," Bredehoft said.
"The burden of proof was easier for him there, The Sun had to actually prove that it was true. "And the court found there - and we weren't allowed to tell the jury this - but the court found that Mr Depp had committed at least 12 acts of domestic violence, including sexual violence against Amber.
"So what did Depp's team learn from this? Demonise Amber and suppress the evidence. We had an enormous amount of evidence that was suppressed in this case that was in the UK case. In the UK case when it came in, Amber won and Mr Depp lost."
EXCLUSIVE: Amber Heard's attorney tells @savannahguthrie the actor "absolutely" plans to appeal. pic.twitter.com/DRGjNBqzdy
— TODAY (@TODAYshow) June 2, 2022
Depp, 58, filed the suit against Heard, 36, over an op-ed she wrote for The Washington Post in December 2018 in which she described herself as a "public figure representing domestic abuse".
During his four days on the witness stand, the Pirates of the Caribbean star denied ever physically assaulting Heard and claimed she was the one who was frequently violent.
Heard, who had a starring role in Aquaman, did not name Depp in the article, but he sued her for implying he was a domestic abuser and sought US$50 million (NZ$76m) in damages.
On Wednesday, the jury found that Heard defamed Depp in the op-ed, which they agreed was false, defamatory and with malice, on all counts, and awarded him US$15m damages, comprised of $10m compensatory and a further US$5m punitive – later reduced to US$350,000 because of a cap.
Heard won one of her three defamation counterclaims against Depp and was awarded US$2m in damages. The jury found that Depp's lawyer Adam Waldman defamed her when he told the Daily Mail she set up Depp in a hoax when the police came to their apartment in May 2016.
Depp celebrated the split verdict in the case as a victory and released a statement saying "the jury gave me my life back".
"I am truly humbled," he continued.
"Six years ago, my life, the life of my children, the lives of those closest to me, and also, the lives of the people who for many, many years have supported and believed in me were forever changed.
"False, very serious and criminal allegations were levied at me via the media, which triggered an endless barrage of hateful content, although no charges were ever brought against me.
"It had already travelled around the world twice within a nanosecond and it had a seismic impact on my life and my career."
In a statement to News Corp Australia following the verdict, Heard said she was disappointed "beyond words".
"I'm heartbroken that the mountain of evidence still was not enough to stand up to the disproportionate power, influence, and sway of my ex-husband," Heard said.
"I'm even more disappointed with what this verdict means for other women. It is a setback. It sets back the clock to a time when a woman who spoke up and spoke out could be publicly shamed and humiliated. It sets back the idea that violence against women is to be taken seriously.
"I believe Johnny's attorneys succeeded in getting the jury to overlook the key issue of Freedom of Speech and ignore evidence that was so conclusive that we won in the UK.
"I'm sad I lost this case. But I am sadder still that I seem to have lost a right I thought I had as an American – to speak freely and openly."
Bredehoft said the ruling bodes ill for the MeToo movement and will discourage women from reporting sexual harassment and abuse.
"Unless you pull out your phone and you video your spouse or your significant other beating you, effectively you won't be believed."