Michael Spindler
Michael Spindler is a forensic accountant at B. Riley Advisory Services, CPA-licensed in six states and certified as a fraud examiner and in financial forensics, with practice since 1990. He was retained by Depp's legal team as an economic damages expert and had previously performed paid expert work for Depp in a separate lawsuit. He was recalled on Day 21 as a rebuttal expert against Heard's damages analyst Kathryn Arnold.
Testimony Impact
Spindler testified on Day 13 presenting a two-component lost earnings analysis totaling $40.3M: $20.25M net from the lost Pirates 6 role (derived from Whigham's testimony) and approximately $20M net from reduced non-franchise bookings against a 2017 baseline, published to the jury via demonstrative Exhibit 1240. On cross, Rottenborn attacked his assumed causation, his reliance on Whigham's unverified account for the Pirates 6 component, and his use of Depp's peak earning year as the baseline — drawing the concession that Spindler never examined alternative causes such as the UK Sun lawsuit or Depp's declining box office performance. Recalled on Day 21 as a rebuttal witness, Spindler called Arnold's comparable-actor analysis "not adequately supported" and presented Heard's actual contract and tax-return figures as a factual counter-baseline, identifying 2019 as a "clean year" at $2.6–3M. On that cross, Rottenborn confined his role to arithmetic rebuttal and drew the concession that Spindler had never served as a testifying expert calculating damages from defamation against an actress.
Notable Quotes From The Record
“I concluded that Mr. Depp suffered lost earnings of about $30 million.”
Spindler's oral summary figure, stated before the demonstrative chart was published; notably lower than the $40.3M grand total the chart ultimately showed.
“the loss related to the loss of that role and that franchise picture was $22.5 million, based on testimony provided by Mr. Jack Whigham”
Identifies the Pirates 6 component as the largest single item and ties it explicitly to Whigham's testimony rather than independent calculation.
“Mr. Whigham testified that that was a typical year for Mr. Depp, and it's also the most recent, clean year”
Rationale for choosing 2017 as the damages baseline: both agent-confirmed as typical and uncontaminated by the op-ed's effects.
“Well, that's grand total. That's the sum of those two components for total lost earnings of $40.3 million.”
Final damages figure from the chart, higher than the $30M stated orally earlier in the examination.
“Correct. And I'm not acknowledging any of this being accurate. I'm just saying that that wasn't part of my calculations.”
Spindler attempts to preserve his credibility by clarifying he is not conceding the factual premises of Rottenborn's questions, only the scope of his analysis.
“That sounds like hyperbole to me. I didn't take that very seriously.”
Spindler dismisses Depp's own statement about refusing Pirates 6 for any sum, a response Rottenborn used to suggest the expert selectively weighed evidence favorable to his client.
“2017 was a year in which Mr. Whigham indicated that that was a typical year for Mr. Depp. He had a studio. He had an independent. He had an endorsement deal.”
Spindler anchors the base year choice in Whigham's testimony and the composition of Depp's income that year, directly rebutting the cross-examination challenge that 2017 was an anomalous peak.
“You're taking a look at what Mr. Depp would have been expected to earn in a typical year, and then you're comparing that to the period of time where you're analyzing following the op-ed from December of 2018 through October 2020.”
Spindler restates the core logic of his damages model in plain terms, reinforcing that the methodology is a straightforward expected-versus-actual comparison tied directly to the op-ed.
“It is not adequately supported, and it is unreasonable.”
Spindler's headline opinion on Arnold's damages analysis — the central purpose of his recall as a rebuttal expert.
“you also don't have the - any potential impact from the alleged defamatory Waldman statements that occurred in April of 2020. So 2019 is clean of all that.”
Defines the 'clean year' concept that anchors Spindler's historical-baseline methodology.
“That methodology was unsound. It's just unsupported. There are no numbers. There's no data that she provided in support for that.”
Direct attack on Arnold's comparable-actor methodology, the foundation of Heard's lost earnings claim.
“There was a slight increase during that period of time in her earnings from 2013 through 2019.”
Spindler acknowledges an upward earnings trend in Heard's career through 2019, supporting the premise that her trajectory was positive before the alleged defamation.
“That's correct. I'm not testifying on causation issues.”
Spindler confirms he cannot speak to whether the Depp/Waldman statements caused Heard to lose roles, limiting the evidentiary reach of his rebuttal opinion.
“I've been involved in defamation cases, but I've not done the calculations as an expert.”
Spindler concedes he has no prior experience as a testifying expert on actress defamation damages, undercutting his authority to rebut Arnold's methodology.
Key Moments
Dennison publishes demonstrative Exhibit 1240 to the jury — a two-component chart showing $20.25M for the lost Pirates 6 role and ~$20M for reduced non-franchise bookings, for a grand total of $40,318,237, superseding Spindler's earlier oral figure of approximately $30M.
Day 13 · Direct of Michael Spindler
Rottenborn establishes that Spindler assumed all damages flowed from the op-ed without examining alternative causes, listing serially the UK Sun article, the UK lawsuit, Depp's drug and alcohol use, and his declining box office performance — none of which Spindler analyzed.
Day 13 · Cross of Michael Spindler
Rottenborn exposes the internal inconsistency in Spindler's base-year logic: 'So if 2017 was clean, then the first 352 days of 2018 were also clean, weren't they, sir?' — pointing out the op-ed was not published until December 18, 2018.
Day 13 · Cross of Michael Spindler
Spindler dismisses Depp's own public statement that he would not do Pirates 6 for $300M and a million alpacas as 'hyperbole,' revealing a selective reading of the record that the jury could weigh against his Pirates 6 component.
Day 13 · Cross of Michael Spindler
On two-question redirect, Spindler defends 2017 as the base year — more recent than 2016, agent-confirmed as typical, and that 2016 would have been even higher due to an endorsement deal — directly rebutting the cross-examination's peak-year challenge.
Day 13 · Redirect of Michael Spindler
Recalled as rebuttal expert, Spindler delivers his headline opinion: Arnold's analysis is 'not adequately supported, and it is unreasonable,' attacking her comparable-actor methodology as producing 'no numbers' and 'no data.' He identifies 2019 as Heard's 'clean year' at $2.6–3M, anchoring his historical-baseline alternative.
Day 21 · Direct of Michael Spindler
Rottenborn elicits that Spindler offers no opinion on causation or the impact of the Depp/Waldman statements on Heard's career, and that he has never served as a testifying expert calculating damages from defamation against an actress — confining his rebuttal to Arnold's arithmetic alone.
Day 21 · Cross of Michael Spindler
Evidence From Their Proceedings (8)
Nov. 2020 'Disney Scratches Depp POTC6 Return' Article
A news item dated November 5, 2020, headlined 'Disney reportedly scratch plans for Depp's POTC6 return,' introduced as Deposition Exhibit 60 during Tina Newman's testimony and…
Catalog entry →April 2018 Dan Wootton / The Sun 'Wife Beater' Article
April 2018 article by Dan Wootton in The Sun calling Depp a 'wife beater,' published approximately eight months before the Washington Post op-ed.
Catalog entry →Heard Tax Returns 2013–2019 (~$10M total)
Heard's tax returns for 2013–2019 showing total compensation of approximately $10 million.
Catalog entry →October 2018 Press Reports on Depp's Pirates 6 Exclusion
October 2018 press articles reporting that Disney had decided not to cast Depp in Pirates of the Caribbean 6, published approximately two months before the op-ed.
Catalog entry →Spindler Annual Income Chart 2009–2020
Demonstrative earnings chart from Spindler's expert report showing Depp's annual income from 2009 to 2020, drawn from records provided by Ed White's office.
Catalog entry →Spindler Deposition Transcript (Vol. 2, Mar. 25)
Spindler deposition transcript, Volume 2, March 25, referenced by Rottenborn at the first sidebar.
Catalog entry →Spindler Expert Report (scope / designation)
Spindler's expert report referenced in sidebar discussions about his designation boundaries, covering historical earnings only.
Catalog entry →Spindler Lost Earnings Demonstrative ($40.3M)
Lost earnings demonstrative chart prepared by Spindler's firm showing a two-component breakdown and a $40,318,237 total, used as a demonstrative and not moved into evidence.
Catalog entry →