The Viall Files - E425 Legal Analyst & Body Language Updates on Johnny/Amber Trial

Episode Date: May 24, 2022

Welcome back to The Viall Files: Bachelor Gossip Edition! Today we are joined by Attorney Dellara Gorjian. On this jam-packed episode we dive back into the Amber Heard and Johnny Depp trial, bringing on some experts to give their thoughts on what has arisen from the shocking cross examination. We talk about how this case has moved past a headline to being a cultural moment, why Dellara believes it’s likely Johnny will lose the case, and the specifics of what it takes to win a defamation case. We then welcome back Janine Driver to dive into what a bruise makeup kit is, and how slips of the tongue can reveal true intentions. We then welcome on a listener for Texting Office Hours where an accidentally butt-dial leads to chaos and confusion. Our caller struggles when a guy she’s seeing shows pretty poor communication skills, being left on read most of the time. We dive into this issue and discuss how texting has become an expectation and how to properly communicate how often you should be talking with the person and if texting too much is taking away from conversations that should happen on a date.  “I’m protective of my energy.” Please make sure to subscribe so you don’t miss an episode and as always send in your relationship questions to [e-mail] to be a part of our Monday episodes.  Pre-Order Nick’s Book: https://www.abramsbooks.com/product/dont-text-your-ex-happy-birthday_9781419755491/ Check out our new "Introvert" merch at http://www.viallfiles.com today! THANK YOU TO OUR SPONSORS: Rothy’s: Discover the versatile styles you can wear absolutely anywhere and get $20 off your first purchase at http://www.Rothys.com/VIALL  Peloton:  The Peloton Bike+ is now $500 less, its best price yet! Including FREE delivery and setup. Visit http://www.OnePeloton.com to learn more.  HungryRoot: Go to http://www.Hungryroot.com/VIALL to get 30% off your first delivery and choose your free gift.  Episode Socials:  @viallfiles @nickviall @dellara @legalbaddie @janinedriver If you are experiencing domestic violence, call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-7233, or go to thehotline.org. All calls are toll-free and confidential. The hotline is available 24/7 in more than 170 languages. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

what's going on everybody welcome back to another exciting episode of the vile files freestyle edition i'm your host nick joined by ali and amanda amanda's back with us from her expedition back at home uh we have what i i hope is going to be jam-packed jam-packed episode uh we are going to cover a lot the about the uh johnny depp and amber heard trial we took a bit of a i guess a week off they took week off. They took a week off, we took a week off, but now we're back and we're going to get some much needed legal insights. Thank you. Insights with our guest, Delora Gorgian, who is with us. Yes.

Hi, Delora. How are you? I'm so happy to be here. So happy to have you. This is going to be a really fascinating episode. We are excited to have you. In addition to Delora, Janine's back. And then some texting office hours. If we have time, we'll get to some bachelor tea.

Tomorrow we have Madison Watkins get in some more. Madison Watkins, very talented musician. She wrote a song about dating and relationships. I thought it was very relatable. And we'll get into the Kardashians wedding because why not? We gotta. And more texting office hours. All right, Delora.

Let's get into it. Let's get into it. Why don't you give us a little bit of background about yourself? Yeah. give us a little bit of background about yourself. And then why don't you just kick this off and give us your thoughts on bring us up to speed on where you are at this case. And then we'll talk about what we've all seen over the past week. Amazing. Yeah. So my name is Dallara. I received my law degree from UCLA School of Law. I was also, thank you, I was also the recipient of the UC President's Award for my involvement in the Supreme Court case that the

University of California filed against our previous presidential administration for the rescission of DACA. I also happen to do advocacy work. I am a writer. I'm working on my first writing project that explores the topics of the legal system, societal trends, and the digital age. I also, this is a fun one, I happen to be a TikToker. I make videos on TikTok doing legal explainers for high profile cases and public speaking since I have a background in public speaking and just overall embracing femininity in the pursuit of being a professional. I don't think that those two things should be mutually exclusive. So yeah, TikTok actually recently featured me for Women's History Month because that's a lot of my platform is that femininity

and professionalism should not be mutually exclusive. And more generally that like you should not have to compromise your authenticity in order to succeed. So yeah, that's a little bit about me. I have been, I have to be honest, up until recently, I didn't really dive into this Amber Heard, Johnny Depp legal case because I am very protective of my energy. And there was something very icky to me about making a spectacle of two people bringing out the worst in each other. And if I can't offer a solution, I don't like to expose myself to negative vibes like that. That's also why I don't watch horror movies. But this has...

I also don't like watching horror movies. Yeah, I don't like them either. Bad vibes. I subscribe to that line of thinking of being protective of your energy. I like that. Yeah. But this has moved away from a news story or a lawsuit, and it's transformed into a cultural moment.

And I wasn't old enough to experience the impact of the oj simpson trial but if i had to guess i would i would the the hold the chokehold that this lawsuit has on the world it's up there yeah it's comparable obviously that was a homicide case and and this is different i think comparable would be uh fair to say i was i remember it i mean i was a little kid but i remember the i mean i i remember the car chase and i think different in the sense that you had the car chase it was all happening real time in this case i mean this case has been talked about for years i mean we're talking about a situation that happened five or six years ago so that part's different but i think you make a great point in terms of it certainly has captured the attention of many americans people across the

world and just i guess culturally and it has kind of bled through you know certainly outside of pop culture into very serious intimate conversations as it relates to relationships and domestic violence and all those things and so yes i think it is very much maybe the closest thing we've had since that i would think and also the ways in which information and news are spread is very different today than it was before so like arguably the oj simpson trial was bigger because if we had the tools today to spread information oh my god yeah oj tiktok would have been oh my gosh truly wild truly wild but yeah so we're not trying to compare no no no but this is all to say yeah this is all to say that like

this i i could no longer um ignore the details of this case. And as I did a deeper dive into the lawyering behind this case and not just what the lawsuit looks like on its face. Like, of course. So this case is interesting in two ways because it's interesting on its face. You have two Hollywood stars. That is inherently very interesting. You have themes of violence, inherently interesting abuse. Then you have wild headlines like Elon Musk pooping in the bed, finger being cut off, writing messages

on the mirror with the bloody... I mean, this is all very shocking. And so it's very interesting on its face. But then when you look at it from a lawyering perspective and how all of the circumstances are really pointing to the conclusion that this is not a case that Johnny Depp filed to win in court. This is a case that Johnny Depp filed to win in the media and in the world. In the court of public opinion. Correct, yeah. We're going to break down the elements of how to win a defamation case and how each element favors either Amber Heard or Johnny Depp. And it's very interesting, you guys. What we are trying to do on this show is as much as possible

to try to have quality discussions around something that you know is including things like fandom and it's easy to spread misinformation now people have opinions on both sides what we're trying to do on the show is try to not get into taking sides and the fandom of it but just have an objective conversation around these things and see where it goes. Let's just, let's start with the timeline because I think everyone needs to understand what kind of case this is and why the facts, how the facts rather interact with what kind of case this is and the elements.

cases and the elements. So 2015, Johnny Depp and Amber Heard get married to very sexy, beautiful individuals. And I think that's also what makes this case interesting is like these are two very attractive people, very toxic relationship. That's no secret. One year later, Amber Heard files for divorce. Four days after filing for divorce, she files for a TRO, a temporary restraining order. The judge grants the temporary restraining order. And then there was a hearing for whether or not the judge would grant a permanent restraining order. And then four hours before that hearing, Johnny Depp and Amber Hurd released a statement that was like, no, no, no, everything is fine. They settle their divorce out of court. That's when Amber Heard is awarded with the $7 million settlement,

which is now this big controversy as to whether she donated, pledged. Yeah. Now, is it, sorry for interjecting, but, and this is where I think it gets a little hazy, but I've heard things about, now she filed hazy, but I've heard things about, now she filed for divorce, but I've heard that he was the one who originally asked for it. Is there any proof about that? And then her legal team submitted what many see as like an extortion letter

in terms of like, we won't file, we won't continue with this if you pay X number of dollars, et cetera, et cetera. But is that, do we know that to be certain or is that just stuff floating around there? Or, you know, cause like we are seeing things on the internet, but we don't know like what's being shown at the trial. don't know like what's being shown in at the trial and also it's also unclear of at this point what's actually true versus not and then what's being presented in court versus not yeah um as as far as those claims i am not 100 certain um i don't know what we would what has been shown to

be true or not um but anyway, continue with your timeline. Yeah, yeah. So they have this out-of-court settlement. Then it's worth noting that in 2016, TMZ releases this video of Johnny Depp slamming these cabinet doors. Obviously, it doesn't make him look very good. But then it's not until 2018

that Amber Heard releases an op-ed in the Washington Post where the title of the article is that she is a survivor of sexual abuse. And that is where the crux of the case, this is not a domestic violence case. This is not a divorce case. This is a defamation case. And a defamation case has everything to do with the reputation of the person being harmed, who the defamatory statements are about. So Johnny Depp files a $50 million defamation lawsuit, making the argument that it was Amber Heard's statement in this Washington Post op-ed that caused him to have his reputation suffer to the point where he was losing big deals,

including the Fantastic Beasts 3 role that he had to resign from. What a lot of people don't know is that was a pay or play contract, and he actually got paid in full for that role. And if people are not... What does that mean? Yeah, so pay or play contract is a term used in entertainment law that basically means that whether or not the production ends up using any of the footage or ends up putting the actor in the production, the actor gets paid regardless. Oh, Allie, your shoes are amazing.

Are they Rothy's? They are. I was really excited to get Rothy's because my sister's had them for a while and she'll wear them to the hospital like when she does clinic and they're always sanitized because she can wash them.

I'm always amazed. I mean, I have a pair of Rothy's because now they make men's as well but it's truly remarkable when people like they're made out of recyclable plastic. And're just very comfy they automatically molded to my feet there's no break in no break in because i get blisters very easily i not only wear these to work but i take them on i like wore them when i walked kiki this morning i'm like wearing them

around the town there's an awesome selection of uh all the various prints and colors and it's usually when i'm thinking about shoes i'm thinking about which ones are going to get dirty. But in Rothy's, I'm empowered to order a light color because I know I can always wash them should anything happen. Never going to get dirty. There you go. Well, style, comfort, washability, they have it all. They also have men's shoes out there. They have handbags as well.

Rothy's has been changing the game when it comes to helping the environment also with fashion and comfort. Your new favorite shoes are waiting. Discover the versatility style you can wear absolutely anywhere and get $20 off your first purchase at rothys.com slash V-I-A-L-L. That is R-O-T-H-Y-S dot com slash V-I-A-L-L for $20 off your first order. Peloton. Peloton, they have bikes, they got treadmills. They also have a bunch of classes that you don't even need equipment for, like bar, boxing. What else do they got? Those bodyweight workouts are good too, because I've heard that strength training is the perfect kind of add-on to your cardio because it not only burns calories in the moment,

it continues burning calories for 24 hours afterward. So my sister is getting ready for her wedding and is really leaning into like the Peloton strength workouts because she's going to get ripped. She's going to get fit. She's going to look great in that dress. It's also wherever you are. Wherever you are. You'll always have your body. Your hotel room. You got your phone. You got your body. Well, there you go. Peloton is for you. Peloton instructors are highly trained fitness pros who motivate you through every workout, whether you're a regular at the gym or someone who is new or getting back into working out. Whatever your fitness level, Peloton instructors don't just teach you, they motivate you. Listen to your favorite music all

while working out. Experiment new types of movement judgment-free at a level and pace that feels good for you right now is the perfect time to try out peloton the peloton buck plus is now 500 less it's the best price yet including free delivery and setup and there are more game-changing prices available on the original peloton bike and peloton tread visit onepeloton.com to learn more it's worth noting that The Sun, which is a UK newspaper, released this article saying, before he was let go from the Fantastic Beasts 3 movie, that there was this article released saying... Called him a wife beater?

Well, they were shitting on J.K. Rowling for keeping him in the movie given the allegations that he was abusing his wife and they called him a wife beater. And that was actually when the first lawsuit relating to defamatory statements was heard, but that was in the UK. Johnny Depp was suing the newspaper in the UK. He's suing Amber Heard in the US. So these are very different cases. A lot of even lawyers make the argument that because Johnny Depp lost not just once, but he also lost on appeal in the UK, that it's very unlikely he will win in the US because it's harder to win a defamation case in the US than it is to win in the UK because our free speech laws are more robust here. But that's kind of not the right

argument because in the UK case, Johnny Depp was suing a newspaper and newspapers don't have to get all of their facts correct. We know this. I mean, look at tabloids. They can pretty much print whatever as long as they don't know for certain that the information that they are printing is false. So you'd have to prove that the newspaper had evidence. Had a reason to believe that it was true. Yeah, they had evidence that he definitely was not a wife beater and they printed it anyway saying he was. Yeah, that would be the instance in which he would win maybe that. And they would have to prove that the son had that information. So even if they had it,

he would have to prove it. Correct. Yeah, much harder. And that's why Amber Heard's testimony was so important in the UK case because all the UK newspaper had to show was we had enough reason to believe that this might have been true because Amber Heard was making allegations that who was Johnny Depp's wife that he abused her so that's enough which is kind of crazy right because basically what you're saying if I'm understanding and how it seems to be here too is that an allegation of any kind that any publication or outlet can run with it without any like that's all they need all they need is allegation. They don't really need to fact check. I mean. They just can't pull it out of the air, essentially.

They can't make it up. Yeah, there has to be a reason for them to say what they're saying. Whether they want to. Whether that's true. Whether they want to look it up or fact check it or get additional sources. Right.

Seems to be entirely up to their professional integrity. Right. Well, they have to show due diligence. And that exists here because again amber heard was making these these serious allegations so so very different cases very different legal standards very different reasons why uh a plaintiff would win in in the uk case versus the u.s case so still johnny depp is just it, it would be nearly impossible for him to win this U.S. defamation case. You think it's nearly impossible for him to win.

And we'll get into why. But let's get back into our timeline. So, yeah, June 2018, Johnny sues The Sun, which is that newspaper. Then March 2019, he sues for defamation in the U.S. court for $50 million regarding the statement that he is an abuser. Amber then files a 300-page response trying to get the case dismissed. That is not successful. So then that's when she files her counterclaim for $100 million, making the argument that Johnny Depp is calling her a liar, basically. Then in November 2020, Johnny Depp loses his U a liar, basically. Then in November 2020,

Johnny Depp loses his UK case the first time. And four days after he loses the UK case, that's when he resigns, or he has to resign from the Fantastic Beasts movie. And then March 2021, he also loses on appeal in the UK. So that brings us to where we are now, our defamation case here in the US. So that brings us to where we are now, our defamation case here

in the US. And this is all about whether Johnny Depp's reputation was harmed specifically by Amber Heard's statement in this Washington Post op-ed. And I think a good place to start and what's interesting and what really highlights the fact that this is very much a glorified pr campaign is because my first question is why is this case being heard in virginia because the washington post is a washington dc newspaper johnny depp and amber heard live in california this case could have been brought federally it could have been brought in california it could have been brought in washington dc so why virginia because their servers are in the Washington Post's servers are in Virginia and Virginia's laws allow these cases to be shown on TV, allowing Johnny Depp's team to

basically, to your point, is they don't give a shit about whether they win or lose. They want the world to watch this case and decide for themselves what they think of Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard. That's correct. So one of the reasons is, yes, Virginia laws allow this case to be shown on TV, and most courts in most states don't. But number two, it's a lot easier to get a jury trial in Virginia courts as opposed to any of the other venues. And that's really important for a plaintiff in a defamation case because judges typically don't award a lot of damages in defamation cases. Is that because, to your point, it's harder to win these cases and a judge is just going to look at the law, the facts, and they might say, hey, I don't, like a judge could be thinking i don't think you're guilty but you haven't the

burden of proof is on you and you haven't done your job where a jury might you know it's just a jury of our peers that's right we don't have law degrees we don't understand this stuff hours and hours of testimony they just get to decide for themselves. And it's kind of fascinating when you think of a jury, just like a bunch of people who don't have law degrees are interpreting the law and then applying it to decide someone's fate is kind of nuts. Yes, but the jury does receive rules. Sure. And that's what we're going to get into next because there are these six things that the jury has to get an answer on. And these are the elements of how to win a defamation case. So the first element is whether the defendant made a statement that was defamatory.

So was Amber the one who made the statement? Number two is, was the statement about Johnny? And it's worth noting that Johnny Depp was never named in this article. Was it about Johnny? That's arguable. The third element is whether this statement was public. It's pretty easy. Then this is the juicy one whether the statement was false and that's where of course all this contention comes from it's it's interesting that johnny depp is is claiming that he never abused amber heard because all amber has to show is that he abused her once because truth is an absolute defense to a defamation case. If I can show that what I am saying is true, this entire case disintegrates. So that's probably one of the most important elements.

Then there is a difference in defamation cases that have to deal with private individuals and public figures. There's a heightened standard for public figures, and that is the standard of actual malice. And malice has nothing to do with maliciousness. It doesn't mean that Amber Heard had to make these statements with the intent of hurting Johnny Depp. Malice is an evidentiary standard. And what that means is she, similar to a newspaper, had to have known that the statement was false and made it anyway or have reckless disregard as to the falsity of the statement.

That's the malice evidentiary standard that applies to public figures, which of course Johnny Depp is one. And then I have a quick question about that, which is just that when we're talking about someone knowing that it's false, would that mean that if Amber truly believes something to be true based on her lived experience, but then other documentation says that that is not true, Like where is that gray area in terms of like everyone's subjective version of reality versus like the more objective factual one? So that's exactly the role of the jury because their role is to be the fact finders. And that's why all of this witness testimony is so important. And we'll get into like the hearsay objections and why that is relevant because a hearsay objection is essentially trying to filter the best version of the truth. When you are a

witness and you are testifying about something that someone told you, that isn't personal knowledge. That is essentially a game of telephone. And so that's why we're getting so many of these objections because like the goal here is to find out what is the best version of the truth. And then finally, and this is also a hard one, we have to prove that Amber's statement was the sole reason why Johnny accrued all of these damages. And it wasn't just because he was getting old or his drug abuse or anything else. or anything else. It has to be shown that there is a direct relationship between Amber Heard's statements and Johnny's reputation being harmed

to the point of him losing roles and whatnot. And do they have to prove all of them, not most of them? Yes, all of them. It's not like two-thirds or some of them. You have to prove all of those in order to win. Correct. Which explains why it's, to your point, so hard.

Because, I mean, as I was driving in today, I was watching a bit of the trial and it seemed like Amber's team had some sort of psychologist, I't know as a gentleman testifying about what he thought about what he observed and they were asking questions about define uh domestic partner violence in terms of it can be verbal it can be uh you know you know trying to maintain power and listen to you now it sure seems like they were just basically trying to maintain power and listen to you now it sure seems like they were just basically trying to show that think what you want but like by the letter of the law we've we've shown that johnny depp has you know done x y or z he's he's name called amber he said some pretty uh terrible things to her you know and even if you believe john Johnny Depp to the point where he was forced, like he was responding, et cetera, et cetera,

all you're saying is, all a jury has to say is, maybe a jury member could be saying, fine, Amber Heard abused Johnny Depp. She's terrible, et cetera, et cetera. She's the worst person in this scenario. But Johnny did this, and that's all that matters. There could be video footage of Amber Heard punching Johnny Depp in the face 25 times. That is not relevant to the outcome of this case.

This case is about whether it is true that Johnny Depp ever abused Amber Heard and that if Amber's statements is the reason why he accrued these damages, like losing these roles. So it's funny that this has become such a case. I mean, it's not funny at all. But it's interesting how this case has become so much,

at least in the public discourse, like he said, she said, who abused who more, who started the abuse, who's the primary abuser. Conversations about like, is mutual abuse legitimate? All of these. And these are very important conversations to have. And I would argue that if there's one positive takeaway from any of this, because on balance, I think that this case is a lot more harmful for the world than any benefit. But the only benefit I think would be just shedding light

onto the fact that anyone can be a victim of violence, of domestic violence. It doesn't matter what your socioeconomic status is, what your gender is, your race, your circumstances. And I think that's important. It remains to be seen, and I agree with you. I think our hope is to try to pull out some of those benefits yes and the the things in the discourse that we can have around topics to learn from because yeah with the

fandom of it all like i think it's really interesting what you just talked about because i here's what's going to happen whenever whenever it is decided who wins or loses is that people at this point i think most people believe what they want to believe right especially the fans of the the respective parties in this case and so if johnny depp loses this case uh anyone who has supported amber heard is going to say see, she was the victim, Johnny Depp's this, that will oversimplify based off the verdict on both sides. I think both sides will do that. And I think it's important to understand what a verdict on any side means. It doesn't necessarily mean anything as it relates to what actually happened in this relationship when it existed.

Absolutely. And I think one of the other implications that certainly worries me is abusers potentially using defamation lawsuits as a form of extortion or like a threat to basically say, if you go forward about this allegation of abuse, I am going to sue you for defamation, which will keep the relationship going for however many years because these are very long and drawn out. So I'm worried about that. I hope that's not the case, but we'll see.

Nick, do you want to see what I did on Saturday night? Yeah, let's do it. Three, two, one. I'm not a chef, but look at me go. You made, this is Hungry Root. chef but look at me go you made this is hungry root yeah look at i had two burners going at the same time look at that and i have my tortillas warming up at the same time meanwhile i'm eating their chickpea cookie dough out of the bowl with a spoon not even baking it there are two ways to enjoy hungry root one is just to feed your stomach

the other one is to like, you know, to be sophisticated, to pretend like you know what you're doing. Well, and the thing is like, I've always wanted to like, quote unquote saute. And that's what I was doing with the, the like bell peppers and the onions. But I never have the motivation to sit there and actually like cut up all of the bell peppers and the onions, but it came in a pack of, they were already pre-cut up. So I just put oil in the sauce pan, heated it up, and then just dumped them all in. And suddenly I was cooking up a storm. And I used Hungry Root before they were a sponsor. And one of the things that I really like is that you can also customize. So if something doesn't look like it's right up your

alley, you can always swap it out for something you're guaranteed to like. So it's a great combination of like adventurousness, being pushed to try new things while also being able to rely on your old faithfuls. Hungry Root is the easiest way to get fresh, high quality food delivered to your door. They've got healthy groceries and simple recipes all in one place. A fun short quiz is all Hungry Root needs to get to know you, your goals and how you'd like to eat. Are you gluten free? Note it. Do you like sweets? They'll keep it top of mind and get to work. Spend less time shopping and cooking and more time enjoying healthy food that you actually love with Hungry Root. Right now, Hungry Root is offering the VibeFile listeners 30% off your first delivery

and a free gift with every delivery. Just go to HungryRoot.com slash V-I-A-L-L to get 30% off your first delivery and choose your free gift. That's H-U-N-G-R-Y-R-O-O-T.com slash V-I-A-L. Don't forget to use our link so they know we sent you. Let's jump into some of these elements and how the elements favor either Johnny or Amber, because I think that's really interesting. So the first element was whether or not Amber Heard wrote the article. And although, of course, she's the author, her name is on the article, she was actually not the one who wrote the title of the article. It was the ACLU?

Yeah, I think so. I think it was the ACLU because that's one of the organizations she donated money to. Right. So they assisted, I feel like, in the… I thought it was the Washington Post. Okay. organization she donated money to right so they assisted i feel like in the i thought i thought it was the uh washington post okay but it seemed to be a collaboration of some kind but um even if she wants to make the argument that she wasn't the run the one that wrote the title she did retweet the article including the title so that basically means that she admitted that that is what her

belief was. So as far as the first element goes, it's pretty straightforward, I would argue. Yeah, Amber Heard wrote this article. That's not really a huge point of contention here. The second element is whether this publication was public. Obviously, that is indisputable. was public obviously that is indisputable this but the the interesting an interesting element is whether or not the statements were about johnny and again this goes back to whether this goes back to the fact that johnny depp was not named in the article and i'm really surprised that amber heard went full force on saying like yes yes, this was about Johnny. He abused me. He sexually assaulted me with the wine bottle. He, you know, was the worst. It would have almost been easier for Amber Heard to just say this, this article wasn't about Johnny and to, and to have that

work in her favor. Because again, you don't have one of these elements, the case falls apart, which kind of brings us to this next element of whether the statement was false. So again, Johnny Depp is not claiming that he didn't abuse her as much as Amber Heard is claiming. He is claiming he never abused her. And this is arguably one of the elements that makes this case so hard to

win for Johnny, because again, all Amber Heard has to prove is that he abused her once. And I think the only reason why Johnny Depp is even bringing up all of the instances in which Amber Heard abused him, which again, are not consequential in this case, is because, again, this is not about winning. Legally, this is about winning in the public eye. And this is a Hollywood story, so everyone wants a villain and everyone wants a victim. And he has done a really good job at telling the story in a way that paints him as the victim. And as a result, there's only one other option, and that's that Amber Heard is the villain. And I'll be honest, it was painful for me to watch Amber Heard testify. I feel like this was a big hit for women. I feel like this is a big hit for survivors of domestic violence because there was something just really off-putting

about her communication style and the way that she was recounting the story. And I'm almost surprised that her attorney didn't prep her. At the very least, Amber Heard, I feel like, should have made sure that she was communicating in a way that at least came from a place of less hostility um and and more just like recounting but like the the it seemed like the public discourse at least online was was very they weren't believing her story and and that crushed me because i just don't want this case to be used as an example for when legitimate victims, and it's very much the case that Amber Heard is a legitimate,

I'm not, I'm not saying that she's not, but people who are coming forward about abuse, I just don't want people to say, Oh, you know, well look at, look at Johnny Depp to say, oh, you know, well, look at Johnny Depp. He was the real victim here, and therefore people making allegations should not be believed. That just really hurts me. Yeah, I think we just have to be careful,

and I think maybe that's what this trial can hopefully show us, is that this trial in no way, I think it should shine a brighter light on, we need to believe victims and we need to listen to victims and we need to hear their stories and not just outright dismiss them like we so long did in the past. And to your point, regardless of who they are, their gender or their age or whatever the situation is we need to to listen and and and believe them but we also need to look at the information and and we do live in a society especially the past few years where we're just quick to react and it's juice in it and when things have juicy elements like celebrities and public figures we we so quickly want to form opinions and then start arguing with people who might disagree with us and i and i think we just have to be careful about

that but we're also able to locate community of other people who agree with us and have a lot of other information that's affirming whatever initial instinct that we have so that only heightens our own convictions about something. It makes us feel like we are vindicated in the sense of like, there's all these other people. It's very easy to get the impression that like you are sharing a dominant belief because you were the information you're getting access to is the one that confirms your own one.

Yeah. And I mean, people are unfortunately going to do what we're all afraid is going to happen. I guess we just have to try not to give Johnny Depp and Amber Heard so much credit, regardless of what happened between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. Like it seems like, and I don't want to speak, you know, like that a lot of the, a lot of people who are former victims of domestic violence or current victims don't want

Amber Heard to be their spokesperson. That's the sentiment I see out there is that the people who are personally victimized, who are, you know, watching this has brought up kind of, you know, things from their past and triggering emotions, like they're angry that Amber Heard seems to have, you know, wanted to take up this mantle of being a figurehead of this cause. Yeah, that's really well said. Yeah, I was just going to ask, one thing I'm really curious about is, you mentioned about how in the way that Amber Heard was communicating,

how you found that to be off-putting. And I think that's something that we've seen so much, is the way that there's a large response on the internet of Johnny Depp's communication style being a lot more charming and endearing and people. And so I'm curious if you can talk about how, um, on one hand there's this, you're trying to prove authenticity in your testimony, but it also seems like there's a lot of strategy in the way that legal teams coach their clients to convey that. So what is that line between? Right. No, a hundred percent. I think that's also reflected even in their,

their outfit choices. And, and something that I was. What do we make of her copying Johnny Depp? Because that's. Bizarre. It's, it's,

it's happening. That's not like a subjective thing. She's mimicking. Right. His outfits. And. Isn't that trolling? It's so confusing.

But it's like a form of. And we remember in the playground where you would just like the cop, you know, when you would like, I know you are, but what am I? And you would like repeat someone, someone said, because like, it was just a way of kind of, it was trolling them. I'm like almost imagining Amber's lawyers being like, oh, he's doing so well. Maybe we need to like take notes and do what he's doing. Right. Because also I just, I'm surprised Amber Heard's appearance is coming off as very authoritarian. It's coming off as very rigid. And I would just imagine in a case like this, at least historically, it's more advantageous to come off as a little bit softer, more, you know, conducive to victimhood as we consider. Sure, sure. Like heightened femininity as, you know, women are more often victims of domestic violence. But instead,

we're getting something very different. And I would love to know, what is the reason? very different. And I would love to know what is the reason? I feel like there's enough of stories out there and I've heard plenty and I've, I know people who have met her that she has a, an aggressive personality. I mean, she has a reactive personality. And that seems to be pretty common knowledge. Um, at least for the people I've seen interact around on a regular basis. Totally. No, I totally see that. In fact, I knew someone personally who was a female and had an aggressive personality

very similar. And I noticed a lot of similarities. And it can just be a personality thing. And unfortunately, it just doesn't work in Amber's favor in this case. But anyway, yeah. So the other element is also, of course, because Johnny Depp is a public figure, that it has to be shown that Amber Heard made these statements with the knowledge that they were false or reckless disregard as to the falsity of the statement. And what's interesting here is that Virginia law only requires a statement to be true if

it's substantially true. So an example of that is like if I said Nick stole a car in West Hollywood and he actually stole a car. I don't think that you steal cars. And he actually stole a car in Beverly Hills. It would still technically be substantially true. It doesn't have to be 100% true or accurate. And so this is something that benefits Amber because obviously there is a lot of inconsistency in her statements.

There's also inconsistency in Johnny's statements. also inconsistency in Johnny's statements, but that's a big reason why Johnny's legal team is so trying to go for attacking her credibility. And that's what we see in the cross-examination by Camille Vasquez is her really doubling down on, is Amber Heard a credible witness? Because that is going to be important when it comes to the jury deliberation. Because the idea is if the witness is lying about one thing, they could arguably be lying about other things. Sure, yeah. I mean, I think we all, just in society, have that kind of line of thinking. Yeah. And I don't think it's any secret that the the lawyer that is cross-examining amber heard camille vasquez looks the way that she does uh i mean they're equally attractive kind of equal in stature

that was all very intentional i mean camille vasquez is the only california attorney out of the main attorneys everyone else is a virginia she's also an associate she's also an associate. She's also an associate. It would be unlikely for her to be chosen to be a main lawyer on this case, given the circumstances. But again, this was all seemingly very intentional because this is more so, I believe, a battle of optics. And this is really the theme that we're coming back to is, is this is not so much about the legal merits, but rather what the public perception is. And it's really interesting to see even, you know, these allegations that Camille Vasquez and Johnny Depp are engaging in

somewhat of a romantic relationship. I don't even like seeing that because. It discredits. Yeah. Yeah. But I think that's just a fandom exactly that's um it's weird i think i wonder if his team is fine with those types of rumors because it it makes him come across as an attractive partner or someone people want to consider to be in a

relationship right like i remember i you know thinking about this i remember when these claims about johnny depp came out years ago and then coincidentally the movie a murder on the orient express came out and he was a character on it and he played he played a terrible person like of an abuser a criminal and i remember watching it and having such a like a just like a bad thought about Johnny Depp in terms of like, why would he be in this movie? Like he's this certain person. And I, so when you start, like, I think part of rehabilitating someone's image is to like, see them with someone other people admire. So we're, we, we look at Camille and think of,

wow, what an impressive lawyer, attractive, sharp-witted, like taking over the case. And oh, could she be interested in Johnny? And if she's interested in Johnny, that must say something good about Johnny. All those optics, I think, play a role. Absolutely. That's really, really well said. And I think totally the intention with the physical touch and those moments of intimacy.

I think that's very much the message that is trying to be sent. And successfully, I think so. I mean, you go online and I personally have never seen anyone be Team Amber. Team Amber, why is this even like a twilight-esque? Yeah, twilight-esque. Yeah. Yeah, Twilight-esque. It's just the fandom. One thing that I keep hearing from lawyers who are covering this all over the internet is

that the jury isn't hearing all the things that we're hearing. They're not seeing all the things that we're seeing. They're not allowed to go on their phones. They're not allowed to go on TikTok or YouTube or watch this stuff. They're not allowed to get on the discourse or the Reddit pages or all the things where all these conversations are going out. But Amber Heard's team brought up a social media expert of some kind, a really accomplished man to talk about like hashtags. And I honestly don't know what the point

of them doing it was. It seemed and it was kind of it seemed like a really talked about moment because then he got cross-examined by johnny's team and what what seemed to be the lasting outcome of that uh witness was he to me and for a lot of people it seemed like he updated the jury on what the public perception is, right? or her right her likability by talking about like you know free johnny and justice for johnny and hashtag amber turd and things like that but at all it seemed to do was to in case you didn't know jury everyone but it was like everyone believed johnny it was like even their witness was basically saying he had to take out all these other hashtags because it was just, he couldn't, he literally, I think he said, I couldn't find

anything positive about Amber. Right. And I just thought, I'm curious what your opinion about that is. Like, was that a mistake by Amber's team to try to, like, what do you think their goal was? And does that often happen where a witness for one side can actually do more damage than good? Yeah, like an NBA would be like shooting for the other team. Sure, yeah. Well, I'm not a trial attorney, so I don't have a ton of personal experience

about how often this happens. I think everything happens, I think everything happens. And I think this is also just a really special case. And, and, and the fact that like, usually, um, attacking someone's credibility is not a way to win a defamation case, but this case is just so unique that, that when, when they, they talk about these things and it ends up benefiting one side or the other, yeah, I mean, but the thing is it can be taken in two ways. One, the jury can take pretty much the idea that Amber Heard is being hurt by all of this,

or it could be a more subconscious understanding of Amber, her, maybe if the world is all behind Amber heard, we should, we should be consistent with that. And who knows, but ultimately like, that's not,

that's not what the elements of the case are. I just wondering, cause I think it's interesting dealing with the human, human element of juries and how they could be influenced. And kind of to your, like you said, like, I wonder if juries are, and that's part, that's got to be the reason why they are told not to look at stuff. Right, exactly. feeling like well i mean if you know we don't want to be the 11 people on this jury who who went this direction when we find out the the world's going to be mad at us etc etc and it's that's it's that's a fascinating kind of element to it to introduce that via a witness when they

otherwise might not know i was surprised it happened for sure we have janine waiting for us so let's let's get to janine and get an update from her on what she's observed from this court case janine welcome back thanks for having me uh so excited to have you back uh my audience loved you thought uh your takes were really insightful and thought it would be great to bring you back since last time we spoke with you uh it was kind of everything up to that point uh where amber had taken the stand from her team but she had yet to be cross-examined by johnny's team up until that point and since then there uh she has been cross-examined and things like um the bruise kit uh slip up came up the the tmz um of it all where we saw the tape of the death of what was it it was the earlier tape from what would you call that not the trial deposition yeah and so you you saw her like even grab her face what looked looked like from, I guess, layman's term, it looked like we saw her

catch herself in a lie. So we wanted to bring you here to kind of get your take on everything that we have seen in the trial as it relates to the cross-examination and your read on who's telling the truth from someone of your expertise. who's telling the truth and from, from someone of your expertise? Well, who's telling the truth? 95% of people weighing in on court TV, know who's telling the truth and who's not. And that let's talk about this TMZ thing, because people are wondering, and they're asking me what's so significant about this. This is really significant for a couple of reasons. So what it is, is Amber said, you know, I'm trying to reach Johnny's team and they're not

answering because I wanted to let him know I filed for divorce. I was about to file for divorce and she kind of goes back and forth. And I wanted to let him know before he found out from social media because we informed TMZ, something along those lines. And she goes, we saw Tom Hanks do this about, I don't even know, eight years ago, he was on Good Morning America being interviewed for some sci-fi movie that he was in where he did numerous accents. I think it was like 30 different accents. And the host of Good Morning America said, give me one of the accents. And as he slipped into the accent, he leaked an F-bomb on Good Morning America. And as soon as the F-bomb came out, Tom Hanks went, oh, this is called the slip of the tongue. And that's what we have here with Amber Heard with that TMZ pre-recorded deposition from

a couple of years ago. It's significant because when she came out of the courtroom, that's the day she had no makeup. She had this little bruise probably she created from her bruise kit. And there was all these reporters here taking snapping pictures and their team, her team leaked it to the media. It's also important because when I was in the courtroom last week, when Amber's sister took the stand, Whitney, she said Johnny, she fell out of Johnny's good graces at one point because Johnny thought she was slipping information to TMZ and other social media outlets. And she said that was absolutely not true and absolutely not true. Anytime. So anytime we use a word like absolutely, we're like overselling it. Truthful people convey and liars try to convince.

So the more you say absolutely not true, the further you get away from telling the truth. Everything is untrue. Everything until we prove that telling the truth. Everything is untrue, everything, until we prove that it's true. So absolutely untrue is something that we often hear liars say. And the sister said it was, Johnny stopped liking her because he thought she was leaking stories. And lo and behold, we go back in time, Amber herself says, we leaked the story to TMZ. Interesting. And then the makeup kit for people who are unaware of, of that particular instance. And I, I didn't even realize at the time because, uh, so Amber was on the stand and talking about covering up bruises and she referred to the makeup that she used as a bruise kit and then quickly corrected herself. i think i don't think a lot of people

realize that a bruise kit is an actual name for something that is used in in the acting community or in in alley help me out here uh yeah like on like for screen like for tv or film typically yeah it's actually called a bruise kit yes It's actually meant to make it look like you have bruises. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah. I've had makeup artists either use this or something else similar. So it's like zombie attacks, any bruises.

It's called a bruise kit. As a matter of fact, someone on TikTok, you know that the video that was leaked to TMZ where Johnny Depp is filming you know Pirates of the Caribbean part five and he kind of loses his crap right he comes in he's he's slamming the cabinet doors right yeah someone on TikTok zoomed in on the table and on the table is in fact a bruise kit really so you can see it on the table. So go watch that clip, look at the dining room table and zoom in and you'll see a bruise kit and the bruise kit is used to create bruises. So she's, oh, well that's, that's what I call it. She's a terrible liar. I don't know if you saw this. I'm going to play this and hopefully you guys can hear this. I just put

this on my TikTok page this morning, but I want you to listen to this. She says, I was punching my head. Hopefully you can hear this. Ready? This is a picture of my Bruce Temple. Johnny had his hand on part of my face with my face down. And I was punching my head. I'm repeatedly punching my head. I was punching my head. I'm repeatedly punching my head. I was punching my head. I'm repeatedly punching my head. I was punching my, eight, nine. And my seven-year-old Jack, one of the things that Amber said is Johnny was holding her by her neck, pushed her down into the counter and she stared at his eyes and she saw nothing. It was black. It was black. So I said to my seven-year-old son, Jack, I go, Jack, grab me by my neck. We're going to do an experiment. Grab me by my neck. So as you might imagine, just like anyone listening to your show here, he came up from behind and grabbed me by my neck. I go, now

push me down. Jack pushed me into the couch. I said, Jack, how come I can't see your eyes? He goes, because your face is in the couch. I said, yeah, Amber messed up. She should have said he grabbed me by my throat and pushed me down. And I looked into his eyes. She has not memorized the script enough to actually be convincing. Not only that, Amber says the sister came from the top of the stairs down when her and Johnny were arguing on the stairs. That's what the sister, no, Amber says the sister came from the top down, but Amber's sister said she was in the living room and came up. So her own witnesses aren't collaborating her story. There's so many stories out there.

And I think we're going to have a witness this week that's going to contradict. It's Whitney. Yeah, she's the founder of the Art of Elysium Foundation. Yeah. What do you make of when she was saying I was punching myself in the head? Is that just like what a Freudian slip? What do you mean? Yes. So John Allen Muhammad, he's one of the DC snipers. He's since been executed. He had the death penalty. He was the older guy out of the DC snipers. He, he waived his right to counsel and represented

himself. Okay. He came out in shackles and the little outfit, the orange outfit, shackled on up and came out and said to the jury, by the grace of God, you find me guilty. I mean, innocent. It's a Freudian slip. So here it's a Freudian slip. Not only that, if you think about, if you go back and listen to Amber, her story about on the airplane, this is significant as well. So she's talking about being on the airplane. And this is where Johnny was loaded, right? You can hear him.

They have audio recordings of him going, oh, like a wounded animal. So she talks about, it's very interesting. She tells us the word slowly six times. So she talks about Johnny hitting her in the face in a couple sentences, but yet is telling us, she's telling us like the directive, like if you're reading a screenplay, you walk slowly into the room. She goes, I slowly walked forward. I slowly said six times in this short story, she tells us about slowly.

Why slowly so important? She then says, she was, I moved my seat so many times. I don't even remember. I wish I knew. I wish I remembered. I wish I remembered. Well, you're making it up. So just make up a number.

She says, I know I definitely moved once, which indicates to me she moved once. So she definitely moved once. Because if you move two or three times, you'd remember two unless she's out of her mind. So she says, I definitely moved once. I moved to the front of the plane. Johnny followed me. He sat in front of me. tried to get my attention. When I didn't give him my attention, he slapped me across the down. You sit in front of me, Derek. So Derek is in front of me.

So I'm here. Derek sits in front of me or Cass sits in front of me right here. And what happens is how are you now looking at me? Well, on these private planes, the seats swivel. So it would be Johnny sat in front of me in the swivel chair and was facing me. But she doesn't use any illustrators explaining this. So it would be Johnny sat in front of me in the swivel chair and was facing me, but she doesn't use any illustrators explaining this. When something is common to mankind, we don't need to explain it.

When something is not common to mankind, we explain it. I'm a body language expert. I talk about what is a start-stop sentence and I explain what they are. It's like a scar, right? There's a scar that's here. Something has been removed. That's why we have start-stop sentences. So she says, Johnny sits in front of me, tries to get my attention. I don't give it to him. He slaps me. She leaves out so much information. Our chairs are facing each other. He leans forward. He slaps me. Because, I mean, these seats even swivel. They're going to be a couple feet apart if he's leaning back in the chair. So we have this disconnect right here. Constantly disconnected. Interesting stuff. Do we have this disconnect right here, constantly disconnected. Interesting stuff.

Do you have any questions? Yeah, it is interesting. The first question that popped into my mind is, is the same analysis being run on Johnny Depp? Do we have any? So Johnny Depp is telling the truth. So you can only say he's telling the truth. So Johnny Depp is using illustrators that match his story when talking about when the bottle is

thrown at him, he says, Amber throws this bottle and his head jerks back. He is showing the body language of the victim where Amber, her body language is showing she's demonstrating doing the throw. Even her sister, when she was on the Stan Whitney, said that Amber punched Johnny in the face on the stairs. Two seconds later, about a minute and a half later, when she tells the story again, she says, Amber punched Johnny on the stairs. She demonstrated with the left hand. So what was it? Was the right or the left? I broke my right clavicle right here. It was broken years ago. I'm never going to point to my left clavicle. You remember, you tell the story from where it happens. What probably happened is Johnny was holding her by the hair as she's punching him right and left. So we're looking at illustrators. We have, I have talked about Johnny at length, and there's only so much you can say when someone's telling the truth. It's like, yes,

he's congruent. And I'm one of many body language and detecting deception experts talking about this. I train clandestine spies, the CIA, the FBI, corporate titans. And so every single human lie detector who has credibility and expertise is all saying the same thing. Johnny's coming across as congruent. Your body language shows up up to up to five seconds before your words. And we're seeing that with Johnny. So even if it's a half a second before, it's happening. So Johnny's words, Johnny's also talking in past tense.

When we talk about if either of you have ever been in a fight or had some type of surgery and you told me about it, you would tell me in past tense. I would be curious to know if there is an intersection between potentially trauma and the ways in which people answer questions truthfully or not. And just the fact that sometimes things are not 100% accurate all of the time, even in our analysis of things, even legal analysis. People don't get things right 100% of the time. And I just worry when we are focusing so intently on when Johnny is telling the truth and not when he is lying, which has been proven on the record, and also specifically paying attention when Amber is lying and not instances where she's telling the truth. I just... No, no, no. I talk about both. Sure. You have me on for five seconds.

So that's fair. I said, Johnny lied about taking cocaine with Whitney two or three times. Liars love the number three, unless it has to do with drugs and alcohol. And then it's two times a police officer pulls you over. Do you have any drinks? Yes. How many? A couple.

So I said, that's a lie right there. Johnny's lying about how often he did it it probably to protect Whitney because he liked her. And Amber is telling the truth about the verbal abuse. Amber's also telling the truth about Johnny being controlling. Amber's also telling the truth about what kind of roles that she should play. She's also telling the truth about Johnny's, in my opinion, my expert opinion about Johnny saying, you don't have to work. I'll take care of you. How do we know this? Because she talks about those things in the past tense because she uses illustrators and Johnny said, and he said, didn't like my outfit. She's telling the truth in the moments where she's using illustrators and she's talking in the past tense. Now, if she's talking in

current tense with trauma, if now I'm not a therapist, but in trauma that your story can sometimes be said, just like you just did with me in the current tense, if we're telling someone else what you need to do. Hey, when you get abused, here's how you apply to law school. Here's how you call for help. But we're talking about what happened on the stairs, what happened on the airplane, what happened in this alleged abuse where a bottle was put inside of her. So it's all fake. And the order doesn't mix up. You'll never mix up your neck from your throat. I don't care what kind of trauma you have. If I've been strangled, a man strangled me, a hotshot lawyer named John

out of Connecticut and left me for dead in his driveway. And I would never tell you that story by saying he grabbed me by the neck. He grabbed me by my throat and held me up against a door. And truthful people do forget details, but here's what they do is they'll fill in the details. They don't forget the order of a story ever. No person under any trauma forgets the order of the story. They'll forget details and they can insert it right back in. As a matter of fact, truthful people can even tell you the story backwards where a liar can't. Amber has emotion. She's upset about everything, including her dog stepping on a bee. That's not authentic sadness, even under someone with trauma. She's done all these interviews on TV where she said, I'm not a victim. You know, I look at myself not as a victim because I refuse to be

victimized. And here she's crying. My dog stepped on a beat. Her fake crying and fakeness is doing her disservice. I think there's a verbal abuse here. I think if she just stuck to what reality was, she'd be more credible. But this fake crying over everything, I wish I could tell you how many times I moved on the airplane. Why? Who cares? That's insignificant. It's fake crying right out of the gate, in my expert opinion. And not just me, every other expert that's insignificant. It's fake crying right out of the gate, in my expert opinion, and not just me, every other expert that's trained law enforcement, that's been trained by psychologists on how to read behavior. So stories, we forget details. We all do. It's impossible to tell us every detail, but you'll insert that detail in the right spot. It's also worth noting, at least in my law school,

we went through extensive training on how to ask questions in order to evoke a certain answer. And so I guess I'm just trying to reconcile the ways in which lawyers are trained and the tactics that they use to be very intentional in the answers that they aim to evoke out of a witness. In terms of like trying to get someone to slip up, so to speak? Sure. Or like leading questions or open questions versus closed questions. And this is all very interesting and, you know, of course, rooted in fact, but I'm just trying to reconcile the both of those forces kind of interacting with each other. If you are, all those things are being objected to every step of the way. The things I talk about is when Amber is telling her story at length, right? It's not just one word answer or a sentence.

It's her recapping what's going on and Johnny recapping at length because he talks a long time. Those types, I train lawyers. I train judges. I've trained lawyers for decades. So any lawyer that's going in, there's an association for lawyers. I'm brought in to teach them how to actually do trials because research shows if you like the lawyers even, it will influence the jury on whether they begin to like your client or not. That was really interesting and really helpful, Janine. Thank you so much once again. I kind of had some fun here. Thanks for bringing a lawyer to battle with me. It was kind of enjoyable.

Yes, yes. This is great. Really appreciate it. Thank you so much, Janine. Welcome back anytime. Thanks for being a lawyer. God love you. All right, take care.

Thank you for finding truth. Thank you for leading you. Truth's important. Listen, people say I have a bias towards Johnny and against Amber. I have a bias towards Johnny and against Amber. I have a bias towards the truth. So because I have a bias towards the truth, I focus on where the deception is. And there's a lot with Amber. So you'll see what happens in the case.

If you didn't follow it this morning, to keep your show evergreen, during this case, someone brought a baby into the courtroom and said, Johnny, this is your baby. We're soulmates. And that woman kept her newborn baby outside from midnight on because I was at the courtroom. I drove by at midnight to bring over a big, huge thing of cookies from BJ's for all the people. They stay in line from 7 a.m. the day before, 7 a.m. to get in the next day at 7 a.m., 24 hours. And that lady with the baby was there at midnight oh that's wild that's not that's not okay for them no that's a sidebar this case is crazy i say it's crazy you know i say it's nuttier than a snickers bar all right everybody thanks thank you bye spicy obviously she has a

lot to get out i think i think she's she's busy right right now i'm and i'm assuming she's busy right now. And I'm assuming she's probably heard it from all angles. I think these were great questions that you asked because, you know, listen, like even people listening to this show, I think what she has is a lot of information and it's very interesting. She's an expert. She's talked about her background.

As we listen to it, again, we, at this point in the trial, we believe who I think we want to believe. And when we are hearing it, again, we, at this point in the trial, we believe who we, I think, we want to believe. And when we are hearing, like, things that go against that, we can get uncomfortable with it. And I think it's always good to, like, poke hoes and challenge and ask questions. Your questions, I thought, brought a lot of better answers up from Janine to offer some clarity. Because, you know, even when we brought her on the first time, I think a lot of people were interested

in what she had to say, but there were certainly a lot of people, and that is the question. It's just like, well, you asked a great question as it relates to trauma. Well, if someone experienced trauma, they might be confused or their stories might seem disjointed.

And in having asked that question to neen hearing her articulate what would be disjointed and what wouldn't be disjointed is what seems like the message she's trying to convey you know i think part of it is she's talking about this 24 7 it's like going in and talking to like you know i remember like chemistry class and this you know chemistry professor it's like going in and talking to like, you know, I remember like chemistry class and this chemistry professor. It's like him talking about chemistry is like simple addition, which to me, I'm like, I don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Right. And so like sometimes I think, you know, when someone like Janine's talking, she I think is used to saying this stuff over and over. It's good to ask some of these follow-up

questions to offer some clarity yeah and and generally the way that I approach life and debate and problems is not so much like me versus the opponent it's us versus the issue or us versus the problem so I it's very it's very hard for me to feel like hostility or attacked when I love lively debate and, yeah, trying to get to better answers. And I just, there was something I felt like those questions needed to be asked because it can just be a little bit dangerous to go so, to draw conclusions that are so, that lack nuance, for lack of better words. I think it's really important to look at things from every side. And when we make these really sweeping claims that are one way or the other, she's absolutely lying. We don't know that. We don't know that. And even as an expert, even as a lawyer, you're never supposed to speak in absolutes like that because it's so easy. Like from a logic standpoint, all I have to do is prove one instance of an alternative scenario in order to invalidate always or never.

But if I say something happens often, then you can still show me another instance without killing my claim. And so I just, as a lawyer, and I recommend others to do the same, it's generally not good to say always, never, this is 100% the case, this is 100% not. The world is so much more nuanced than it is black and white. Um, and it's, I think more, I think it does require more effort to explore that nuance, but I think it's worth, uh, making that effort and, and trying to understand things more than in a way that's so binary, especially in a world that's so polarized already like we should we should move away from from analyzing things that way and and and just kind of exploring all of it and and not being so

totally yeah no i well we uh well i know i uh definitely agree with the nuance thing it says it's a tough thing to do these days only because so many people are uninterested in having nuanced conversations. Before we get to our office hours, this was great in terms of the legal stuff. I'm so glad. Yeah. I think what's the big takeaway when it comes to the Amber Heard and Johnny Depp trial?

From a lawyer's standpoint, we now, I think, have a better understanding of the defamation case as it relates to what's going to happen and what it says or doesn't say. Yeah. And then with Janine, it's this more comes down to who do we find to be more truthful and who's not? I think the important part that she said is like both people have lied at this. In her opinion, both people have lied. Right.

At some point point it's just a matter now we decide what are the bigger lies and what are the more significant lies let's lighten it up and get to our texting office hours shall we how's it going hi um i'm nikki i'm 32 years old hi nikki how can we help so i feel a bit stuck in a texting situation um obviously so i just wanted to catch you up to speed because it's actually with somebody i've dated in the past um so a bit over a year ago i met you know this guy off an app i actually became a really big fan of your podcast back then um so i was dating him for about three months um i was you know just wondering where we stood and i you know asked to be i'm sorry, I told him that I wanted to be exclusive

I didn't ask I didn't ask I remember that very vividly and the reason, just to give you some context that I had asked was we were hanging out on a consistent basis I had such a great time with him in person but the things that were throwing me off where our communication was like very

sporadic, like we like text here and there. He wasn't like a great texter in general. And then, um, one of the date nights that we had, um, I actually met his friends for the first time. It was such a great time. And then, um, you know, I slept over and then the next day, like I joined him on the couch and I noticed that he was like swiping on the dating apps and I was like, Oh God. So, um, I wasn't obviously sure where we stood at that point. So I was like, you know what, I'm going to sell him. I like him. And like, I don't want to date other people. Um, so he, he said, yes. Um, I could tell that he was hesitant. And then two days later he backtracked. Um, he sent me a text saying like, you know, you're great, but I just don't see this as anything like

real or serious. So I definitely stung, but, uh, you know, I just no bad blood. Like we kind of just left it at that. And then like we moved on. So I, you know, continue to date and put myself out there. And then, um, fast forward to actually last month, um, he reached back out, I guess he saw me on the apps again. So he was like, Hey, how are you? Um, you know, I saw you on the apps. I could just figure it out and say, hi. I was like pretty shocked that he came back around. Um, we ended up making small talk and then small talk, less of drinks. And then when we were, you know, grabbing a drink, I was like touching on the fact that we're just like casually sitting here, you know, after how he ended things.

Um, and basically he like took all accountability he apologized like up and down like he was like i should have told you how i felt um apologize for what i was just um he basically apologized for pulling the plug he was like you know i really liked you he was like um you know i should have just told you how i felt he was like i was worried that so he he his version of the story was i you, but some force came over me that made me, like, say, like, someone took over my body and told me. I was like, but I just, like, and then I need to break up with you. But now I'm no longer being taken over by the spirit or something. Yeah, no. And I'm glad you're saying that because I was sitting across the table

and I was like, are we like talking about like the same situation? And I was like, I'm confused as to like why you're confused because I did put myself out there and I did tell you I liked you. I mean, I asked you to be exclusive. Like that should tell you like how I felt.

Right. And he was like, no, this has nothing to do with you. It's all me. And he was like, I was worried that if we were going to be exclusive, that I was going to end up driving the relationship. I was like, I don't know what that means. And then he was like, I was worried you were just going to go along with it.

And I was like, why would I go along with it? If I wasn't feeling it, I would just break it off. It seemed very odd. Can I ask you a question? What if he would have told you the honest answer? And I don't really know but my guess is the honest answer was at the time that you asked me i panicked because i just wasn't sure if this was a fit and i kind of thought i should like keep looking and date other people and right i just didn't think i liked you enough. Yeah. What would you have said?

I mean, I would have appreciated the honesty, but of course, if I'm being honest, it would, of course, hurt my feelings. So I think, to your point, I don't know. I kind of viewed it as a cop-out a little bit, but maybe... I'll be honest. I think he kind of just made it up

as we were sitting there as to why he pulled the plug. And then he was saying how he was worried and scared and like he didn't know like how he you know how he felt in that time and he was like I just got frustrated and I ended up just like pulling the plug I was like okay um so there wasn't I asked these questions because it seems like it it sounds like both of you were trying to manage each other's feelings yeah trying to give the most honest answer while not trying to sound like a dick and what that usually does is turns into people saying things that when you really think about what they're saying makes no fucking sense because it sounds like what he's saying is i really liked you but like i i I, I, I don't know why I, I did like you and you're like, but I,

why didn't we date? Yeah. I think, right. Like, I think I was, I was really, really over, oversimplifying it. And I was like, I don't get it. Like, I like you. Why don't we just be exclusive? And like, it, it wasn't as cookie cutter. It felt like, um, on his end. And I think to your point, he, he probably just wasn't feeling it as much as I was. So, you know, he took, you know, he was apologizing, basically saying, like, he should have handled it better. And he was saying all of these things, like, you know, I thought, like, you and I were going to be, like, in a relationship at some point, and, like, saying, and I was like, wow, okay, I'm, like, really confused. I walked away from that thinking, like, the opposite. And I was like, I'll be honest. Like one thing that really threw me off was our communication was so sporadic. He was like,

uh, no way I felt that way. And I was like, what? So it was, it was kind of this weird, um, I, I walked away from it. Like maybe we just, it was miscommunication or like we thought of the wrong things. Um, so, so then at the end of the date, he was like, okay. Oh, he was like, well, I'm really glad we cleared the air. Like this seemed like a missed opportunity. Like I wish I talked to you about this sooner. He was like, how do you feel about going on a second date? And I was like, well, I'd be open to it.

But like, I really want to be honest. I just want there to be like open lines of communication. Like let's not, it looks like we did like a lot of assuming. I just don't want to like beat around the bush, like moving forward. So he was like, no, totally fine. I was like, I'd really appreciate if we'd like just communicate more um also between hangouts because it threw me off so much so he's like great so it seemed like we were on the same page a week later we went on another date it was a great date um and then um shortly after that the the texting

became spotty again so um at this point i think it was like the second week or third week. I remember I didn't hear from him for like three or four days. And I'm like, where did he go? Like, we've never like went this far without talking. And I honestly thought I had outghosted. So like, that was like the one screenshot I sent. And he wasn't responding.

Like you had reached out. Right. Like we were just having a normal conversation and I had asked a question about work and like, I just didn't hear from him. So I was like, oh, that's weird. Like, it's not like I left the conversation like closed ended. So then I sent a screenshot and, you know, I was, I was confiding, confiding in my friends and they're like, you know what? Like you told him that you guys wanted open lines communication. Why don't you just be direct? Like maybe he's just not a

texter and like, maybe you just, you could just handle it head on. So I was like, okay, fair. So then that's this, the picture you have, but I basically just said, you just, you could just handle it head on. So I was like, okay, fair. So then that's this, the picture you have, but I basically just said, you know, Hey you know, I'd rather just be straight up with you. I was like, you know, to not hear back from you, like the last few days, like, I just thought that was like a little weird, especially when we had said we wanted to communicate better. It just doesn't seem to be happening. I was like, is that just your style? Like, I'd rather just, you know, ask you straight up versus like falling back into the old pattern. So he was like, Oh my God, no, I'm so sorry. Like, I missed your text. Like, I really didn't see it. And he was like, he was like, please don't take this as like a sign of disinterest. He was like in this specific situation, like, I'm sorry. He was like, I really

just suck at like small talk. I was like, okay. So he actually ended up calling me after that. And it was actually a great call. He was like, you know, I don't want you to think like, I want this to be casual. Like, I would do want to see on a consistent basis. And this specific scenario was totally my bad. He was like, but I just asked you to be patient with me because I really do suck at small talk. Like, I'm sure once we hang out more, there'll be like more things to talk about. I was like, that's fine. I just want there to be like effort. I just didn't want it to be spotty. So he was like, okay, great. No, I totally get it. I mean, so your expectation though, is you want like ongoing dialogue via text with this guy? Yeah, I just, yeah. I mean, yes. And you know, you could tell me if, if I'm expecting a bit too

much, just at the fact that like we reunited, but my thing was like, you know, I understand we both have busy schedules. I don't expect to be texting like all day, every day, but I guess like in my mind, I'm like, well, we've dated before. We know each other pretty well. I thought we would kind of pick things up and not have it be a text here and a text there and have it be a day or two in between. So where did things leave off? Yeah, so basically what happened was,

so we were supposed to hang out later that week our schedules didn't match we continued to text here and there he was away that weekend um and then the second screenshot i sent was like the last interaction so i was like oh like you know i had uh he he was just asking me how my week when his weekend was going i was like i'm actually a little under the weather like um how's it by you and I was like how's your weekend going and he like literally didn't text back after that that's you asking him how the wedding was yes yes sorry how the wedding was he hasn't responded to how the wedding was no which I was like no this was um so it's been like about a week a little over a week now you haven't heard from him in a week no so that's

the thing like where I'm just like I don't't get it. Like, we just had this, like, great conversation. And, like, we had a great phone call. And then to make myself even more embarrassed, just to add a last layer. So I sent that text, like, on a Sunday. And I was like, you know, Tuesday, Wednesday, I was like, should I, like, double text? Just, like, is he alive? Like, I started to become, like, a little worried, which I know sounds, like, ridiculous. But I was like, you know, am I getting ghosted? Like, it really doesn't seem like his personality at all. Um, and I was like,

you know what? I asked him how the wedding was. It just seemed like I was becoming, I just don't want to be a nag at that point. I was like, I'm not going to say something again. So, um, there's four days later I get a call and I was like, oh, that's weird. So then I pick up and I quickly realized I was being butt dialed. I was like, oh God. So then I hang up the phone and I text him and I was, and I'm not sure if you see it, but I said, hey, like I could barely hear you, but I think you just butt dialed me. And then two hours later, I guess when he got home from the bar, he was like, oops, sorry. Like, how are you? Yeah, I was out. Did you respond to that? And that was it. I didn't.

And, like, that's kind of where I'm at now, where I'm like, How many days ago was that? This is even, like, Warren, that was about a week ago, like, a little over a week ago. Yeah. And I was like, you know.

I think you should move on. Yeah. Okay. I think this also highlights just how important it is to have communication compatibility because I am the type of person who I don't like consist I don't like small talk either I don't like ongoing text

messages and they're and that's with my friends that's with my family and that's with the people that I'm dating and so and I'm pretty straightforward about that and it seems like he was too and I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing it's just about you finding the person who also likes having an ongoing stream of conversation. And there are people like that. And I think those are the people who have communication compatibility. I am not compatible with people who want to text me all day. It's very frustrating for me. I don't like small, like I was just thinking like, let's say he answers the question about how the wedding was like, what does that, in my opinion, just like there. And maybe that's me just like being very efficiency driven, but I just don't understand what the value and even that

answer would be for me. I want to have a date set and we can have all of the fun banter, the flirtation in person. But, um, well, that's your point is that you have a unique point of view on this and you know what you like and that you're specific to what you're looking for. And that's a part of your compatibility that you're looking for. It's not something that most people assume is like a standard. My biggest note for you is that I, I, in this situation, I do think it was unfair for yourself to like, think, well, we dated before we can pick it back up. I think you almost needed to start over. There was like, there was almost too it back up. I think you almost needed to start over. Yeah. There was almost too much going on. I think he did the disservice of not,

you both kind of did the disservice of not being totally honest of what that situation was. You're being considerate of each other's feelings. And he asked for a second chance either way. And anyone who asks for a second chance, I think you really need to like really show that you really want this opportunity.

And he seems to not really show that you really want this opportunity and he seems to not be all that interested and even though he's not a texter if i wanted a second chance with someone and someone was like hey this is something this is a way to communicate with me efficiently i think i would want to like show that initiative yeah you want to go above and beyond yeah this person like who wanted to reconnect with you, there should have been like a rapport build and like, and whether it's in person or via text, you know, fine. He wants to not text all the time. Why isn't he taking more of the initiative to set up times to hang out with you, to get to know you, to FaceTime and have a conversation

like, yeah, I don't want to text all day, but I'd love to talk to you at the end of your day to see how it was and maybe FaceTime for 20 minutes and have a conversation in person. There's a bunch of things he could have done that he's not doing to show an actual interest in pursuing this. And the fact that he did reject you in the past makes you feel a little

vulnerable now. And I think if we're going to give people a second chance in a situation i think we need to recognize our vulnerability and like have certain boundaries set for ourselves and then communicate them and see if they're willing to like live up to the expectations that we have it's like all right you want back in fine but this is what's going on and it's good that you can acknowledge that you hit a wall in dating but like you have to be careful not to give them a pass and to lower your boundaries and expectations of them just because things are feeling a little dry like they popped up in a very convenient time for them because things have been inconvenient for you so as far as this guy if if i wouldn't if i were you i wouldn't reach out and if he reaches

out again i would just once again to say this level with him as much as you can it might be passive but just be like we don't need to like date do you want to like try to your point you're just like do you want to like put an effort into this do you want to like start hanging on a consistent basis or not but like if it feels to you like you have to encourage him or convince him to do something then i would walk away all right well thank you so much i really appreciate your time all right thank you bye bye bye bye delora thank you so much nick thank you it's been a pleasure it was really fun lots of fun uh please let my audience they can follow you, find you, all the things you're putting out there if they've enjoyed listening to you today, if they want to continue to follow along. I appreciate that.

My Instagram handle is pretty easy. It's just my first name, Dallara, D-E-L-L-A-R-A. My TikTok handle, on the other hand, is, it's also easy. It's LegalBaddy, which is self-explanatory. And yeah, I just love kind of spreading the message that you can be a professional and you can be a bad bitch. And we love celebrating that. And I was so happy to come here and discuss and, you know, shed a little bit more nuance on, on something that has been so polarizing. Well, thank you so much. It's been an absolute pleasure. Thank you guys

for listening. Don't forget to send in those questions for texting office hours for Ask Nick at asknickatcastme.com. Cast with a K. We are back tomorrow with Madison Watkins talking about the Kardashian wedding, more texting office hours. We didn't get to talk about Bachelor stuff today. There's too much going on. We'll probably dive in a little bit tomorrow. Thanks for listening, guys. Bye. Bye.

Hey guys, thanks for watching. But before you go, make sure you like, subscribe, and ring that bell so you don't miss any future videos like our Monday's Ask Nick, especially if you're looking for some relationship stories and relationship advice, as well as our Wednesday interviews with your favorite celebrities and experts. See you next time.