Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Amber Heard claims Johnny Depp trial juror’s age was wrong in court records in bid to throw out verdict

Court documents list juror’s birth year as 1945, but Heard team says public records say it’s 1970

Oliver O'Connell
New York
Monday 04 July 2022 11:52 EDT
Comments
Amber Heard comments on Johnny Depp's threat of 'total global humiliation'

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Amber Heard’s legal team claims that a juror in her high-profile defamation trial was not properly vetted and was 25 years younger than listed in court documents.

Ms Heard is seeking to appeal or throw out the June verdict that found her guilty of defaming her ex-husband Johnny Depp.

In a lengthy filing in Virginia court on Friday, the Aquaman actress’s legal team argued the ruling had a number of issues, including poor legal reasoning, an improperly vetted jury, and excessively awarded damages.

Within the document, her lawyers asked that the court should conduct an investigation of Juror 15 regarding “whether jury service was proper and due process was protected”.

The legal team argues: “On the juror panel list sent to counsel before voir dire, the Court noted that the individual who would later be designated Juror 15 had a birth year of 1945. Juror 15, however, was clearly born later than 1945. Publicly available information demonstrates that he appears to have been born in 1970.”

Because this raises the question that the individual who served as Juror 15 may not, in fact, be the same individual listed before the trial, or that the Court Clerk’s office did not verify his identify, Ms Heard’s lawyers argue that her due process was compromised.

They write: “The Virginia Code does not contemplate jury service by someone not on the venire, for good reason … In any case, but especially a high-profile case such as this one, it is critical to ensure no person who is not on the venire is able to serve on the jury, whether by inadvertence or intention.

“Here, the facts show Juror 15 was decades younger than the individual on the jury panel list, raising questions as to whether they were the same or different people.”

Ms Heard requests that the court verify the information and take “appropriate action based upon the results of the investigation, including if appropriate, ordering a new trial”.

Last month, a seven-person civil jury ruled largely in favour of Mr Depp in a split verdict, finding that Ms Heard had defamed him in a 2018 op-ed in The Washington Post in which she implied he had abused her but did not name him.

The decision ordered Ms Heard to pay the Pirates of the Carribbean star more than $10m in punitive and compensatory damages.

It also held one of Mr Depp’s attorneys defamed Ms Heard, who was awarded $2m in punitive damages.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in