Johnny Depp has responded to ex-wife Amber Heard’s request for a mistrial in their defamation lawsuit.
Heard’s legal team requested a mistrial after alleging that a 77-year-old had been summoned to court to serve on the jury but instead a 52-year-old living at the same address had shown up and participated.
Her team is citing these ‘newly discovered facts’ as grounds that the verdict in the defamation trial should become invalid and a new trial be held.
The trial between the two actors has revolved around a piece Heard wrote for the Washington Post in 2018 about being a public figure representing domestic abuse.
While Depp was not named in the article, he claimed it implied he abused her during their marriage and was therefore defamatory.
At the conclusion of the trial Heard was ordered to pay around $10 million in damages to Depp and he $2 million to her.
According to E! News, Depp has now responded with a request that the motion for a mistrial be struck down.
Depp’s legal team say that lawyers for Heard ‘had more than enough time’ to investigate the jurors, and that the individual who ended up on the jury when another had been summoned was still ‘qualified to serve as a juror’.
They also argued that the request for a mistrial came on 8 July, seven days after the court appointed deadline to dispute the verdict.
The filing of Depp’s official response said: “Though understandably displeased with the outcome of trial, Ms. Heard has identified no legitimate basis to set aside in any respect the jury’s decision.
“Mr. Depp respectfully submits that the Court should deny Ms. Heard’s Post-Trial Motions, which verge into the frivolous.”
Heard had also previously appealed the verdict of the defamation trial, her team claiming one of the three statements found to be defamatory against Depp was not written by her.
They are arguing that since the actor didn’t write the headline to the piece it shouldn’t be counted against her.
However, Depp’s team have argued that since Heard retweeted the article after publication that counts as ‘actionable republication’.
The Aquaman star is facing other woes after being sued by an insurance company over the verdict of the defamation trial.
Insured by the New York Marine and General Insurance Company during the time she wrote the Washington Post article, they are now suing her as they claim they shouldn’t have to cover the costs of the trial or the damages on her behalf.