Johnny Depp's Lawyer Says Her Viral Stardom Is 'Surreal': 'I Don't Know My Way Around TikTok'

  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
·3 min read
In this article:
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
Johnny Depp (R) and his attorney Camille Vasquez (L) during a break in the 50 million US dollar Depp vs Heard defamation trial at the Fairfax County Circuit Court
Johnny Depp (R) and his attorney Camille Vasquez (L) during a break in the 50 million US dollar Depp vs Heard defamation trial at the Fairfax County Circuit Court

SHAWN THEW/POOL/AFP via Getty Images Camille Vasquez and Johnny Depp

Camille Vasquez is reflecting on her newfound TikTok fame.

In an exclusive interview with PEOPLE following the verdict in which her client Johnny Depp came out mostly victorious, with the jury awarding him $10.35 million in damages against ex-wife Amber Heard, the attorney says she "didn't know what was happening on social media" during the six-week defamation trial.

In terms of how the public responded during the trial, "I'm not that surprised because I know the facts," Vasquez adds. "I know the evidence and it was clear to me that we were on the right side of this. And I know all of it."

Of becoming a TikTok celebrity herself, Vasquez tells PEOPLE those are "words I never thought I'd hear."

"It's funny, but also it's surreal," she says. "It's overwhelming, but I really believe that to the extent that I could inspire young women to stay in school, work hard and maybe pursue a career in law, then it was all worth it because that's what's important at the end of the day."

Never miss a story — sign up for PEOPLE's free daily newsletter to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from juicy celebrity news to compelling human-interest stories.

Johnny Depp's attorneys Benjamin Chew and Camille Vasquez talk before the jury announced a split verdict in favor of both Johnny Depp and Amber Heard on their claim and counter-claim in the Depp v. Heard civil defamation trial at the Fairfax County Circuit Courthouse
Johnny Depp's attorneys Benjamin Chew and Camille Vasquez talk before the jury announced a split verdict in favor of both Johnny Depp and Amber Heard on their claim and counter-claim in the Depp v. Heard civil defamation trial at the Fairfax County Circuit Courthouse

EVELYN HOCKSTEIN/POOL/AFP via Getty Images Camille Vasquez

RELATED: Legal Expert Says Fan Support of Johnny Depp on Social Media "Means Nothing for the Case"

"And that's the new medium for communication and that's how young people and people in general really communicate and absorb news and become inspired. And so if that's the forum, so be it," she adds, but admits, "I don't know my way around TikTok."

Last week, Depp won all three defamation claims in the case and was awarded $15 million in damages by a jury, though the judge reduced the amount Heard, 36, will have to pay to $10.35 million due to a Virginia law capping punitive damages.

Depp was found to have defamed Heard on one of three claims in her countersuit. The Aquaman actress was awarded $2 million in damages.

Depp sued Heard for $50 million in damages, claiming she defamed him by writing a 2018 op-ed about coming forward with domestic-abuse accusations, though she did not mention him by name.

RELATED VIDEO: Amber Heard's Attorney Says Jurors Were Skewed by "Lopsided" Social Media Posts, Actress Was "Demonized"

Meanwhile, the actress filed a countersuit seeking $100 million in damages, claiming the Pirates of the Caribbean star spearheaded a campaign to discredit her and her allegations as "fake" and a "hoax," harming her career and reputation.

During an appearance last week on the Today show, Heard's attorney Elaine Charlson Bredehoft told Savannah Guthrie that her client was "demonized" during the trial and that internet favor was "absolutely" in Depp's corner, which she believes affected the outcome of the case.

Though jurors were instructed not to research the case or scan social media during breaks from the courtroom, Bredehoft said, "How can you not? They went home every night, they have families, the families are on social media. We had a 10-day break in the middle because of the judicial conference. There's no way they couldn't have been influenced by it."

"And it was horrible — it really, really was lopsided," the attorney continued. "It was like the Roman Colosseum, how they viewed this whole case."