“She didn’t but it doesn’t matter”: Amber Heard’s attorney claimed actress should win case even if she chopped Depp’s finger with axe

On Friday, May 27, Amber Heard's attorney Benjamin Rottenborn slammed Johnny Depp and his legal counsel during his closing arguments. Rottenborn also made some questionable statements while addressing the jury members.

In his argument, Rottenborn insinuated that the jurors' verdict should favor Heard even if the actress (hypothetically) cut off Depp's finger in the controversial 2015 incident in Australia. The attorney suggested that it did not matter whose side of the claims were true regarding Depp's severed fingertip incident.

Furthermore, Rottenborn proceeded to accuse that most of the witnesses produced by Depp's legal team were under the actor's 'payroll.' Rottenborn seemed to shift the focus towards Heard's 2018 op-ed, which is at the crux of the lawsuit. In the trial, the jurors are supposed to determine whether the op-ed was defamatory to Depp or not. They would also determine if Heard wrote the article with the intent to malign Depp's career.

---

What did Amber Heard's attorney say about Amber Heard hypothetically chopping off Johnny Depp's finger?

While addressing the jurors, the actress' attorney Benjamin Rottenborn explained how Heard's involvement in allegedly abusing Depp should not matter in the jury's verdict. Rottenborn said:

"There's been testimony about what happened to cut the finger off, but frankly it's irrelevant to your deliberations here. Amber could have chopped it off with an axe and it has nothing to do with whether or not Mr. Depp abused her. She didn't but it doesn't matter."

During the trial, the 58-year-old Pirates of the Caribbean star claimed that Amber Heard threw a vodka bottle at his finger which severed the fingertip and fractured it. Meanwhile, the 36-year-old Aquaman star claimed that Depp sustained the injury when he punched a telephone onto the wall.

---

Is Rottenborn's statement correct?

While many found the statement to be uncanny, as per the lawsuit, the main deciding factor is whether either party is guilty of defamation of the other. This makes Rottenborn somewhat correct, as the jury's deliberation would be based on whether Amber Heard's op-ed in The Washington Post was aimed at Johnny Depp or whether it was defamatory in nature.

However, Rottenborn could also be wrong, as the jury may find both Heard and Depp not guilty of defamation if the deliberation comes to the verdict that there was mutual abuse. Since the trial is not about the abuse but the abuse allegations, Heard's legal team was required to prove that Depp abused the actress. Meanwhile, Depp's legal team had to prove that Depp was not the abuser in any instance, which in turn would make the claims in Heard's op-ed defamatory.

According to legal YouTuber and former Los Angeles-based Deputy District Attorney and lawyer Emily D. Baker, the jury may decide that there was no defamation from either party involved. Baker also added that the jury might also decide that either Johnny Depp or Amber Heard is guilty of defamation towards the other.

In a YouTube live video, where she reacted to the closing arguments, Baker said:

"I do not see a path to both sides winning on the defamation…I don't think both can win, both can lose."

With the jury still in deliberation over the Memorial Day Holiday weekend, the final verdict is expected to be out on Tuesday, May 31.