Johnny Depp has told a High Court judge how his drug use started “at a very young age”, beginning when he took one of his mother’s “nerve pills”.
The Hollywood actor said his mother used to ask him to bring her the pills and he took one after realising at around the age of 11 they were “calming her nerves”, adding it was “the only way that I found to numb the pain”.
In cross-examination on the first day of his libel action against The Sun newspaper, Mr Depp, 57, also said that the flip side of wealth and fame means being “forced to live a life of a fugitive”, and that he has no anonymity.
Mr Depp is suing The Sun’s publisher, News Group Newspapers (NGN), and its executive editor Dan Wootton over an article which called him a “wife beater” and referred to “overwhelming evidence” that he attacked his ex-wife Amber Heard, 34, during their relationship – which he strenuously denies.
He has been called as the first witness in the high-profile trial in London, which is being heard by Mr Justice Nicol.
Sasha Wass QC, barrister for NGN, asked Mr Depp if it was true that he “found drugs and alcohol” early in his life, which Mr Depp agreed with.
The actor explained how he began taking drugs in his youth “at a very young age, when it was not a particularly stable or secure or safe home life, and there was quite a lot of unpleasantness in the house”.
He added: “My mother used to ask me to go and get her ‘nerve pills’ and I think I was around the age of 11 that it dawned on me that ‘nerve pills’ were calming her nerves, so I brought her her nerve pills and I took one and that began (my drug use).” Mr Depp continued that it was “the only way that I found to numb the pain”.
The barrister suggested that Mr Depp’s fame and wealth had given him “a lot of freedom”, to which he replied that “the other side of that coin you are, in a way, forced to live a life of a fugitive”.
“Anonymity doesn’t exist anymore anywhere,” he explained.
During the morning cross-examination session, which lasted around two hours, Ms Wass argued that there was a “nasty” side to Mr Depp’s character, later suggesting he “regularly engaged in destructive and violent behaviour”, which the actor denied.
He was also asked about a number of incidents in his past, including one in London in 1999 when he “chased off photographers with a piece of wood” outside a restaurant.
Mr Depp said his then-partner Vanessa Paradis was “very pregnant” at the time and he was concerned about her “being turned into somebody else’s circus”, adding: “I thought it was disrespectful.”
Mr Depp and Ms Heard both arrived at the Royal Courts of Justice in London yesterdayon Tuesday wearing face coverings, with more than 30 photographers waiting outside the entrance.
In a written outline of the Hollywood star’s case, his barrister David Sherborne said the article made “defamatory allegations of the utmost seriousness” against Mr Depp, accusing him of committing serious assaults on Ms Heard and “inflicting such serious injuries that she feared for her life”.
The actor’s case against NGN and Mr Wootton arises out of the publication of an article on The Sun’s website on April 27, 2018, with the headline “Gone Potty: How can JK Rowling be ‘genuinely happy’ casting wife beater Johnny Depp in the new Fantastic Beasts film?”
The words “wife beater” were removed from the headline the following morning and were not used in the print edition, but Mr Depp says the article still caused “serious harm to his personal and professional reputation” and “significant distress and embarrassment”.
The Pirates Of The Caribbean star denies ever having been violent to Ms Heard, and claims the article included quotes from alleged victims of disgraced film producer Harvey Weinstein in order to “finish his career” by linking the allegations against him to the #MeToo and Time’s Up movements.
NGN is defending the article as true and says Mr Depp was “controlling and verbally and physically abusive towards Ms Heard, particularly when he was under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs” between early 2013 and May 2016, when the couple split.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here