As the dust settles on the Amber Heard vs Johnny Depp libel trial, so many questions still hang in the air.
Some have raised major concerns about what the result means for the # MeToo movement and what it really says about the way sexual and domestic violence victims are treated by society.
It also raises questions about the different verdicts between the courts in the US and the UK and what that means for the two countries’ justice systems.
Some will no doubt be overjoyed by the result, others dismayed.
But while the wider implications of the ruling are there for the world to ponder over, other questions are still being asked about some of the more tangible points that have caused confusion.
What is the difference between compensatory and punitive damages?
One of the big outcomes of the trial was that both Amber Heard and Johnny Depp were awarded damages.
However, while Depp got $10m (£8m) in compensatory damages and $5m (£4m) in punitive damages (later reduced to $350,000), Heard was awarded $2million (£1.6m) in compensatory damages - quite some distance from the $100million (£80m) she had initially counter-sued her ex-husband for.
Yet the differences between these two types of awards aren't immediately obvious and neither is what they say about the result of the trial.
To clear things up, Brett Turnbull, partner at Turnbull Holcomb & Lemoine, told the Mirror: “Compensatory damages are intended to compensate a victim of a tort for things such as medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, emotional distress, mental anguish, loss of full enjoyment of life, and many others.”
Punitive damages - the type only Depp won - “have a very distinct and narrow purpose”.
Mr Turnbull explained: “Punishment. The damage amount for punishment is normally instructed as the appropriate amount to reflect the reprehensibility of the conduct, deter similar future conduct, and to deter others from similar conduct.”
So while the court found that both parties had undergone suffering due to events that warranted compensation, only Heard was actively punished.
But despite Depp being the ‘winner’ in the Fairfax trial, he lost his libel lawsuit in the UK against the Sun newspaper in 2020, which covered much of the same ground and evidence.
Why was the Depp vs Heard verdict different in the US to the UK?
Confusion over how the results of the Depp vs Heard case could be different in the UK and the US has raised concerns over the consistency of justice systems.
Former California judge Halim Dhanidina, a partner at Werksman Jackson law firm, said that differences in trials on either side of the Pond often comes down to who is responsible for finding the evidence to prove a point one way or another.
“Some have wondered whether the opposing verdicts can be explained by the differences in British and American law. A closer examination reveals that in a legal sense, the results we have seen are counterintuitive,” he said.
However, at least in theory, it comes down to the fact that libel is “easier to prove in the UK than in the US from a purely legal standpoint".
“In the UK, the burden is on the defendant publisher to negate the allegation that a false [or] negative statement of fact about the plaintiff was published," he went on.
"In the US the plaintiff has the burden to establish that the false statement that was published was made intentionally or with reckless disregard for the truth and also that the statement caused financial harm."
But with the burden of proof resting on the Sun's publishers in the UK case, it should have been Depp who came out on top.
“Despite these differences that would appear to favour Depp in the UK, that is where he lost.
"In my view, the best explanation for the opposing results is that the trial in the UK was heard by a judge who simply believed Heard’s allegations while the jury in the US was not persuaded by Heard’s presentation of evidence.
“There is also the possibility that the jury in the US was more enamoured with Depp’s celebrity and more willing to give him the benefit of the doubt than the UK judge.
“After all, Depp has been a popular figure in the entertainment industry for decades and in a sense has been inside all of our homes at one point or another. Coverage on the internet and in the media has clearly demonstrated the enduring strength of Depp’s popularity,” added Mr Dhanidina.
