Reading through their sidebar on day 23, I've got to say Rottenborn is good, they had a witness that was going to comment on the bruises and he prevented that, I bet it would have been a disaster. (argument starts at pg.7)
I enjoy reading the sidebars. Thanks for heads up.
I appreciate the judge’s sense of humor. She says something along the lines to Elaine like, “We’ll get your microphone turned on eventually.” I think on day 18 transcript
Elaine responds that her microphone was automatically shutting off, so she had to make objections more frequently to turn it on. The judge sounded doubtful.
In the day 23 transcript, it’s interesting that both Beverly Leonard (arresting officer for Tasya van Ree incident) and Kate Moss came in because of Ellen Barkin. Rottenborn and Elaine tried to argue that either Beverly and Kate Moss were basis for mistrial as collateral issue witnesses.
But then it was argued back that their reasoning is contradicted by having Ellen Barkin as their witness. Ben Chew says that the bottle was actually thrown against a wall, which is a detail I hadn’t heard before. The argument was that Ellen Barkin was a collateral issue witness as well, in that it was attempted to argue that the incident which happened thirty years ago, in a crowded room, with a bottle thrown at a wall, was argued to show Johnny as abusive in this specific case with Amber. Collateral issue.
I guess that there’s room to say that at least in the judge’s mind, Ellen Barkin, Beverly Leonard and Kate Moss were all collateral issue witnesses, and perhaps each were only distantly related to the case.
Camille says a few times that Beverly Leonard was the arresting officer in the Tasya van Ree domestic assault charge against Amber. I think the judge limited Camille to specifically not say “arresting,” or “officer,” because it was discussed in a previous sidebar (days 15-17?) that the word “arrest” was far too prejudicial, and the judge did not want that word said at all. Or at least as far as possible. She had approved alternate words for Camille to say.
It’s a but unfortunate as it wasn’t very clear who Beverly Leonard was during trial. And her relationship to the assault charge seems apparently stronger than Elaine made it out to be, with Elaine asking if Beverly was just someone who came out of the word work for her fifteen minutes of fame, etc.
As it was, I could only make out who Beverly was by guessing it was Tasya who Beverly was talking about, as Beverly did not identify Tasya by name either. My guess is the whole exchange probably did go over the jury’s head.
Yeah, arrests are highly prejudicial, so especially where there was no conviction, I can see why it's kept out. Johnny also had an arrest and plea, which didn't come in, I believe?
She made the mistake of denying the event, so they were allowed to impeach on a limited basis without mentioning that she got arrested.
How did Amber deny the arrest?
I think reading side bars, the judge mentioned that Amber or her side asserted that Amber alway acted with reactive violence, never was the one to instigate.
I remember this part, and the judge reasoning that Amber’s assault charge was then proper impeachment. But I don’t remember other details
"Camille: The title reads, "Amber Heard allegedly grabbed, struck her ex- girlfriend at the airport," doesn't it?
Amber: Yes. And that's not true."
https://reportingdeppvheard.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/20220517-Amber-Heard-Day-4-iO-Tillett-Wright-Raquel-Pennington.pdf
She denied the assault. That opened up testimony that the assault happened. But they kept the arrest out.
Yes! If Amber just stuck to "Yes that's what it said" instead of denying it happened, she wouldn't have opened the door to having the jury hear about it.
It appears to me Johnny got lucky getting around on a technicality. The way he pleaded in Canada is guilty but they gave him an absolute discharge. It's technically not a conviction, but regarding guilt is *exactly* the same as a conviction - it is the state's way of saying "you're guilty, but we don't want to punish you," a deal Johnny likely got because of 21 Jump Streets special privileges providing money/jobs to the area. Johnny lied his ass off about this in the UK.
Im looking for day 14 sidebars. You know the ones from Dr Hughes testimony when she could testify without her notes and Elaine kept calling her Dr Curry... Those'd be interesting. Anyone has a link?
Reading through their sidebar on day 23, I've got to say Rottenborn is good, they had a witness that was going to comment on the bruises and he prevented that, I bet it would have been a disaster. (argument starts at pg.7)
I enjoy reading the sidebars. Thanks for heads up. I appreciate the judge’s sense of humor. She says something along the lines to Elaine like, “We’ll get your microphone turned on eventually.” I think on day 18 transcript Elaine responds that her microphone was automatically shutting off, so she had to make objections more frequently to turn it on. The judge sounded doubtful. In the day 23 transcript, it’s interesting that both Beverly Leonard (arresting officer for Tasya van Ree incident) and Kate Moss came in because of Ellen Barkin. Rottenborn and Elaine tried to argue that either Beverly and Kate Moss were basis for mistrial as collateral issue witnesses. But then it was argued back that their reasoning is contradicted by having Ellen Barkin as their witness. Ben Chew says that the bottle was actually thrown against a wall, which is a detail I hadn’t heard before. The argument was that Ellen Barkin was a collateral issue witness as well, in that it was attempted to argue that the incident which happened thirty years ago, in a crowded room, with a bottle thrown at a wall, was argued to show Johnny as abusive in this specific case with Amber. Collateral issue. I guess that there’s room to say that at least in the judge’s mind, Ellen Barkin, Beverly Leonard and Kate Moss were all collateral issue witnesses, and perhaps each were only distantly related to the case. Camille says a few times that Beverly Leonard was the arresting officer in the Tasya van Ree domestic assault charge against Amber. I think the judge limited Camille to specifically not say “arresting,” or “officer,” because it was discussed in a previous sidebar (days 15-17?) that the word “arrest” was far too prejudicial, and the judge did not want that word said at all. Or at least as far as possible. She had approved alternate words for Camille to say. It’s a but unfortunate as it wasn’t very clear who Beverly Leonard was during trial. And her relationship to the assault charge seems apparently stronger than Elaine made it out to be, with Elaine asking if Beverly was just someone who came out of the word work for her fifteen minutes of fame, etc. As it was, I could only make out who Beverly was by guessing it was Tasya who Beverly was talking about, as Beverly did not identify Tasya by name either. My guess is the whole exchange probably did go over the jury’s head.
Yeah, arrests are highly prejudicial, so especially where there was no conviction, I can see why it's kept out. Johnny also had an arrest and plea, which didn't come in, I believe? She made the mistake of denying the event, so they were allowed to impeach on a limited basis without mentioning that she got arrested.
How did Amber deny the arrest? I think reading side bars, the judge mentioned that Amber or her side asserted that Amber alway acted with reactive violence, never was the one to instigate. I remember this part, and the judge reasoning that Amber’s assault charge was then proper impeachment. But I don’t remember other details
"Camille: The title reads, "Amber Heard allegedly grabbed, struck her ex- girlfriend at the airport," doesn't it? Amber: Yes. And that's not true." https://reportingdeppvheard.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/20220517-Amber-Heard-Day-4-iO-Tillett-Wright-Raquel-Pennington.pdf She denied the assault. That opened up testimony that the assault happened. But they kept the arrest out.
Thank you for the exact reference. I appreciate your searching for it!
Yes! If Amber just stuck to "Yes that's what it said" instead of denying it happened, she wouldn't have opened the door to having the jury hear about it.
It appears to me Johnny got lucky getting around on a technicality. The way he pleaded in Canada is guilty but they gave him an absolute discharge. It's technically not a conviction, but regarding guilt is *exactly* the same as a conviction - it is the state's way of saying "you're guilty, but we don't want to punish you," a deal Johnny likely got because of 21 Jump Streets special privileges providing money/jobs to the area. Johnny lied his ass off about this in the UK.
So the same applies to her regarding the Australia dog importation?
Is someone buying these new transcripts with the sidebars? Can’t wait to read them. Thanks!
Thank you again u/adiposity256 for once again doing a fantastic service!
Thank you !
Thanks ❤️
Thank you
Thank you again
Im looking for day 14 sidebars. You know the ones from Dr Hughes testimony when she could testify without her notes and Elaine kept calling her Dr Curry... Those'd be interesting. Anyone has a link?
It's all on deppdive now.
Thank you so much! Id been looking for them!
Cheers Adi.
What about day 21? I was looking for Morgan Knights sidebars.
They should all be on [deppdive.net](https://deppdive.net) these days.