Video Creator’s Channel Just In

Setback For Women For Women Inside The Courtroom And

outs because because basically what this said you know? Amber had an enormous amount of evidence, although a lot of it was suppressed in this case. As opposed to the Uk, Elaine Amber attorney went on national Tv claiming that the verdict was based on the public sentiments because she believed the jury watched the proceedings online and based their judgment on that for starters that was very rude of her. These are men and women who attended the proceedings the entire six weeks of trial trying to get testimonials from both sides so that their verdict could be based on what was happening in the courtroom and just because she doesn’t agree with the verdict. It doesn’t give her the right to be disrespectful. All jurors are usually told not to watch anything regarding the case they are on and.

If By Bad Luck They Actually

saw something online they are not supposed to base their judgment on what they have seen, but rather on the proceedings in court, so why would the jury in Virginia be any different It’s pretty simple. They sat in court for six weeks, and all the evidence was lying heavily on a positive angle on Johnny’s side so obviously he was going to win when Johnny’s team went on national Tv. Recently Ben Chu had the same response that the verdict was not based on public opinion, but it was a decision made by the jury on the evidence presented by both sides and in good luck. It was overwhelming in Johnny’s favor the jury saw the evidence and they were able to distinguish the fact that Amber was a liar, but Johnny was not. They realized she was guilty of all the three.

• jurors
• courtroom
• jury
• verdict
• court

• case opposed uk elaine amber
• court jury virginia different
• disrespectful jurors usually told
• sentiments believed jury watched proceedings
• setback women women inside courtroom

Charges Of Defamation Against Her And Made Their

verdict instead of being sore losers. The least they could do was to say thank you to these guys for at least listening to both sides. Even when it was so obvious Amber was lying. Johnny had sued Amber for defamation over an up head. She wrote back in 2018 claiming she was a victim of abuse and even though she didn’t mention Johnny’s name.

It Was Quite Obvious Who She

was talking about the entire world seemed to have noticed the op-ed and its claims and were against Johnny his life reduced to nothing. He lost his job his reputation the respect from his fans and colleagues, and all this was taunting to him because he was the real victim. He went to Virginia to prove that he wasn’t a wife beater and that his ex-wife was lying and knew she. But had intentions of malice. It was easy because Amber had thought if she threatened him with the fact that if he came out as a victim as a man, no one’s going to believe him, but Johnny didn’t back down in cower as he always did when they were in a relationship.

He Came To Court To Prove That

Amber lied when she said that the paparazzi who were writing about Johnny were getting their information from anonymous people that even she didn’t know by bringing in an ex-tMz worker who worked on Amber’s case. He revealed Amber and her team had leaked info of when Amber was going to go to court to file a restraining order against Johnny and they were even told which side of her face to capture and what footage was tnc trying to capture at the La courthouse on May 27 we were. to capture Amber leaving the courthouse and an alleged bruise on the right side of her face. He proved that Amber was the one who wrote the op-ed with intent of malice by bringing in her partner who worked with her on writing the setup head.

The Aclu Worker Proved That Amber

wrote the op-ed and wanted it to be posted a day after Aquaman so that Aquaman could get popular. Amber was the one who used social media against Johnny when she was the one in the wrong but now that the entire world watched the trial and know she’s the beater. She and her team wants to blame the jury how unprofessional anyways thanks for watching and see you in my next video.

Summary

Elaine Amber attorney went on national Tv claiming that the verdict was based on the public sentiments because she believed the jury watched the proceedings online and based their judgment on that . The jury in Virginia is not supposed to watch anything regarding the case they are on and. If by bad luck they actually saw something online they are not . supposed to base their . judgment on what they have seen, but rather on the proceedings in court . The least they could do was to say thank you to these guys for at least listening to both sides and in good luck . It was overwhelming in Johnny’s favor the jury saw the evidence and they were able to distinguish the fact that Amber was a liar, but Johnny was not . Amber had an enormous amount of evidence, although a lot of it was suppressed in this case. It doesn’t give her the right to be disrespectful. It’s pretty simple. The jury sat in court for six weeks, and all the evidence was lying on a positive angle on Johnny’s side…. Click here to read more and watch the full video