Talk:Andrew Nicol (judge)

Another Controversial case
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)

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)


 * 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)
 * 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)
 * 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)