Interesting that she's going to testify about damages for BOTH Depp and Heard.Redirect of that doctor done, Heard calls Catherine Arnold, an entertainment industry expert witness.
After that cross, the doctor could have sued Depp's lawyer for IPV.That cross before lunch was a bloodbath. That doctor looked absolutely terrible.
Just listened to a bit of it, and it was all anti-Depp.Interesting that she's going to testify about damages for BOTH Depp and Heard
She is being questioned by Heard's side now. That will likely change when Depp's side gets their chance.Just listened to a bit of it, and it was all anti-Depp.
Supposedly there was no Pirates 6 in the works. There certainly was no contract in place.
If thats true then Depp cant claim loss of potential income.
Unless of course what she's saying isnt true
I get that. But if Depp's lawyer cant disprove that there was no contract for Pirates 6 he's screwedShe is being questioned by Heard's side now. That will likely change when Depp's side gets their chance
His expert already testified he had a deal with Disney, this is the defense damages expert attempting and failing to contradict it.I get that. But if Depp's lawyer cant disprove that there was no contract for Pirates 6 he's screwed
I missed that. Did he show an actual contract as evidence??His expert already testified he had a deal with Disney, this is the defense damages expert attempting and failing to contradict it\
It wasn't at the written contractual stage.I missed that. Did he show an actual contract as evidence??
That might be a problem then. We'll seeIt wasn't at the written contractual stage
He runs his psychiatric clinic in a van down by the river
I think he did OK on her cross. He made it sound silly how Depp couldn't have damages for pirates 6, when Pirates 6 doesn't exist, yet every alleged damage of Heard's (removal from a potential role) also doesn't exist.Denison ended 180 hours of cross examination of the entertainment industry expert without making a single point any layman could have come away with.
Like, wtf was that?
If that was his point (and I'm not arguing that it wasn't) then he needed to make that point in a manner that normal listeners could have followed. His cross was muddled, confusing and meandering.I think he did OK on her cross. He made it sound silly how Depp couldn't have damages for pirates 6, when Pirates 6 doesn't exist, yet every alleged damage of Heard's (removal from a potential role) also doesn't exist.