1 June 2022: the jurors in Fairfax District Court, near Washington, USA, deliver their verdict at the end of six weeks of legal wrangling between the defence of actress Amber Heard and the lawyers for her ex-husband, actor Johnny Depp. Both accused each other of violence and defamation.
Broadcast live on television and on the Internet, the trial turned into a grand unpacking of the couple's private life in full view of the general public. The extracts relayed on social networks gave rise to torrents of insults against Amber Heard and misogynistic messages that went viral, while Johnny Depp, who is 22 years older than his ex, benefited from a wave of "love". himpathy - a phenomenon that the Australian philosopher Kate Manne describes it as " the inappropriate and disproportionate sympathy shown to men of power in cases of sexual assault, domestic violence, homicide and other misogynistic behaviour".
Did the 36-year-old actress defame her ex-husband in her column published in 2018 in the Washington Postin which she presented herself as " a public figure embodying domestic violence" without explicitly mentioning Johnny Depp's name? That was the question the jury answered, finding her guilty of "defamation with actual malice" against Johnny Depp. Amber Heard was ordered to pay him $10 million, plus $5 million in damages. The jury also ordered Johnny Depp to pay $2 million in damages, considering that he had also defamed his ex-wife in the Daily Mail.
Settling scores
The legal and media war between the two ex-spouses dates back to 2016. Amber Heard filed for divorce, accused Johnny Depp of violence and obtained a restraining order - charges that were extinguished by a financial settlement. In 2020, the actor filed his first libel suit against the British newspaper The Sunwhich published comments made by Amber Heard accusing her of violence. The courts ruled that the actress' accusations were well-founded, even though Johnny Depp had also accused his ex-wife of violence. This was followed by an article by the young woman in the Washington Post leading up to the trial, which closes on 1 June.
On the one hand: Amber Heard presents evidence of bruises and scenes of violence, insults and threats, generally under the influence of alcohol, by Johnny Depp. On the other: the actor produced recordings of Amber Heard admitting to hitting him, and proof that she had already been arrested in 2009 for domestic violence against her ex, Tasya Van Ree. In the end, Johnny Depp claims that he accidentally headbutted Amber Heard while trying to stop her from attacking him. She justifies the violence she may have indulged in by describing it as self-defence.
Beyond the merciless settling of scores between the two parties of a toxic couple, the Fairfax trial, because it was delivered live to the public's vindictiveness, gave rise to a wave of hateful comments against Amber Heard, the woman who caused the scandal. And in turn against all victims of domestic violence who dare to speak out. Amber Heard put it this way when she expressed her disappointment at the verdict: " I am devastated that the mountain of evidence was not enough to stand up to the far greater power, influence and clout of my ex-husband.she said after the sentence was read out. I'm even more disappointed by what this verdict means for other women. It is a setback. It calls into question the idea that violence against women should be taken seriously." .
Toxic media coverage
Judge Penney Azcarate had decided to authorise the television broadcast of the hearings in this high-profile case, one of the most closely watched in the world, despite the opposition of Amber Heard's lawyers. It was " the worst court decision in decades for victims" says Michele Dauber, a law professor at Stanford University in California and campaigner against sexual assault on campus. A decision that reveals " a profound ignorance of sexual violence on the part of judges" .
Amber Heard had to " describing her alleged rape in graphic detail on television. It's shocking and should offend all women and victims, whether they agree with the verdict or not....", explains Michele Dauber. In fact, the trial has fascinated a global audience unaccustomed to watching allegations of sexual assault within a couple, since the last time a rape victim had to testify publicly was in 1983..
Whatever the opinions on the verdict, it's a problem: " I don't think our society yet understands the dynamics of domestic violence." Ruth Glenn, President of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV), told AFP. This context was not sufficiently explored during the court proceedings, she believes. For her, there is "no doubt" about the types of abuse that were revealed at the trial. " You have to make sure that the people present understand it. But until they do, don't show this sort of thing on television." .
Denigration, insults, mockery
"Every time Amber Heard has spoken out to detail the domestic violence of which she accuses Johnny Depp, her words, relayed on social networks, have immediately provoked mockery, sexist remarks and denigration, which have an undeniably disastrous effect on the objective of encouraging women to lodge complaints against violent spouses or public figures," writes women's rights activist Fatima-Ezzahra Benomar on Facebook. As is often the case in cases of sexist and sexual violence," she deplored, "the actress has been accused of acting when she cries, or on the contrary of not doing enough when she doesn't cry.... "
From now on " every victim will think twice before coming forward and applying for a restraining order or telling anyone about the abuse they have sufferedlaments teacher and activist Michele Dauber. Women are at risk of being injured or even killed because they did not call for help. This case is a complete disaster. It is potentially catastrophic" she concludes.
Misogyny in full force
The law professor also notes that public opinion was supportive of Johnny Depp, while his ex was the target of insults and jeers". openly misogynistic "on social networks. Amber Heard suffered " the metaphorical ordeal of tar and feathers" she asserted, while the ruling was welcomed by the American right. Her comments triggered an outcry of hate speech against Michele Dauber - slut, slag, criminal, shrew, etc. - to the point where one of her Twitter accounts was blocked.
Backlash after #metoo?
The media coverage of the Heard vs Depp affair raises the question of the future of the #MeToo movement, which since 2017 has encouraged women to denounce the perpetrators of sexual harassment and assault. Five years on, the irresistible tidal wave is marking time. " It's impossible not to see this as a backlash against #MeToo - women have gone too far. Ladies, we've listened to you and condemned a few men. Don't be too greedy" wrote one user on Reddit.
Others, like NCADV's Ruth Glenn, see it as a reminder of the work still to be done. For Tarana Burke, founder of #MeToo, "the movement is very much alive. It's the system that's corrupt". The instigator of #MeToo calls on us to focus on the courage of the millions of women who have denounced violence rather than on the legal battles, won or lost.
Tarana Burke's words are echoed by those of Anne-Cécile Mailfert, President of the Fondation des femmes en France, who reacted to the thousands, if not millions of insults from tiktokeurs who are making Amber Heard pay for having damaged the image of Johnny Depp, the "perfect male". For her, this backlash will not stop the movement, because "#metoo cannot be summed up in just one trial and is resonating around the world: there is no stopping it a movement whose time has come" .
Following the trial, Amber Heard's lawyer said that her client "absolutely cannot" pay the more than 10 million dollars in damages that she has been ordered to pay to her ex-husband. Believing that the actress had been "demonised" by the opposing party, she said she would appeal against the jury's decision.
Text by Terriennes Liliane Charrier
FR 
EN 
DE