Day 24 · Closing Arguments

Judge Azcarate delivered comprehensive jury instructions before closing arguments, outlining the seven elements Depp must prove for each of three op-ed statements and the five elements Heard must prove for each of three Waldman statements. The court defined actual malice, explained principal-agent liability for Waldman's actions, and addressed republication via Heard's December 19, 2018 tweet. Damages instructions were given, with Depp's recoverable harm limited to events before November 2, 2020. Juror names were ordered sealed for one year due to the case's high-profile nature.

Camille Vasquez and Benjamin Chew deliver Depp's closing argument on the sixth anniversary of Heard's TRO filing. Vasquez plays audio recordings of Heard admitting to hitting Depp and challenges the absence of medical records and photos corroborating Heard's injury claims. Chew examines the op-ed's defamatory implication, career damages, and walks the jury through the 21-question verdict form. A Rottenborn objection on the Kate Moss characterization was overruled.

Rottenborn argues the op-ed's statements are true and First Amendment-protected, and that Heard did not design or intend any defamatory implication about Depp — supported by ACLU testimony that the ACLU drafted the article. He walks through each jury instruction element, stressing Depp bears the burden of proof and that actual malice requires the higher clear and convincing evidence standard. Rottenborn then surveys alleged abuse chronologically using Depp's own texts, audio recordings, and video. He closes urging the jury to protect free speech and reject Depp's claim.

Elaine Bredehoft presents Heard's counterclaim closing, walking the jury through Waldman's three defamatory statements and noting Depp's damages are capped at November 2020. She recounts the May 21 penthouse incident to refute the "hoax" narrative and addresses the ACLU pledge distinction. Multiple sidebars interrupt over alleged misstatements about police testimony, Bonnie Jacobs' notes, and California divorce law. She closes citing $47-50M in estimated career damages and requesting $350K in punitive damages.

Camille Vasquez delivers the plaintiff's rebuttal closing, rebutting defense mischaracterizations of police officers, Walter Hamada, and other witnesses. She argues Heard lied repeatedly — about the charity donation, in the op-ed, and on the stand — and that her abuse narrative escalated to meet the lawsuit. Vasquez challenges Heard's counterclaim by attacking the Waldman actual malice and agency arguments and disputing her damages evidence. She closes urging the jury to restore Depp's reputation.

Rottenborn delivers Heard's rebuttal closing, challenging Depp's team for ignoring Heard's corroborating witnesses. He argues any single act of abuse—physical, verbal, emotional, or sexual—is sufficient to deny Depp's claim and support Heard's counterclaim. He contends Waldman's statements were made with actual malice attributable to Depp as his agent, and describes a coordinated 2020 Daily Mail campaign that damaged Heard's career before the UK trial. He closes urging the jury to give Heard her voice and life back.

Judge Azcarate instructs the jury on unanimous verdict requirements, presiding juror selection, deliberation conduct, and prohibition on outside research. She explains the two-part verdict form structure — one set for Depp's claims, one for Heard's counterclaim — and how to navigate to damages pages. Alternates Jurors 3 and 14 are released but remain under oath in case a seated juror is unable to continue. The jury retires to deliberate, and the judge outlines verdict notification logistics.