Amber Heard and Johnny Depp's battle for a defamation verdict came to an end in June, but that has not been the story's end by a longshot. The verdict in favor of Depp has been appealed, and now we're receiving more information about Depp's poor behavior on the set of the fifth Pirates of the Caribbean film.
Pre-trial papers have been unsealed that reveal several things that the judge decided not to state as evidence during the trial. One of them relates to Depp's defamation claim. One of the documents was taken from Vanity Fair. Depp was produced as a drunk and stoned character in Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales.
Mr. Depp appeared drunk and stoned on television, to the point that Disney studio executives called [his former agent Tracey] Jacobs and asked what the hell was wrong with your client. During the filming of Pirates 5, Disney told Ms. Jacobs that such behavior would not be tolerated, that Disney would not tolerate such behavior, and that Johnny and Disney would not be drawn in marriage.
Amber Heard's defamation lawsuit against Johnny Depp was based on the claim that the Washington Post op-ed she wrote, in which she claimed to be a survivor of domestic abuse, cost the actor millions because he lost his role in the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise due to it. However, this information, if true, provides another plausible reason for Disney to make that call.
The movies were mentioned many times during the trial because Johnny Depp's role in the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise was at the heart of his lawsuit. Although a Disney executive might have claimed the op-ed did not affect its decision to leave Captain Jack Sparrow, it was stated elsewhere in the trial that Depp had a verbal agreement to return for a sixth film at some point.
Depp made a huge amount of money from a deposition, in which he claimed he would receive a million alpacas as his compensation for future films. This was a question that was discussed in court and that obviously received a lot of attention.
The likelihood that this information might have altered the jury's opinion is unreliable. Both sides are now appealing the verdict, and thus this case isnt quite over yet.