Amber Heard's attorney Elaine Bredehoft has her own theory as to why her client Amber Heard lost out to Johnny Depp in their blockbuster defamation trial.
Yesterday, the Pirates of the Caribbean star won his libel lawsuit as a civil jury, which consisted of seven people, came to a unanimous decision on each verdict. They had deliberated for around 12 hours over three days.
The jurors - made up of five men and two women - started deliberating on Friday afternoon and were asked to determine whether Heard and Depp defamed one another in statements they'd made about their relationship.
Jurors found that Depp was entitled to $10 million in compensatory damages and punitive damages of $5 million. However, as Virginia state law caps punitive damages at $350,000, Depp will actually be awarded $10.35 million.
Meanwhile, the jury has awarded Heard $2 million in damages based on her $100 million countersuit.
Appearing on The Today Show after the verdict was announced yesterday, Bredehoft claimed Depp won because an "enormous amount of evidence was suppressed".
Highlighting Depp's libel suit against UK newspaper The Sun, which he lost in 2020, Bredehoft said the British court had found the Edward Scissorhands actor had "committed at least 12 acts of domestic violence, including sexual violence", and that Depp's legal team had learned to "demonize Amber and suppress the evidence".
Bredehoft went on to say that she believes the anti-Heard sentiment on social media would have swayed the opinions of the seven jurors.
Though they were instructed not to do any research outside the court, the lawyer commented: "How can you not? They went home every night. They have families. The families are on social media. We had a 10-day break in the middle because of the judicial conference. There’s no way they couldn’t have been influenced by it."
Referring to social media commentary on the trial as "horrible", Bredehoft said public opinion was favorable where the 58-year-old beloved Hollywood star was concerned and disastrous to Aquaman actress Heard.
"It’s like the Roman Colosseum, you know?" Bredehoft said. "How they viewed this whole case. I was against cameras in the courtroom and I went on record with that and argued against it because of the sensitive nature of this. But it made it a zoo."
The attorney believes the verdict was proof that survivors of domestic abuse are not afforded the support they deserve.
She said: "Unless you pull out your phone and you video your spouse or your significant other beating you, effectively you won’t be believed."