[imagesource: Evelyn Hockstein / Pool – AFP via Getty Images]

The verdict has been delivered, and both Amber Heard and Johnny Depp have been found liable for defamation in their lawsuits against each other.

A jury awarded damages to both, although Depp’s $15 million ($10 million in compensatory damages and $5 million dollars in punitive damages) far outweighed Heard’s $2 million (compensatory damages, with no punitive damages).

Depp won’t get that full $15 million, no matter what happens with Amber Heard’s planned appeal, but he is having a great time cruising around the UK.

Heard’s lawyer, Elaine Charlson Bredehoft, has made it clear that the Aquaman actress will appeal the jury’s decision, stating Heard “has some excellent grounds for it”. This via The International News:

Heard is reportedly not ‘worried’ about paying her former husband as she is ‘convinced’ she will win the appeal.

…citing an insider, [it’s] reported Heard is ‘100 percent appealing on freedom of speech and is telling friends she is determined to take it all the way to the Supreme Court if she has to.’

One thing we can be certain of is that there will no swift resolution here.

The appeals process is likely to take years and Heard is certainly up against it. Before she can even lodge an appeal, there’s a solid chance the actress, or her insurance company, will have to put forward a bond of sorts to show that she can raise the money she owes Depp.

Heard’s legal team has said on multiple occasions that she is under financial strain.

TIME spoke with a number of legal experts:

“Anyone appealing has an uphill battle,” says Rebekah Sullivan, a Washington, D.C., attorney who focuses on family law. Most likely, the lawyers who spoke to TIME said, Heard’s team will argue some legal error was made during trial and will try to overturn the verdict on the basis that the jury was influenced by things they saw and heard outside the courtroom…

“It’s a long, expensive process,” says David Ring, a Los Angeles civil trial lawyer. He and other experts estimated the appeal would take two years minimum…

“But when you’re facing a $15 million judgment,” says Ring, “you certainly have to probably pursue that.”

Should the appeal make it to court, Heard could stand a better chance of convincing appellate judges than a seven-person jury.

That’s one of the main reasons legal eagles say British media outlet The Sun won its libel case against Depp. That took place in the UK, and a judge, rather than a jury, ruled an article that called him a “wife beater” was “substantially true”. The judge found that 12 of the 14 alleged incidents of domestic violence had occurred.

In the libel case that has just wrapped up in Virginia, the jury was not sequestered, television coverage was wall to wall, and social media was full of memes and commentary that was overwhelmingly pro-Depp.

An appeal would take place behind closed doors:

Three appellate judges in the Virginia Court of Appeals would decide the case largely by sifting through documents written by attorneys for either side.

Depending on the outcome, the case could then be appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court, which has the discretion to take the case or refuse to hear it, and ultimately to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has the same discretion.

Bredehoft has suggested that they will argue some of their evidence was “suppressed” and evidence introduced by Depp’s team was “prejudicial”.

Ring says it’s true that the judge allowed a wide scope of evidence in court but that alone is not a great basis for appeal.

Mary Anne Franks, a professor at University of Miami School of Law who focuses on civil rights, says that Heard’s team might challenge the judge’s decision to allow the trial to be live-streamed, “a particularly unusual decision given that the case involved allegations of sexual abuse and domestic violence,” as well as the judge’s decision not to sequester the jury which resulted in “a trial by social media.”

That, too, could be a losing argument according to Ring, as sequestering juries for lengthy trials has fallen out of favour.

It’s a lot to ask seven jury members to spend upwards of six weeks without their phones. Hell, even six hours is a struggle these days.

The above does make it sound like Heard may be wasting her time, but accepting the verdict would also send its own message:

Though legal experts were divided on whether Heard stands a chance against Depp if she appeals her case, they agree it may be worth the risk for Heard.

“In no way, shape, or form,” says Ring, “is this a slam-dunk winner for Johnny Depp on appeal.”

Of course, whatever happens on appeal will do little to change the general public’s view on the matter.

Depp may legally be called a “wife beater” in the UK but around the world, he’s being celebrated by millions as a hero.

[sources:intnews&time]