Amber Heard accused her estranged husband Johnny Depp of domestic violence in a court filing and now the court has granted a temporary restraining order.
Along with lawyer Samantha Spector, Amber showed up at the Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles on Friday. It was at this same court, where “The Rum Diary” actress filed for a domestic abuse restraining order.
According to Daily Mail, the 30-year-old actress didn’t come without proof. She carried photos of her alleged injuries.
One of the photos showed an injury of a large bruise that could be seen around her eye.
😱😱😱 Amber Heard, a agora ex de Johnny Depp, pediu uma ordem de restrição contra o ator dias após anunciar a separação e afirmou ter sido agredida por ele. Em uma imagem obtida pelo site #TMZ, a modelo aparece com hematomas no rosto que teriam sido provocadas pelas agressões. Saiba mais em QUEM.globo.com #JohnnyDepp #AmberHeard
On Friday, Amber arrived at court for divorce proceedings and alleged that Depp assaulted her physically, during their short marriage.
The temporary restraining order that the judge granted Amber, said that it requires Johnny Depp to stay 100 yards away from her. This will be effective until a hearing next month.
It had been just three days since his mom died, when Amber filed for divorce. According to TMZ, now it was a week since the death of his mother and she’s claiming domestic violence.
According to Amber, “The Sweeny Todd” actor had hit her in the face with his iPhone. She also said that when police arrived on the scene, the actor fled.
While many requests made by the actress were rejected, the judge gave her the permission to live in the family home.
Amber requested the judge to keep Johnny Depp away from at least one of their dogs. However, the judge rejected that offer saying that there was “an insufficient showing to protect the pet dog.”
The judge also ruled against her attempt to collect spousal support from the actor and have him bear her attorney fees.
The Daily Beast noted that these are just allegations, as it can only be guessed whether this is actually a victimisation or simply a “cash-grab ploy by the woman.”