Judge denies Amber Heard's motion for new trial against Johnny Depp, dismissing her argument about a juror

She had argued that one of the jurors in the case should have never been seated and that the verdict should be tossed.

• A judge declined to grant Amber Heard a new trial against Johnny Depp.
• Heard argued that one of the jurors in the case should have never been seated.
• The judge ruled that Heard waited too long and the juror was properly vetted by both sides.

The judge who oversaw the trial between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard rejected the actress's motion for a retrial on Wednesday, dismissing as irrelevant allegations that one of the jurors in the case should have never ended up on the jury.

The denial comes more than a month after the jury in the case largely sided with Depp, finding that Heard had defamed him in three instances and ordering her to pay her ex-husband $15 million in damages, though Judge Penney Azcarate reduced the number to $10.4 million. The jury also found that Depp had defamed Heard on one of her three counterclaims but gave her a much lower reward of $2 million.

Azcarate, who presided over the trial in Fairfax County, Virginia, said in her decision Wednesday that the jury's verdict in the case would stand.

"The juror was vetted, sat for the entire jury, deliberated, and reached a verdict," Azcarate wrote. "The only evidence before this Court is that the jurors followed their oaths, the court's instructions, and orders."

In a series of court filings earlier this month, Heard's attorneys tried to get the verdict tossed. They argued that the damages the jury awarded were excessive, and that Juror No. 15 was more than 20 years younger than the actual person called for jury duty, who appeared to live in the same household.

"As the Court no doubt agrees, it is deeply troubling for an individual not summoned for jury duty nonetheless to appear for jury duty and serve on a jury, especially in a case such as this," Heard's attorney Elaine Bredehoft argued. "This was a high-profile case, where the fact and date of the jury trial were highly publicized prior to and after the issuance of the juror summonses."

Depp's lawyers said that Heard's lawyers knew about the irregularity before the trial began and missed their chance to correct it then.

"In a rare moment of candor, Ms. Heard admits that she was aware of the purported discrepancy in Juror 15's birth year from the very start of the trial because 'Juror 15 ... was clearly born later than 1945,'" Depp's lawyers wrote.

Azcarate sided with Depp. She wrote that Heard missed several chances to object to the juror before he was actually seated on the jury. Furthermore, she wrote, she checked the juror's under-seal juror questionnaire and found that he correctly filled out his birth date rather than mislead the court.

The juror was also questioned by both sides, Azcarate wrote, and was deemed a fair juror before the trial began.

"Due Process was guaranteed and provided to all parties in this litigation," Azcarate wrote.

Depp initially sued Heard over an op-ed she wrote for The Washington Post in 2018, in which she insinuated she had been the victim of domestic violence but did not name Depp. Depp claimed he had been the real victim in their marriage and that Heard used false claims of domestic violence to further her own career. Heard countersued and claimed there were multiple incidents before and during her marriage to Depp when he had physically abused her.

The trial was livestreamed over six weeks and quickly became the biggest story in America, with millions watching as both Depp and Heard took turns on the stand and disclosed details of their turbulent relationship.

The case will now be headed to Virginia's appeals court, where Heard's attorneys are expected to continue fighting the jury verdict.

Bredehoft has said Heard doesn't have the funds to pay the $10.4 million she owes Depp, and her insurer filed a lawsuit against her this month to avoid paying the bill.