That’s true in American civil cases too. Only criminal cases have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s why rape cases are often encouraged to go through civil court rather than criminal court, as distasteful as that is because of the monetary award.

I know people are spouting the phrase, but that’s just because they heard it on Law & Order and now they’re playing armchair legal expert.

That’s also why Heard lost this case. If it was “beyond reasonable doubt" she wouldn’t have. It’s not reasonable that DV didn’t go both ways here, due to his past behavior and his addiction with blackouts.

He had to prove it was more likely than not, given the evidence, that she lied. And she got caught in multiple lies on the stand. This case still wasn’t about the abuse; realistically, I don’t know that it ever can be.

If you were on the jury here, you wouldn’t have been able to hang the jury except as an act of civil disobedience because your scope of consideration would have been very narrow via jury instruction.

Well, maybe. Johnny Depp is heading back to trial. Did you hear that? Apparently, he assaulted a crew member on set, punching him multiple times in the abdomen. Then, after he got pulled off the guy, he tried to get a manager to punch the guy in the face by offering him $100K.

I’m not sure what movie it was, maybe Transcendence, maybe Through the Looking Glass or the last Jack Sparrow movie. It was during that general time frame.

So, if it comes out after that trial that that’s the reason he lost the Jack Sparrow character, then there’s grounds for an appeal. It also might explain why it wasn’t brought up during this trial. I was not satisfied with that part of the defamation charge. They didn’t prove that point in my opinion. It was all assumption.

This case is never going to end. Aaarrrrrgggghhhh!!