Revisiting Amber Heard vs Johnny Depp

Congratulations if you were able to avoid the internet in 2022, but you most likely missed one of the most widely discussed court cases in the modern era: Amber Heard vs Johnny Depp. What began as a defamation lawsuit swiftly became a worldwide spectacle, meme-ified like a gritty teen drama and live-streamed. So let's break it down: how was any of this legally permitted to be so public?

What was the Amber Heard v Johnny Depp case?

The case at the centre of the chaos was a defamation lawsuit filed by Johnny Depp against his ex-wife Amber Heard in Virginia, USA. Depp sued Heard for $50 million, claiming an op-ed she wrote in The Washington Post - where she described herself as a victim of domestic abuse - damaged his career and reputation. Importantly, she never named Depp directly, but his legal team argued he was clearly identifiable.

Heard countersued Depp for $100 million, alleging that statements made by his lawyer defamed her by portraying her abuse claims as a hoax. This was never about deciding who was “right” in their marriage but whether either party had successfully legally defamed the other.

Why was the trial completely public?

In the United States, court transparency is a fundamental principle according to the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution which provides defendants in criminal cases with the right to a public trial. Courts have also established that the First Amendment gives the public and the press a right of access to court proceedings.

This feels like a very foreign concept as a resident in the UK and to many other countries. The best explanation I could piece together was that the US places freedom of speech and press above individual privacy, in most courtroom contexts. The belief is that public scrutiny: keeps courts accountable, prevents judicial abuse and reinforces trust in the legal system.

This means that, despite these values, the decision of whether this trial would become televised or not, rested in the hands of Penney Azcarate, the cheif judge of the Fairfax County (Va.) Circuit Court. And once the decision to publicise the trial was made, it allowed the internet to do what it does best

Why did the case become a cultural event?

The majority of Americans know this as the Depp v Heard trial however, many viewers were unaware or had forgotten that previously a U.K. magistrate judge found that the Sun had "substantial " evidence to label Depp a "wife-beater". It's remarkable how drastically narratives can change in the US, being based purely on public opinion. 

As you would read through innumerable posts, it became clear that more complex and conversations about the nature of abuse were overshadowed by the overwhelming 'cult-like' support for Depp. 

The bigger question

The real controversy isn’t just who won - it’s whether cases involving allegations of abuse should ever be consumed this way. The US system says transparency protects justice. The UK system says restraint protects people.

No matter who's 'side' you were on or who you believed was 'lying' I think its incredibly telling that all of the antagonising, the memes and undermining of abuse had stemmed from Depp's supporters. If you truly believed this was 'mutual abuse' you are wrong. The term and concept has been disproven by experts many times; that partners in a relationship cannot be mutually abusive. There will always be the abuser and the reactant. As abuse stems from one person's desire to to exert power or control over the other, by definition and principle it could never be equal. 

When we categorize Heard's behaviour as reciprocal, we overlook the victim's role in reacting to violent abuse. Carefully examining each victims story is important because failing to do so not only reinforces harmful stigma but also silences the voices and experiences of those who have been harmed. 

Narcissistic abusers often push their victims to provoke a reaction. When the victim reaches their breaking point and reacts with anger, frustration or aggression, the narcissist uses this reaction to manipulate the situation further. They may portray themselves as the victim, justify their abusive behaviour, and use the victim's reaction as evidence to discredit their claims or deflect responsibility. 

I am not a psychologist in any means, however taking this definition of narcissistic abuse and applying it to the relationship of Heard and Depp, provides one possible explanation for why the situation was interpreted the way it was at the time.

Attraction and Deceit: The Dual Aspects of Narcissism

One of the paradoxes of narcissistic people is that they are able to attract others with their captivating personalities, as evident with Johnny Depp. This attraction is not coincidental; rather, it is a deliberate attempt to ensure a constant flow of approval. Narcissists can be incredibly endearing; they frequently project success and confidence, making them seem like the perfect leaders, friends or partners. However, beneath this facade, is a persistent need for dominance and control, which they satisfy by subtly manipulating emotions.