Here’s a summary of the provided text with the requested annotations:
The author, Miles Mathis, argues that the Heard trials were faked, asserting that the events and legal proceedings were orchestrated. Mathis was prompted to investigate after seeing a resurfaced joke about Amber Heard pooping in Johnny Depp’s bed. He points to several “red flags” that, in his view, indicate a staged event.
Firstly, Mathis questions the timing of the legal battles, noting Depp and Heard were only married for a year in 2015 and that Heard had publicly come out as gay in 2010. He suggests they were “Hollywood co-beards” and their marriage was a ruse, implying the subsequent trials were also fabricated. He emphasizes that both individuals are actors, skilled at creating fiction. Mathis contends that their careers were already in decline by 2018 when Heard’s op-eds appeared, and that the trials represented their “best movie offer in years.” He lists several of their failed films, such as Mortdecai, Black Mass (where Depp played Whitey Bulger), Alice, and Pirates 5. He also criticizes Heard’s filmography, mentioning The Prince, I Do…Until I Don’t, Her Smell, London Fields, Gully, The Pineapple Express, and The Informers. He also mentions Duchovny’s The Joneses.
A significant piece of evidence for Mathis is footage he saw in an Ozzy Man video on YouTube, which he claims showed the Heard trials. He observed that everyone in court, including Depp, Heard, and the attorneys, had computer screens in front of them, which he believes is unusual and indicates they were being prompted with a script. He further analyzes a scene where Heard’s attorney, Rottenborn, questioned Depp about the Washington Post op-ed, suggesting the exchanges were staged, particularly the attorney’s statement about moving to strike his own questioning as hearsay, and the judge’s inaction. He also makes a point of Heard’s attorney’s name, Rottenborn, and another female attorney’s name, Bredehoft.
Mathis highlights the involvement of expert psychological witness Dawn Hughes, noting her prior involvement in the R. Kelly, NXIVM, Weinstein, and Diddy cases, suggesting she is a recurring “fake events actor” hired by Langley.
The location of the US trial in Fairfax County, Virginia, is also seen as suspicious, as Mathis states it’s the “home of the CIA” and neither Depp nor Heard lived there. He argues that the trial’s location was chosen to be near the Washington Post because Heard’s op-ed that defamed Depp appeared there, but questions why Heard would write for the Post instead of a West Coast publication. He dismisses the claim that the Post’s online publication in Fairfax County justified the location, stating the Post’s editorial offices are in DC, not Virginia. He lists Herndon, Falls Church, McLean, and Langley as places in Fairfax County.
Mathis also finds the divorce settlement of Heard being awarded 65 million income that year. He argues that if abuse had occurred, Heard and her lawyers would have pursued more money. He also questions the divorce settlement’s non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), noting that Heard’s 2018 op-ed in the Post violated these terms, which should have invalidated her settlement and opened her up to a libel suit. The fact that Depp and his attorneys did not pursue this, and that Heard allegedly did not donate the full $7 million to ACLU and LA Children’s Hospital, with Elon Musk possibly covering some of her claims, further fuels Mathis’s skepticism.
He finds it unbelievable that Depp would settle with Heard for 7 million from him and after the jury found her op-ed to be a hoax. He also points out that if Depp’s attorneys were working on a percentage, they would not allow him to let Heard off the hook for the remaining $7 million.
Regarding the London trial, Mathis notes the absence of a jury, the judge Sir Andrew Lindsay Nicol’s quick decision, and his subsequent retirement. He questions Nicol’s previous handling of the David Sellu manslaughter case, which was overturned due to judicial malpractice. He also links Nicol’s lineage to the Stuarts and other aristocratic families, suggesting a deeper conspiracy. Mathis points to the “first secret terror trial of Britain” presided over by Mr Justice Nicol as another example of a fake trial, violating principles of justice. He also finds it suspicious that Nicol was reported to have presided over Warwick University professor libel cases in January 2022, after he had already retired in 2021. Furthermore, Mathis criticizes Nicol for deciding Depp committed 12 of 14 offenses based solely on Heard’s testimony, when no friends or family testified and no forensic evidence existed. He argues that photos should be inadmissible as evidence because they could have been faked with stage makeup.
Mathis disputes Judge Nicol’s rejection of Heard being a “gold-digger,” citing the fact that her charitable donations were not as claimed. He questions the appeals judges’ statement that Heard’s credibility was not a primary factor, asserting that it was central to the trial. He concludes that the UK trial was scripted for Depp to lose, while the US trial was scripted for him to win, allowing “CIA/MI6” to achieve “full-spectrum destruction of the heterosexual relationship.”
Finally, Mathis expresses doubt about the validity of Depp and Heard’s marriage ceremony on Depp’s private island in the Bahamas, questioning who officiated and the lack of a marriage certificate. He also questions why Depp did not sue the Washington Post for defamation in the US when he sued The Sun in London, given the Post’s deeper pockets. He reiterates that the trial’s location in Fairfax County was likely to facilitate CIA staging. He points out that the Washington Post still has Heard’s op-ed online, with only a note added, despite the jury finding it false and defamatory, and questions why Depp hasn’t sued the Post to have it removed. He notes the date of the op-ed, December 18, 2018, as 18, or “Aces and eights twice,” signifying a coded message. He also includes footnotes discussing Whitey Bulger as an FBI actor and the declining subscriber numbers of the Washington Post, LA Times, and New York Times.