Johnny Depp spearheaded online trolling campaign against Amber Heard in bid to ruin her career, she says in new court papers
- Amber Heard claims Johnny Depp ‘organised and orchestrated’ online trolling
- She claims he attempted to ‘interfere with her reputation, career and livelihood’
- Believes Depp and lawyer arranged for accounts to ‘smear and harass’ her
Amber Heard claims Johnny Depp ‘organised and orchestrated’ an internet ‘smear campaign’ against her, US court documents reveal.
The documents – which are publicly available online – claim Depp attempted to ‘defame Ms Heard and interfere with her reputation, career and livelihood’ through the online trolling campaign.
Heard claims Depp – and his lawyer Adam Waldman – arranged for both authentic Twitter accounts and fake ‘bots’ to ‘smear and harass’ the Aquaman star.
The papers allege that Mr Waldman ‘is publicly associated with Russian individuals with the capability to organise such attacks’.
Amber Heard (left) claims Johnny Depp (right) ‘organised and orchestrated’ an internet ‘smear campaign’ against her, US court documents reveal
This papers were filed on August 10, at the end of Johnny Depp’s £1 million libel trial against The Sun.
The Pirates of the Carribean star is suing the newspaper over an April 2018 article that suggested he was a ‘wife beater’.
Explicit details of the couple’s turbulent marriage has dominated headlines, as each accused the other of domestic violence.
One claim included Depp bashing Heard’s head into a fridge and sending texts threatening to cut off Elon Musk’s penis after suspecting they were having an affair.
The documents – which are publicly available online – claim Depp attempted to ‘defame Ms Heard (pictured) and interfere with her reputation, career and livelihood’ through the online trolling campaign
In another, the model, 34, claimed her ex-husband, 57, used his severed finger to paint ‘I love you’ in blood on a mirror while they were temporarily based in the Gold Coast while he was filming.
Heard’s case has seen Depp hit with 14 allegations of domestic violence, claims he defended during three days of testimony.
The end of this trial is set to have a major impact on another high-profile case the Hollywood star is bringing against his ex-wife.
In the US proceedings, Depp is suing Heard for $50million over a 2018 article she wrote in the Washington Post in which she describes herself as being a domestic abuse survivor.
Although Depp is not specifically named, his lawyers allege that it is obvious that the article refers to him and labels the actor of being a domestic abuser.
The three-week libel trial against The Sun in London, in which Depp hopes to win £350,000 in damages, has widely been seen as a ‘dress rehearsal’ for the US hearing, which will take place in Virginia.
It will feature all the same witnesses that appeared on behalf of either Depp or Heard in London and is also based on the same bombshell evidence that was produced at the High Court over the past few weeks.
The papers filed in Virginia by Heard form part of her counter claim.
They read: ‘Mr Depp is attempting to defame Ms Heard and interfere with her reputation, career and livelihood through an online smear campaign he has organised and orchestrated.
Heard’s case has seen Depp (pictured) hit with 14 allegations of domestic violence, claims he defended during three days of testimony
‘As part of his ongoing smear campaign, Mr Depp has directed both authentic and inauthentic social media accounts and “bots” to target Ms Heard’s Twitter account and attempt to interfere with her contracts and business.’
‘Many of these accounts smear and harass Ms Heard while simultaneously promoting and praising Mr Depp’s attorney, Adam Waldman.
‘Mr Waldman is publicly associated with Russian individuals with the capability to organise such attacks.’
She claims Depp called her a ‘disgusting pig’, an ‘inhuman scum-filled sickfish’ and a ‘whore c***’ – verbal abuse which ‘laid the groundwork for the smear campaign he spearheads today’.
Mr Waldman replied to the claims, saying ‘the people demand facts and evidence, not nonsense’.
Source: Read Full Article