Eagle-eyed Twitter users ridiculed Heard for her ‘failed attempt at poetic justice’
The actress wore a plain black dress to receive the verdict in Virginia yesterday
She wore the same dress to file a restraining order against Depp in LA in 2016
And she donned an identical outfit again in 2020 when attending court in the UK
She was accused of trying to orchestrate a ‘PR stunt’ with the somber outfit
Social media hawks following the Depp vs. Heard trial have ridiculed Amber Heard’s failed attempt at poetic justice after noticing the Aquaman star wore her infamous ‘funeral dress’ at the courtroom yesterday.
The same plain black dress was worn by Heard when she filed her restraining order against Johnny Depp in LA as their marriage crumbled in 2016, then again in London in 2020 while attending court for the defamation case between Depp and British newspaper The Sun.
Heard herself even posted snaps of the outfit from both events on social media in March 2021 as the Pirates of the Caribbean actor lost his bid to appeal the court’s ruling in favor of The Sun, in what many saw as a snide dig at her former husband.
‘One dress, four years apart. Sometimes it’s important to wear the same thing twice,’ the 36-year-old wrote.
Eagle-eyed Twitter users ripped into Heard last night, having spotted she was clad yet again in the same somber outfit as she left the courtroom after learning she will be forced to pay $8.35million in damages to her 58-year-old ex-spouse.
‘Sometimes it’s important to wear the same dress three times. The day you ruined his life, the day you agreed to lie in the court of law, the day you lost,’ one user wrote, poking fun at Heard’s poorly-aged post from last year.
Another commented: ‘This manipulative show pony planned to use the verdict as a PR stunt when she put on her ‘Amish dress’ for the 3 times. All the PR in the world can’t fix her reputation now.’
Some accused the actress of trying to stage ‘yet another photo op’ while others exclaimed ‘third time is NOT a charm!’ and taunted ‘your lucky black dress didn’t work?’
Depp yesterday won his libel case against former spouse and fellow actor Heard, marking the culmination of a blockbuster trial that has captured attention around the globe.
The jury at the Fairfax County court in Virginia yesterday ruled in favor of all three allegations of defamation levied by Depp against Heard, finding that she falsely and knowingly accused him of domestic abu’se.
The highly-publicized case has set the internet ablaze in recent weeks, and Heard’s attorney said her client could appeal the verdict yesterday by arguing the jury would have been strongly swayed by the overwhelmingly pro-Depp messages circulating on social media.
Elaine Charlson Bredehoft, who represented Heard throughout the trial, appeared on the Today Show on Thursday to confirm the actress plans to appeal and has ‘excellent grounds’ to do so.
The attorney insisted the jury had been heavily influenced by public opinion, particularly on social media, despite strict orders from the judge not to read anything about the case outside of court.
‘There’s no way they couldn’t have been influenced. It was horrible. It was really, really lop-sided,’ Bredhoft said of public sentiment against Heard in the case.
‘It’s like the Roman Coliseum, how they viewed this whole case.’
Bredehoft said that Depp’s legal team had tried to ‘demonize Amber and suppress the evidence.’
‘We had an enormous amount of evidence suppressed in this case that was in the UK case,’ she said, referring to Depp’s defamation suit against The Sun, which he lost.
‘In the UK case when it came in, Amber won, Mr. Depp lost.’
Asked whether the verdict meant that the jury simply didn’t believe Heard, Bredhoft doubled down and snapped back: ‘That’s because she was demonized here.’
‘A number of things were allowed in this court that should not have been allowed and it caused the jury to be confused,’ she said.
The impact of the trial on Depp and Heard’s respective careers in the entertainment industry remains to be seen, but legal and entertainment experts said both actors’ reputations have been damaged.
‘Both of them will work again, but I think it will be a while before a major studio will consider them safe’ enough to bet on,’ said former entertainment lawyer Matthew Belloni, who writes about the business of Hollywood for the newsletter Puck.
Depp, a three-time best actor Oscar nominee, was a bankable star leading up to the release of Heard’s defamatory op-ed in 2018 and is best known for his portrayal of the beloved Captain Jack Sparrow in the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise.
But in recent years he has only appeared in a series of smaller films, few of which were considered a commercial success.
Heard’s acting career has been more modest, and she is set to appear in only one upcoming high-profile role – the sequel to superhero flick Aquaman – though petitions to have her removed from the movie have received millions of signatures.
British PR expert Mark Borkowski said: ‘There is no way back for Heard in Hollywood. If you’re sitting there making a movie or thinking about casting it, are you going to hire her?
‘Look at the huge outcry about Aquaman 2 [where a petition to have her kicked off the film hit four million signatures last night]. The trial pollutes any marketing or PR to launch a film.’
Eric Rose, a crisis management and communications expert in Los Angeles, called the trial a ‘classic murder-suicide,’ in terms of damage to both careers.
‘From a reputation-management perspective, there can be no winners… It becomes more difficult now for studios to hire either actor because you’re potentially alienating a large segment of your audience.
Source & Credit: makaluhilsonline.com