The Guardian view on Depp v Heard: an abusive spectacle
The publicity surrounding the defamation suit brought by the actor Johnny Depp against his former wife and fellow actor Amber Heard would have been concerning whatever the verdict. There are precedents in the US for trials involving celebrities that become media circuses. This, though, was particularly ugly. Partly that was due to the intimate nature of the case, involving as it did the breakdown of a brief and disastrous marriage. The invasion of privacy was magnified to grotesque proportions by continuous coverage on social media, and the Virginia court’s decision to allow livestreaming. With Mr Depp’s grossly insulting messages to other actors about Ms Heard now common knowledge, the phenomenon of trial as entertainment plumbed new depths of offence and misogyny.
Mr Depp’s victory brings further worrying implications. The jury decided that his ex-wife defamed him in a 2018 article for the Washington Post, in which she called herself a “public figure representing domestic abuse”, even though his name was not mentioned. There is a risk that, in future, other women who wish to speak or write about domestic abuse may be deterred by the fear of being sued by former partners.
Ms Heard, who said she was “heartbroken” by the outcome, may yet appeal. The fact that in 2020 a British high court judge took the opposite view to this American jury could encourage her. In that case, Mr Depp was the loser in a libel case he brought against the Sun newspaper. The judge found the description of Mr Depp as a “wife beater” was “substantially true”.
But this earlier ruling, in a jurisdiction usually thought to be favourable to libel claimants, has also added to this week’s shock. As in most trials involving abuse allegations where the alleged perpetrator and victim know each other, both cases rested on which witnesses were seen as more credible. Of course, juries must be allowed to reach decisions based on the evidence before them. But the power imbalance between the protagonists and campaigning by Mr Depp’s supporters made for a troubling backdrop. At 58, Mr Depp is a world-famous film star. He is also the face of Dior Sauvage men’s fragrance and played in concerts with Jeff Beck while the jury was deliberating. By contrast, 36-year-old Ms Heard is now better known for her failed marriage than her acting.
It is hard to predict the case’s precise impact. Part of the reason for the saturation coverage is people’s fascination with lives that are so remote from their own. But the level of public sympathy for Mr Depp despite plentiful evidence of appalling behaviour,
including violence, is disturbing. As is the hostility towards Ms Heard, particularly on social media with, as usual, no obvious way for her to seek redress. In 2018, she wrote hopefully that the #MeToo movement had created a “transformative political moment”. The past few weeks have been closer to a nightmare.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a letter of up to 300 words to be considered for publication, email it to us at guardian.letters@theguardian.com