Amber Heard loses effort to set aside defamation verdict and get a new Johnny Depp trial

The judge in the Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard defamation case ruled Wednesday against Heard's attempt to get the $10 million verdict against her set aside and a new trial ordered.

Judge Penney Azcarate, the Fairfax County judge who presided over the six-week spectacle trial, issued a written order, obtained by USA TODAY, denying Heard's multiple reasons for seeking a do-over trial.

Her ruling was swift: Heard filed her motion seeking to vacate the verdict last week; Depp's legal team responded on Monday.

"Defendant Amber Laura Heard's Post-Trial Motions I through VI are DENIED for the reasons stated on the record," Azcarate's order read.

'Deeply troubling': Amber Heard's attorney's claim juror served improperly in Johnny Depp defamation trial

Johnny Depp's lawyers respond, argue against Amber Heard's 'outlandish' efforts to get a new trial

In addition, the judge denied Heard's motion for a mistrial on due process grounds: Heard's lawyers asserted one of the jurors who ruled against her in favor of Depp was not properly vetted by the court.

The judge said that under Virginia court rules, Heard's legal team should have raised the issue at the time the jury was picked, and she presented no evidence that Juror 15's inclusion on the panel "prejudiced" Heard in any way.

"Juror Fifteen was vetted by the Court on the record and met the statutory requirements for service. The parties also questioned the jury panel for a full day and informed the Court that the jury panel was acceptable. Therefore, Due Process was guaranteed and provided to all parties in this litigation," the judge's order said. "There is no evidence of fraud or wrongdoing"

Through one of his lawyers, Benjamin Chew, Depp said he was "most gratified by the Court’s rulings.”

USA TODAY has reached out to Heard's legal team for comment.

Original filing: Amber Heard files to dismiss verdict or grant retrial in Johnny Depp defamation case

Azcarate's order is final. That means there won't be another trial in Fairfax County in suburban Washington D.C. to transfix the nation for weeks with toxic testimony about the volatile 15-month marriage of two movie stars and whether either defamed the other with shocking allegations of abuse.

But the legal battle will continue: Heard has vowed to pursue an appeal to a Virginia appellate court. She must post a bond for $10.3 million plus 6% interest while her appeal is pending.

Last month, the jury in the case found overwhelmingly in Depp's favor that Heard defamed him when she published a column in The Washington Post in December 2018 calling herself a victim of domestic abuse. Depp's name was not mentioned but during their 2016 divorce proceedings she had accused him of abusing her.

Depp sued her for defamation in 2019, seeking $50 million. She countersued, also for defamation, seeking $100 million.

The jury agreed Heard had defamed Depp and awarded him more than $10 million in damages. The jury also awarded Heard $2 million in damages over remarks Depp's lawyer at the time said about Heard's abuse allegations being a "hoax."

Juror in Amber Heard case said she wasn't 'believable.' What experts in domestic and sexual violence say about believability

LEGAL QUESTIONS ANSWERED: Johnny Depp won his defamation suit against Amber Heard. So what happens now?

Following the verdict, Heard and her lawyers made a series of TV appearances to talk about the outcome, and to lament the social media commentary during the trial, which was overwhelmingly against Heard.

Heard's legal team filed a 53-page brief arguing that the verdict was unfair, inconsistent and "excessive," citing multiple reasons, including that Depp did not present evidence of required "actual malice," and that what Heard wrote in her column was "true" and thus protected by the First Amendment.

In response, Depp's brief argued that Heard's legal team failed to present sufficient reasons for setting aside the jury's decision or for retrying the case and that her arguments were "outlandish" and verges into the frivolous."

"Though understandably displeased at the outcome of the trial, Ms. Heard has identified no legitimate basis to set aside in any respect the jury's decision," Depp's lawyers argued in their brief. "Virginia law is clear that a verdict is not to be set aside unless it is 'plainly wrong or without evidence to support it.' "

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Amber Heard loses setting aside verdict, get new Johnny Depp trial