The Daily What Depp v. Heard Means for #MeToo
Jun 6, 2022
Julia Jacobs, a culture reporter for The New York Times, dives into the aftermath of the highly publicized Depp v. Heard trial and its implications for the #MeToo movement. She discusses how the verdict could empower those accused of abuse to pursue defamation lawsuits, potentially silencing victims. The complexities of the courtroom dynamics are revealed, showing a battleground of opposing narratives. Jacobs highlights the chilling effect on future victims speaking out, raising critical questions about justice and accountability in a post-trial world.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Defamation as a Legal Strategy
- The accused are using defamation lawsuits against their accusers as a legal strategy.
- This has emerged since the rise of the #MeToo movement.
Depp v. Heard
- Johnny Depp sued Amber Heard for defamation over a 2018 Washington Post op-ed.
- Heard's op-ed, published after Harvey Weinstein's downfall, discussed the repercussions she faced for speaking out against domestic abuse.
Defamation Burden of Proof
- Proving defamation in the US requires the plaintiff to demonstrate that the statement was false and made with actual malice.
- Actual malice means the person knew they were lying or had a high awareness of the statement's falsity.