Legal experts believe Washington Post could be held liable too


Johnny Depp received his defamation situation in opposition to ex-wife Amber Read and authorized professionals imagine the Washington Publish could be liable for publishing the op-ed at the heart of the bombshell trial, but that situation may possibly be tough to make.

The jury located that Read was liable for defamatory opinions she designed versus Depp in the 2018 op-ed published in the Washington Post, in which she implicitly accused him of domestic abuse. The jury awarded Depp $10 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive damages Choose Penney Azcarate decreased Depp’s punitive damages award from $5 million to $350,000, the utmost under Virginia legislation, bringing the overall sum to just over $10 million.

“I unquestionably think that the Washington Write-up really should be held accountable as well in this case. A jury just resolved that all three of the statements in that Washington Publish op-ed were being deemed defamatory,” criminal protection lawyer Brian Claypool advised Fox Information Electronic. 

Obtain the FOX 5 DC News application for neighborhood breaking news and temperature

“On top of that, they also considered that Amber Listened to acted in a punitive way with falsifying these tales. So it truly is the obligation of a newspaper and other media stores to vet or filter information and facts in advance of they publish it to the globe and perhaps hurt the reputation of any person irreparably,” Claypool included. “The Washington Put up is not off the hook.” 

Claypool felt Depp’s group need to bring legal action versus the newspaper owned by billionaire Jeff Bezos to established a precedent for very similar cases likely ahead. 

“You have got to do your thanks diligence in advance of posting that post. You can not simply have someone walk into your office environment and say, ‘Hey, you know, I am accusing Johnny Depp of all these bad items,’ prior to heading out and undertaking owing diligence,” Claypool claimed. “I consider it is incumbent on Johnny Depp’s crew to carry a lawful motion versus The Washington Put up, to established a precedent in the upcoming that all media outlets need to be further watchful ahead of they publish to the earth allegations of domestic violence.” 

Claypool thinks the jury ruling in favor of Depp would make a situation versus the Article less complicated because the challenges have presently been litigated. 

“To me, the true culprit in this Depp vs . Heard circumstance is The Washington Write-up,” Claypool claimed. “Without having the Washington Article op-ed getting published, then there would have never ever been a defamation case.” 

Authorized Insurrection founder William A. Jacobson, a professor at Cornell Legislation College, isn’t as certain that the Write-up could be held liable, but he does not absolutely rule it out. 

Read Far more: Johnny Depp, Amber Listened to react to verdict

 “So the dilemma is whether or not the Washington Publish must be held liable for a defamatory op-ed penned by an personal who is not utilized by The Washington Submit,” Jacobson instructed Fox News Digital. 

“Could they possibly be liable? Indeed, they could probably be liable, but it would lawfully impose yet another step on the plaintiff, which is to display that the editors, and the Washington Publish by itself, had some kind of imputed expertise or imputed cause to assume that her firsthand accusations ended up untruthful,” Jacobson continued. 

Jacobson explained that Depp’s authorized group would have a drastically more challenging time proving the Submit was liable for defamatory remarks than it did when a jury dominated in his favor towards Heard. 

“The typical conventional that you would have to show for a community determine like Johnny Depp would be known to her, but would the falsity or the reckless disregard for the real truth be imputed to the publisher? And that would be a factual problem,” Jacobson stated. “So it is probably some thing that the Washington Submit would be on the hook for, but it would be a considerably a lot more hard situation to make.” 

Jacobson stated that op-eds them selves are not exempt from prospective defamation lawsuits, but there is a “greater hurdle” to acquire these kinds of a circumstance. 

“Men and women have a constitutional ideal to express their opinions, no matter if it bleeds in excess of to a fake assertion of specifics that negatively impugn somebody’s status and is defamatory is a factual concern,” Jacobson said, noting that details of the op-ed could become an challenge if Heard’s team appeals the verdict.  


“This was a publication of an op-ed which did not point out his title, did not genuinely state a lot of information,” he reported. “I would not be amazed if this is an issue on appeal.”  

The New York Times claimed on Thursday that Heard strategies to enchantment the choice. 

Though Claypool feels Depp need to go after a situation from the Put up, Jacobson is not so positive. 

“No matter if Johnny Depp goes soon after The Washington Submit, I assume is a strategic difficulty. He has now gained, he has presently been awarded the damages that he would be entitled to, so I cannot see how he would get additional damages, due to the fact the jury has presently mentioned, ‘Here is how you have been destroyed and in this article are your compensatory damages,’” Jacobson said. “So I can not see how he would get more damages when a jury’s previously awarded him the harm he suffered.”

Jacobson also feels it was “pretty strategic” that Depp did not title the Submit in the primary fit. 

“They would have had defenses that Amber Heard did not have,” he explained. “Moreover, it may well have distracted the jury’s consideration from what Johnny Depp seemingly needed, which is to set her on demo, not to put an editor of the Washington Put up on trial, but to put her on trial and I imagine that they made that strategic determination. I would be shocked if they moved over and above that at this stage.” 

On Thursday the Washington Article included a lengthy editor’s take note to the primary story. 

Editor’s observe, June 2, 2022: In 2019, Johnny Depp sued Amber Listened to for defamation arising out of this 2018 op-ed. On June 1, 2022, adhering to a demo in Fairfax County, Va. Circuit Court, a jury observed Read liable on a few counts for the next statements, which Depp claimed have been phony and defamatory: (1) ‘I spoke up from sexual violence — and faced our culture’s wrath. That has to alter.’ (2) ‘Then two decades back, I turned a public determine representing domestic abuse, and I felt the total power of our culture’s wrath for ladies who communicate out.’ (3) ‘I experienced the unusual vantage level of looking at, in genuine time, how institutions shield men accused of abuse. The jury independently discovered that Depp, by means of his lawyer Adam Waldman, defamed Listened to in 1 of 3 counts in her countersuit,” the Washington Publish wrote. 

Jacobson feels the editor’s notice was proper, despite the fact that he’s not positive it will insulate them from opportunity legal responsibility.  

“It was the proper matter to do in which you had an op-ed prepared by someone and that op-ed revealed in your newspaper was, in simple fact, the issue of a negative jury verdict. I assume it was appropriate for them to increase that take note to it, so that any individual in the potential likely ahead looking at it would know what at least a jury has held about that,” Jacobson mentioned. 

The Washington Post declined even further remark and pointed Fox News Digital to the editor’s be aware when asked about the predicament. 

Browse additional through Fox Information.


Supply hyperlink