The high-profile defamation case between Johnny Depp and his ex-wife Amber Heard reached verdicts earlier today, with them both awarded damages against the other.
The Pirates of the Caribbean actor, 58, had sued the Aquaman star, 36, for $50 million over an op-ed about domestic violence published in the Washington Post in 2018.
Depp had argued that the article implied that he had abused Heard, although it didn't directly name him - with him claiming that the op-ed impacted his ability to work.
She had countersued for $100 million, with the case between the former couple - who were married from 2015 to 2017 - heard in Fairfax County, Virginia, over recent weeks.
The jury found in favour of Depp in his case against Heard, awarding him $15 million in damages, and found in favour of one of Heard's counterclaims, awarding $2 million to her.
We've put together a summary of the statements at the centre of both elements of the case, as outlined in the verdict which was read out in court earlier today.
Depp's claim #1
The first verdict read out in court related to a statement made in the online version of the Washington Post op-ed, which Depp had claimed had been defamatory against him.
The statement in question, as outlined in the verdict, read: "I spoke up against sexual violence and faced our culture's wrath. That has to change."
The jury found that Depp had proven all the elements of defamation in relation to the statement and that it had been made or published by Heard - and that it was about him.
Additionally, they found that it was false and that it had a defamatory implication about Depp - with them finding that this implication was "designed and intended" by Heard.
They found that it conveyed a defamatory implication to someone who saw it other than Depp and that he had proven it had been made with "actual malice" by Heard.
Depp's claim #2
The second statement Depp claimed had been defamatory featured in the print edition of the op-ed as well as the online edition, with the jury finding in his favour again.
The statement in question read: "Then two years ago I became a public figure representing domestic abuse and I felt the full force of our culture's wrath for women who speak out".
The jury found that Depp had proven all the elements of defamation and that it had been made or published by Heard, as well as that the statement was about Depp.
They further found that it was false and had a defamatory implication about Depp - with the jury finding that this implication was "designed and intended" by his ex-wife.
The jury found that it conveyed a defamatory implication to someone who saw it other than Depp and that he had proven it had been made with "actual malice" by Heard.
Depp claim #3
The final statement in Depp's claim appeared in print and online. It read: "I had the rare vantage point of seeing in real time how institutions protect men accused of abuse."
The jury found that he had proven all the elements of defamation over it and that it had been made or published by Heard, as well as that it had been about Depp.
It was further found that it was false and had a defamatory implication about Depp - with them finding that this implication was "designed and intended" by Heard.
The jury found that it conveyed a defamatory implication to someone who saw it other than Depp and that he had proven it had been made with "actual malice" by her.
Overall, as a result of the three verdicts, Depp was awarded $10 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive damages.
Heard claim #1
The statements in Heard's counterclaim are understood to have been made by Depp's attorney Adam Waldman, allegedly "acting as an agent" for his client.
The first statement in her counterclaim against Depp, appeared in an online article by the Daily Mail in 2020, with it claimed that such had been defamatory against her.
The statement in question read: "Amber Heard and her friends in the media use fake sexual violence allegations as both a sword and shield depending on their needs."
The statement continued: "They have selected some of her sexual violence hoax 'facts' as the sword, inflicting them on the public and Mr Depp."
The jury found that she hadn't proven all the elements of defamation in relation to the statement.
Heard claim #2
The second statement raised in Heard's counterclaim had appeared in an online article on the Daily Mail in 2020.
The statement in question read: "Quite simply this was an ambush, a hoax. They set Mr Depp up by calling the cops but the first attempt did not do the trick.
"The officers came to the penthouses, thoroughly searched and interviewed, and left after seeing no damage to face or property.
"So Amber and her friends spilled a little wine and roughed the place up, got their stories straight under the direction of a lawyer and publicist, and then placed a second call to 911."
The jury found Heard had proven all the elements of defamation over the statement and that it was made or published by Waldman while "acting as an agent" for Depp.
They found that the statement in question was about Heard and that it was false, with the members of the jury finding that it had been seen by someone other than her.
It was further revealed in the verdict that the jury further found that Heard had proven that the statement had been made with "actual malice" by Waldman.
Heard claim #3
The third and final statement in her counterclaim had appeared in an online article on the Daily Mail in 2020.
The statement in question read: "We've reached the beginning of the end of Ms. Heard's abuse hoax against Johnny Depp."
The jury found that she hadn't proven all the elements of defamation in relation to the statement.
Overall, as a result of such verdicts, Heard was awarded $2 million in compensatory damages.
Do you have a story to sell? Get in touch with us at webcelebs@mirror.co.uk or call us direct 0207 29 33033.
