Jump to content

Talk:Andrew Nicol (judge)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Another Controversial case

[edit]

Enthralled by Amber Heard

The legally perverse and patently absurd judgement for Amber Heard again Johnny Depp show that he was besotted by the Halo Effect of Amber Heard.

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/depp-v-news-group-judgment180520.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.100.188.53 (talk) 09:52, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get something added about how during the Johnny Depp trial, this judge's son was working for Rupert Murdoch, the owner of THE SUN, which was being sued? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.10.224.236 (talk) 12:05, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per wikipedia's policy on living persons, WP:BLP, contentious claims like this need to be strongly sourced with reliable sources Tristario (talk) 12:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The current article states that Nicol "wrongly" ruled against Depp, citing a source that has nothing to do with the UK trial (it's a BBC article about the US trial). The "wrongly" adverb should be removed immediately, as it's an unsubstantiated opinion that has no place on Wikipedia. Kumagoro-42 (talk) 19:01, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's already been removed. If you see any more edits like that you can just remove them yourself, this page has had a lot of vandalism Tristario (talk) 23:34, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]