Who Trolled Amber? - Who Trolled Amber: Episode 6 - Public enemy

Episode Date: March 26, 2024

Johnny Depp’s maverick lawyer Adam Waldman finally comes under scrutiny. Alexi uncovers Waldman’s links to powerful figures and investigates his role in feeding online abuse. Can the team get to the truth about who trolled Amber?To find out more about Tortoise:Download the Tortoise app - for a listening experience curated by our journalistsSubscribe to Tortoise+ on Apple Podcasts for early access and ad-free contentBecome a member and get access to all of Tortoise's premium audio offerings and moreIf you want to get in touch with us directly about a story, or tell us more about the stories you want to hear about contact [e-mail] and host: Alexi MostrousProducer and reporter: Xavier GreenwoodEditor: David TaylorNarrative editor: Gary MarshallAdditional reporting: Katie Riley Sound design: Karla Patella Artwork: Jon Hill & Oscar Ingham Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hello, it's Claudia here, host of the Slow Newscast from Tortoise. 30 years ago, peace in the Middle East seemed like a real possibility. That's hard to believe, given what's going on in Gaza and Israel right now. Donald McIntyre reported from the region for decades, and this week, across three episodes, he explores how peace was left behind, through the story and career of one man, Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu. To listen, search the Slow News cast wherever you get your podcasts. Acast powers the world's best podcasts. Here's a show that we recommend.

Have you ever heard about the time Australia went to war with a bunch of emus and lost? Have you heard about the World Cup where the refs wore suits? What about the magical chess-playing machine that bamboozled Napoleon one time? These are all real things that actually happened and I get across all of them on Half-arse History. If you want to learn more about everything from the history of the toilet to the history of nuclear weapons, there are hundreds of episodes of my Tin Pot History podcast waiting for you.

Have a listen to Half-arse History today. Or don't, I can't tell you what to do, I'm not your dad. But if you fancy it, Half-Hast History is out three times a week and it's available wherever you get your podcasts. Acast helps creators launch, grow and monetize their podcasts everywhere. Acast.com. Tortoise. Just a warning before we start, this series contains strong language and descriptions of violence. I wrote about the nuclear industry in France, EDF, RBNB, the green industry in Saudi Arabia. Meet Julien. He's a journalist, but not a normal one.

I wrote under the pseudonym of Julien Fomenta Rosa. Fomenta, it's the anagram of phantom, French, so ghost, and Julian Rosa with a T. It's the anagram for journalist. So it's a phantom journalist, ghost journalist, which is what I did for six years. Julian has written hundreds of articles, not for a newspaper or a blogging site, but for a French PR firm. About the human rights in Qatar, presidential elections in many countries such as Gabon, Ivory Coast, Congo, Djibouti. The stories didn't look like puff pieces from a PR company. They read like genuine news articles. And they were convincing enough to appear in major publications like the Huffington Post.

But in each case, Julian's real identity was disguised. My stories were published under some different fake identities, such as lawyers, teachers, students, economists, what else? Nurses, could be a professor, an engineer. Anyone reading Julian's work would think it was written by an expert, someone impartial or with real experience, when actually it was anything but. There was a fire in Flamandille, one of the French nuclear plants in Normandy. And just after a few hours after the fire, then I was asked to write a story

to say how safe the planes were. Julian's work lies in that gray area where PR, fake news and information manipulation all collide. Part of the same shady world that I think may have been used to target Amber Heard. The only reason we know about Julian's activities is that a few years ago, he decided to get out of the industry. He was worried about being caught,

and he was starting to lose grip on reality. I felt like I was leaving the Truman Show because I thought at any time my story and my work would be revealed. I wanted to speak to Julian to understand the world of misinformation better, how it wasn't just about bots and trolls, but about a whole ecosystem of misdirection and fake news. That was all interesting enough, but then he dropped the name of a company that

rang a bell. the name of a company that rang a bell. I happened to write about Rusal and that was a story about the Ebola virus. Rusal is a Russian aluminium giant which was controlled by Oleg Deripaska, one of the country's most powerful oligarchs. Rusal has a huge mining presence in Guinea. When Ebola struck the West African country in 2014, the company helped to pay to vaccinate the population. For Rusale, this was a significant PR coup and Julian was commissioned to make sure that everyone knew about it.

I was then asked in the same story to make the reader think that Ebola was one of the worst pandemics ever. And we were very fortunate that some companies like Rusal were brave enough to make this pandemic end. And at the end of the brief, I was asked like, NB, you need to make Rusal appear right after the headline. When he mentions Roussel, my ears prick up because I'd just been reading about a man who worked on behalf of Roussel. Someone who was paid to help promote the company's presence in Guinea and specifically worked on its Ebola initiative.

Someone who might have had nothing to do with Julian or the company which employed him, but whose name seems to pop up whichever road this story takes me down. That name rings a bell, Oexy. Wow. He's represented a number of very interesting and in my view controversial people. I'm talking about the man who many hold most responsible for trolling Amber. He attacked witnesses, he attacked us as a legal team and personally, it was unlike anything I've seen

from a professional counsel. Johnny Depp's lawyer, Adam Waldman. I'm Alexi Mostros and this is Who Trolled Amber? The final episode, Public Enemy. To Trolled Amber, the final episode, Public Enemy. Almost everyone I've spoken to for this story has told me, you've got to look at Adam Waldman. He's the key to all this. It didn't take me long to see what they were talking about. Since he first had dinner with Johnny Depp in 2016, Adam Waldman has upended the actor's life. It's almost like Johnny Depp had two

periods, before Waldman and after Waldman. Before Waldman, the actor's strategy was generally to ignore criticism, to let his agents and managers sought things out behind the scenes. After Waldman, the strategy appeared to change. To attack, attack, attack. In January 2017, the same day Depp finalised his divorce from Amber Heard, he sued the management group, or TMG, for $25 million, alleging fraud, negligent misrepresentation, wrongful foreclosure and a breach of fiduciary duty, E! News reported. Under Waldman's guidance, Depp sued his former lawyers and his former business managers. This was long before he sued Amber, and these earlier lawsuits went Depp's way. He won

big. The attack strategy seemed to work, so it wasn't surprising that by the time Depp v. Herd came around, the gloves were off. Nothing wrong with an aggressive lawyer, you might think, except that in defending Depp, Waldman arguably went too far. In the UK defamation trial between Depp and the son, Waldman was told off by the judge for posting menacing tweets about Amber's witnesses. He was tweeting throughout the UK trial trial tweeting his version of what was happening in court. I've never seen such aggressive and wholly inappropriate public commentary from a

lawyer. The Sons lawyers also accused him of preparing false witness statements and manipulating evidence on Depp's behalf, allegations he denied. The Sun's QC said that Mr Waldman was prepared to deploy threats and improper tactics to secure the objective of burning Ms. Herd and subjecting her to total global humiliation. A few months later, Waldman was thrown off the Depp v. Herd trial in the US. A judge there found that he'd leaked confidential information to the press. Amber's lawyers accused him of being a publicity hound who was more

interested in trolling their client than complying with court rules. Defendant Amber Herd brings this motion for sanctions against Adam Waldman for his repeated abuse of the discovery process, violation of the court's protective order and general conduct in this case. Adam Waldman doesn't behave like any lawyer I've encountered before. Who on earth is this guy? He advised him on mining operations in Guinea and Jamaica, on a Russian Ebola vaccine. He was earning a lot of money for doing all of

this stuff. I'm in the office with my producer Xavier. I want to see what else I can learn about Adam Waldman and I come across these online documents called Farah filings. Farah filings are legal papers which you have to file in the US if you work for a foreign agent. It turns out that Waldman had to file dozens of Farah papers. Not because of his work for Depp, but because of his relationship with a Russian oligarch, Oleg Deripaska. He works with him on animal welfare, Canadian energy policy, Chinese metal policy.

Oleg Deripaska is a super controversial figure. He's been sanctioned by the UK, Europe and the US. He's been accused of money laundering, threatening the lives of business rivals, illegally wiretapping a government official and taking part in extortion and racketeering. He's even faced claims that he helped Russia interfere in the 2016 US election. Deripaska was one of seven oligarchs slapped with sanctions for quote malign activity around the globe. Three of his companies were also sanctioned. As you might imagine, Deripaska denies everything.

I hope that sooner or later people will recognise it's wrong, will try to assess the facts. If Adam Waldman was just Deripaska's lawyer, it would be a colourful detail, but maybe not too big a deal. Plenty of people have represented Deripaska through the years. But the Farah filings tell a different story. He offered Deripaska legal advice, but he also seems to have helped him with his PR and his press strategy. He offered commercial advice to his businesses, and for all this, he was earning $40,000 every month. In 2017, that amounted to more than $560,000. Wow.

You can see on one of the forms that Waldman travelled to Siberia, Amsterdam and Moscow with Deripaska and the filings say here that the purpose of the travel is marked as friendship, not business. So at one point at least these guys were friends. This wasn't just a lawyer-client relationship. The documents paint a picture that looks far more pally than that. They've been pictured together more than once. Yeah, so if you look at this website, you can see that it's got pictures of Waldman next to Deripaska. It's like Oktoberfest party. They're drinking beers together. They've got like their arms around each other. There's a Twitter account that shows Waldman posing with these

dogs at a dog charity that I think Deripaska set up. So it seems like they were pretty close. You might think that Oleg Deripaska, a man accused of crimes like money laundering and extortion, was the most controversial Russian that Waldman worked for. But you'd be wrong. controversial Russian that Waldman worked for. But you'd be wrong. Look at this, right? Like Sergey Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister. Basically Russia's mouthpiece abroad. Waldman registers as an agent for him too.

Sergey Lavrov is Russia's official mouthpiece abroad. This is Lavrov last year, saying that it was Ukraine which started the war against Russia. The Faro filings make clear that Waldman worked for Lavrov in the Russian's official capacity as foreign minister. He was a counsel for Lavrov on political and legal matters as requested, as well as diplomatic matters. Working for Lavrov means he's working directly for Russia. Waldman's relationship with Lavrov continued for years, from 2010 until May 2017. Which means at the time Waldman started working for Depp, he was also

working for Moscow. You might ask what have Waldman's previous clients got to do with Depp v. Heard? Well, for me it's about showing that Waldman was willing to go beyond what you'd normally expect from a lawyer. He didn't just advise Deripaska, he became friends with him. And he kept working for Lavrov, even after Russia had invaded Crimea in 2014, and even after the country had been accused of attempting to subvert US democracy.

And that's not all, because Waldman also represented a third man, Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks. Taken in isolation, there's nothing wrong with that. But Waldman was Assange's lawyer at the same time as he was representing the Russian state. And that's interesting given Assange's history with Russia. Tonight there is growing evidence that Russia is using WikiLeaks as a delivery vehicle for

hacked emails and other information. Intelligence and administration officials tell CBS News they're confident the Russian government is behind the DNC email. Donald Trump has also denied knowing who is responsible that he's put out a new campaign ad arguing the WikiLeaks emails provide a window into what he calls Clinton corruption. Assange has always denied that Russia leaked him the emails. Our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party. What did this mean?

Was I stumbling onto a bigger story? I thought that Peter Pomerantsev might be able to help. He's an expert on Russian propaganda. Disinformation campaigns are always a large part of the Russian states. They already had a rich tradition of coordinated disinformation campaigns from old media, and then they work out you can use it with digital media. They start off with using it domestically against domestic opposition. Troll farms start coming for the domestic opposition first, and then they start rolling it out abroad and across the world. And again, I don't think there's any one trick that they have come up with. But what they've done is institutionalise it as a tool of foreign policy. And I think

they were the first to do that. Peter had never heard of Adam Waldman, but he knows a lot about the people Waldman associated with. I think you've discovered something that nobody else has really clocked. This really rather unheard of character who seems to be, we don't know if he's at the centre of the web or the side of the web, but part of a very, very, very malign, let's be frank, web of characters who played a very active role in subverting Western democracies and furthering Russia's aims.

What started out as a celebrity courtroom drama has morphed in my mind to something bigger, more convoluted. A kind of shadow world of disinformation where companies, celebrities and countries like Russia all overlap. It's hard to work out how all these strands fit together, but Adam Waldman's name keeps coming up. From Wondery, this is The Spy Who. This month, we open the file on Oleg Lele, the spy who sabotaged the KGB. His actions triggered the biggest removal of spies by any government in history. It's the story of an overstretched security service needing a win, a covert plan to bring

catastrophe to Britain's streets, and a love affair that shook the world. this current occupation? Attorney, I'm also involved with a skincare company in a variety of capacities. I want to speak to Adam Waldman directly. I have a lot of questions, but before I call him, I bring up a video of the deposition he gave in the Depp v. Hurd trial. On tape, he looks smart in a white shirt and blue tie, but what he says isn't exactly revelatory. And what is your role in this case as counsel for Mr. Depp? Objection. I would instruct the witness not to answer that question. OK, I'll follow the instruction. Waldman is advised that he doesn't have to answer any question, which could reveal any legal advice

he's ever given Depp. That's the same question that I instructed Mr. Waldman not to answer before, just stated in a slightly different way, so I would instruct the witness not to answer that question. I accept the instruction. In total, he refuses to answer more than 70 questions. But there are some questions that he can't avoid because they're not covered by legal privilege. And it's one of these exchanges

that really stops me in my tracks. Have you provided information about this case to other social media personalities who then post that information? I've provided information episodically to what I would call internet journalists. Have you communicated with a social media user who goes by the name That Umbrella Guy?

I've had several phone calls with the person who goes by the name That Umbrella Guy I don't actually know his real name. Have you communicated in a similar fashion with someone on social media who goes by the name That Brianfella? Yes. Waldman reveals that he's directly communicated not just with the press but with two YouTubers. A man called Matthew Lewis who goes by the name That Umbrella Guy and Brian MacPherson commonly known as That Brian Fella. Waldman calls them Internet

Journalists. And look I'm not a snob about this some of the best journalists today don't work for mainstream media. Look at Bellingcat for instance. But journalists should at least try and be objective. She's got the psycho eyes. She looks crazy. And these YouTubers are not that. They're more like professional trolls. I wasn't afraid of him stabbing me then. Like what?

She's a nut. I thought he was hurting. I tried to kill you. I don't understand. I'm the biggest piece of crap now. She does have the right name. Turd. That umbrella guy, who's also known as Tug, started out on YouTube eight years ago reviewing

household appliances. Today I want to briefly consider this water sprinkler unit and the reason I want to do so is twofold. But he soon discovered that making content trashing Amber Heard was much more popular and profitable. Hey there, to all you wonderful folks, Welcome to another week of craziness. Tug has posted literally hundreds of videos about Amber Heard. His channel has racked up 140 million views. His worst comments about Amber are in videos that are now private.

But I've downloaded the transcripts and used AI to voice some of them up. Amber your lips are gross. I don't know where they've been. Look at how gross her skin is. She's all like meaty and sweaty. She's got lip herpes. She looks like she's got the meat sweats. Turning himself into a full-time Amber Herg troll has made Tug a lot of money. Nicky C, thanks for the five.

Dude McGuy, thanks for the 20. Karina, thanks for the 20 there. Appreciate that. We worked out that he earned £65,000 or about $82,000 during the trial from YouTube tips alone. YouTube has definitely helped and made my life better too, for sure. And that doesn't include advertising revenue or sales of merchandise. He even boasted that Amber had paid for his

house and his kids' college fund. If that umbrella guy were a lone wolf, I might not have paid him that much attention. Lots of YouTubers said the same about Amber or worse but Tug was one of only a handful who spoke directly with Adam Waldman. Adam Waldman, you freaking crazy fool. I love Adam Waldman dude. And Tug didn't just speak to Waldman. The YouTuber implies that Waldman passed him information as well. Tug posted videos containing material that no one else had, including two witness statements which had not yet been made public.

It exclusively came from myself, by the way. Let's just say it sourced its way to me. This inside track helped Tug's videos become a big part of how Amber came to be seen online. There was actually a huge narrative priming that occurred before the trial even began, where from the outset, the entire idea and the entire conception was that Amber Heard was an abuser, that she was not credible, and that she was just basically bad in every sense of the word. That's Kat Tenbarge. She works for NBC and is kind of a bet-noir for Depp fans. While other reporters were focused on the day-to-day of the US trial, Kat was more interested in what was going on online with people like that umbrella guy. She thinks that they were part of a deliberate strategy.

The moment that Adam Waldman testified, he really opened the floodgate for all of these influencers and creators to revel in the fact that they had this type of close communication with Team Dev. Kat tried to interview Tug, but instead of just saying no, he screenshotted her email and tweeted it out to his followers. As soon as he did that, it was instantaneous. I received DMs on Twitter that basically said, we know where you live, we know where you are, and we're going to come find you, and we're going to hurt you. He did the same to me just a couple of days before I recorded this.

I sent him an email asking about his links to Adam Waldman. He posted my list of questions online and then made a video with another YouTuber. Alexi, Alexi, Alexi. Alexi! What's funny is, like, I looked at his name and the first thing I thought was Alexi Moistris. That's what I thought his name was! Oh yeah, jokes about my name. It feels like I'm back at school. What's the second question here? Substantial amount of money covering misheard and misredebt, huh? Advertising. about my name, it feels like I'm back at school. You know? Or she's got those psycho eyes, she looks crazy, she's just like...

If Tug represents one sort of anti-Amber Herd troll, loud, misogynistic and crude, then that Brian fella, the other YouTuber who talked to Adam Waldman, represents something else. Hey everyone, thanks for checking out my video, I really appreciate it. I've put a lot of work into this even if it doesn't show." On the 14th of November 2018, Brian McPherson, a little-known actor, posts a 35-minute video on YouTube. "...my attempt here is to stick to facts and not rumors." The video raises questions about one of Amber's friends and his evidence against Johnny Depp. "...I don't know his motivations. All I know is I believe he did lie.

McPherson's video is forensic. It seems to be the work of someone who really knows their way around the case and viewers are impressed. You've put 90% of journalists to shame. Thank you for speaking facts. I'm genuinely in awe. Why aren't you on Johnny's legal team? He needs you. In this first video McPherson works with information that's already out there, already in the public domain. But in January 2020, all that changes. Hey everyone, welcome back. Just a couple of minutes of your time for the intro. This video is probably not what you expected in terms of what I promised my next one would be,

but I believe it needed to be made and it also needs to be seen and heard by as many people as I can possibly reach with my platform. This video is different. It's a recording of a private conversation between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, a real exclusive. Just before McPherson posts his video, the male online news website publishes a two-minute snippet of it, but this obscure YouTuber seems to get hold of the whole thing. I think what you're about to watch or listen to is the single biggest and most damning piece of evidence yet. In the recording, Amber tells Depp,

I can't promise you I won't get physical again. I can't promise I won't get physical again. For Depp fans, this is the proof they've been waiting for, that he is the real victim. And I should say, it is something that pulls you up short. Amber appears to admit hitting Depp across the face. It's quite a shocking admission. When she appeared on the stand, Amber explained that she sometimes hit Depp in self-defence. But I have to repeat, I'm not trying to re-litigate the case. The fact is that a British judge found that Depp had abused Amber on a dozen occasions

and that, quote, no great weight was to be put on Amber's alleged admissions. A US jury reached a different conclusion. A US jury reached a different conclusion. McPherson's video gets 6 million views on YouTube and many more millions see his content on other sites. It has a huge impact on how Amber is seen online. But here's the thing, it was manipulated. Let me play you a bit of McPherson's recording. 10 hours or fucking a day. We must. There can be no physical violence. I can't promise you that I'll be perfect. I can't promise you I won't get physical damage. Pretty damning right? And Amber did say those words. It's the truth, but it's not the whole

truth. Because between Depp's line, There can be no physical violence. andpp's line, There can be no physical violence. and Amber's line, I can't promise you that I'll be perfect. I can't promise you I won't get physical again. There's seven minutes of tape missing. We know this because a full version was released during the UK trial. In reality, this is how Amber responds to Depp.

I agree about the physical violence. I agree about the physical violence. I agree about the physical violence. But MacPherson cuts that critical line. In his version, it seems like Depp is pleading for the violence to end and Amber is saying, as a direct reply, I can't promise it won't. There's something else too. Depp's words themselves are edited. He doesn't just say, there can be no physical violence.

There are three words missing. There can be no physical violence towards each other. There can be no physical violence towards each other. So now listen to the two versions side by side. This is MacPherson's video. There can be no physical violence. I can't promise you that I'll be perfect. I can't promise you I won't get physical again. Whereas this is the real exchange. There can be no physical violence. I agree about the physical violence.

Somewhere along the way, this very sensitive piece of evidence was altered in favour of Depp. People never figured out that these were acts of disinformation. They just took them at face value and they shared them and they reacted to them. That's not the only time it happens. A few months later, McPherson publishes audio of the aftermath of a fight between Depp and Hurd. It's another exclusive. The original recording is over five hours but McPherson has slimmed it down. He says he's only made cosmetic changes.

I've cut it down from hours of white noise, no noise, cleaning sounds and non-speaking to get a much cleaner product. But again, this is not the case. The audio is missing lines that later appear in court documents. The audio that was leaked to Brian McPherson and that was disseminated across the internet was essential to people's understanding of the case. The Brian Fella's videos changed my mind. You were what changed my mind about JD when I heard the recordings.

Brian Fella is awesome. His videos were the first breakdowns of the JD allegations and changed my mind about JD when I heard the recordings. That Brian fella is awesome. His videos were the first breakdowns of the JD allegations and changed my mind. It was absolutely Brian who changed my mind. McPherson clearly left a good impression on Johnny Depp. When Depp created an Instagram account in 2020, McPherson was one of the first people he followed. Brian McPherson didn't respond to our requests for comment, but it's Adam Waldman who I really want to speak to.

I have so many questions about why he appears in a quarter of all the anti-Amber herd tweets in Ron Chanel's database. About what evidence he passed to two YouTubers who played a big role in turning the internet against Amber. And about what work he did for Oleg Deripaska and Sergey Lavrov. He hasn't answered any of my emails, so I give him a call. This is Adam Walden. Please, give me a message. Oh, hi Mr Walden. This is Alexi Mostras from Tortoise Media. I'm trying to reach you... He doesn't pick up, but 25 minutes after I call, he posts a Twitter message. It quotes Public Enemy, the 80s rap pioneers.

False media, their pens and pads I'll snatch. Cos I've had it. I'm not an addict. Fiending for static. I'll see their tape recorder and grab it. No, you can't have it back. Silly rabbit. Waldman is one of the most fascinating characters I've come across. He remains

threaded into this story in a way that I can't quite untangle. On the one hand he's this high-powered obviously intelligent lawyer, a guy who's represented celebrities, oligarchs, really extraordinary figures. On the other hand when it comes to the internet he's happy to behave as if he's another youtuber attacking Amber Heard. Just after I contact him Waldman does what that umbrella guy did. He posts my questions online. Less like a lawyer, more like a troll. Towards the end of this investigation, I got in touch with Amber Heard.

She didn't want to speak on the record, so I can't tell you what she said. I get the impression she's trying to get on with her life. But in a way, this podcast has never just been about Amber. It's about how online trolling can not only have devastating effects on a victim, but can create ripples that go far wider. And certainly the verdict in the US trial, I do feel affected my day-to-day approach to the work that I've done in terms of industry misconduct. Maureen Ryan is a writer for Vanity Fair. She's been at the forefront of reporting on the Me Too movement for years. For her, Depp's victory gave Hollywood an excuse to backtrack on hard-won

reforms. As a woman who's been online for 30 years, sometimes they just want to take a woman down many pegs and they don't need much of an excuse to do it. A lot of people went nuts with that opportunity. The thing about the Johnny Depp Amber Heard case in particular that chilled me to my soul frankly was the idea that you know Amber Heard wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post which is a very respected publication and Johnny Depp's name isn't in it. Maureen's right. Amber never named Johnny Depp in her piece for the Washington Post. And she still ended up losing a defamation case.

It told survivors of industry misconduct. If this can be done to a woman who's actually a well-known, well-established person in the industry, it's going to be even worse for you. You can see how that would deter other women from speaking out. You don't have to talk about it if you don't want to, but I was interested in the variety piece that you wrote about sexual assault and your own experiences in sexual assault. Do you mind just telling me a bit about that? Thank you for asking.

I'm okay to talk about it. So in late 2017, I wrote about something that only my close friends and family knew about at the time, which was that I was assaulted by a television executive in 2014. I wrote a piece about my own experience, and I didn't name the person who did it. And to this day, I haven't named that person. And Amber Heard didn't choose that path. And I really applauded her piece at the time because talking about incidents of assault and abuse that you've experienced is really difficult.

I suppose that you wrote about your assault without naming the perpetrator. And then some years later, Amber Heard wrote her claimed assault without naming the perpetrator. She got sued even though she didn't name the perpetrator. And I wonder if that had happened before you rather than after you, whether you would have written the piece that you did. Yeah, I never thought about that before. I think I wouldn't have written it. I don't know that I would have been able to handle that psychologically, this idea that even

if I did not name the person who did this to me, that I could still be in danger. There are sometimes I wish I had named him. It really haunted me because I really, I've devoted the last seven years of my life to try to prevent. I'm sorry. I don't want what happened to me to happen to anyone else. I knew that in that moment in late 2017, I could not name that person. I have still not named that person publicly. And for a long time, I thought about whether that was the right decision. But in the light of the Depp vs. Hurd, I'm even more certain that that was the right decision. My favorite Agatha Christie book is Murder on the Orient Express. A few years ago, Johnny Depp starred in the movie version directed by Kenneth Branagh.

The story is the ultimate whodunit. A man called Lanfranco Cassetti is killed in a train carriage and detective O'Kiel Praroe investigates his murder. Everyone in the carriage is a suspect. But here's the spoiler. They all did it. They all had their own motive. When it comes to who trolled Amber, the answer, I think, is the same. There were the real-life Dep fans, the online misogynists, grifters who thought they could make a quick buck,

and critically, our evidence suggests, thousands and thousands of bots and trolls, from Thailand to Spain, from Chile to Saudi Arabia. A seemingly global campaign. All of these forces came together to attack Amber Heard online. Some, like Adam Waldman, did more than others. But, like on the Orient Express, everyone played a part. This year is the biggest election year in history. Billions of people will go to the polls in India, in the UK and most importantly perhaps in the US. Over 50 countries will hold votes in 2024. It feels like democracy itself is on the line.

And hovering over all of this like a ghost at the feast is the spectre of disinformation. For me, Depthi Herd is a warning. Because if a famous actress can be trolled online in a widespread and inauthentic way, then what happens when the stakes are even higher? It's one thing to confuse a bot with a real-life Johnny Depp fan, but what if it's impossible to tell the difference between a Russian troll and a US election official?

If we can no longer separate what's fake from what's real online, then the question we're all left with is this. How can we ever trust our own opinions again? We contacted Johnny Depp while making this podcast, but he didn't respond. Thank you for listening to Who Trolled Amber. Who Trolled Amber is written and reported by me, Alexi Mostros, and by Xavier Greenwood. The producer is Xavier Greenwood. Additional reporting by Katie Riley. Sound design is by Carla Patella. The narrative editor is Gary Marshall. The editor is David Taylor. I'm sorry. Hello, it's Tomony from Tortoise. We hope you enjoyed this podcast. To get ad free and

early access to all Tortoise podcasts, become a Tortoise member or subscribe to Tortoise Plus on Apple Podcasts. You'll be able to hear our brand new investigative shows before anyone else and get ad free listening across our podcasts. Click subscribe on Tortoise Plus or become a member in the Tortoise app.