Amber Heard's legal team has revealed the reason they decided against allowing Johnny Depp to return to the witness stand to testify once again in the ongoing trial.
Depp, 58, and Heard, 36, are suing each other for $50 million and $100 million respectively over a 2018 op-ed the actress wrote for The Washington Post about her experience with domestic abuse.
It was titled: I spoke up against sexual violence — and faced our culture’s wrath. That has to change.
Attorneys for Depp argue that the piece implies he was physically abusive towards his former wife - despite the fact that he was not named in it.
Over the weekend, it was reported that Depp was expected to testify once more in the trial. The initial plan was that he would be questioned as a rebuttal witness on Wednesday or Thursday this week.
However, that plan has now been scrapped - and for good reason apparently.
Per The Independent, Heard's legal team has released a statement to the press explaining the sudden change of heart.
The statement said: "Calling Depp back to the stand would be as relevant to us as a bicycle to a fish. Everything Depp has testified up to this point has been irrelevant to the heart of this case, and there’s no reason to believe it would be any different now."
Depp's four days of testimony saw the actor claim that he, rather than his former wife, was the victim of domestic abuse in their short-lived marriage.
There were several memorable moments in his testimony - one which saw him recall a time he was shown a photo of what he referred to as human fecal matter on the bed he shared with Heard at the time.
He also maintained that he never struck Heard in spite of her claims that she was physically and sexually abused by him.
The actor said: "Nothing of the kind had ever happened. Though [in] the relationship there were arguments and things of that nature... but never did I, myself, reach the point of striking Ms. Heard in any way. Nor have I ever struck any woman in my life."
"I am obsessed with the truth," he added. "Today is... actually the first opportunity that I've been able to speak about this case in full."
