Trial shocker: Amber Heard abuse expert never met Johnny Depp | LiveNOW from FOX
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 фев 2025
- Dawn Hughes, a clinical psychologist hired by Amber Heard's legal team in her defamation trial against actor Johnny Depp, admitted that she has never met Johnny Depp. Depp's legal team spent a significant amount of time questioning Hughes' ability to properly evaluate the relationship without talking to both parties.
Subscribe to LiveNOW from FOX! www.youtube.co...
Where to watch LiveNOW from FOX: www.livenowfox...
Follow us @LiveNOWFOX on Twitter: / livenowfox
Raw and unfiltered. Watch a non-stop stream of breaking news, live events and stories across the nation. Limited commentary. No opinion. Experience LiveNOW from FOX.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Wow, this woman makes assessments without ever having interviewed Johnny Depp. Unbelievable. She is a poor example of a clinical psychologist.
She had no choice, he wouldn't see her.
Well, she assessed JD through tabloid write ups🤣
No dude, she is a magnificent expert, she can asses a relationship knowing only half of the story! Totally unbiased /S
She is the kind of therapist tha does not help people, and prevents them from getting better. Prolong the agony for that person
It's funny how everyone sides with Depp. What if they were both abusive to each other? That sounds likely to me, in which case Johnny loses. Johnny's teams' psychologist was very poor: she diagnosed histrionic PD. That diagnosis has been discredited for many years.
JDs attorney is no joke, man. His arguments are extremely to the point. They make it very evident what they are trying to clarify with their questions and the witness digs their own grave. Very good legal team.
He’s also assertive. With the US court cases I’ve watched, the good ones sound like that. Ambers lawyers sound scared to ask questions. Night and day difference
I think it is more due to the fact that this woman has so many holes in her story. The Psychologist that did an analysis on Amber Heard for JD's team was rock solid on everything she said and backing every comment she ever made with more foundation on her points.
@@akanuwolf yes I strongly agree, I feel like JDs team is going to use this information against them
AND he's being polite, calm, doesn't interrupt the witness for no reasons etc. Night and day compared to AHs team. That's actually refreshing
He’s an excellent lawyer. Many lawyers like myself are watching this case as a learning tool
Incredible. She’s a psychologist and stated that she could judge someone without even meeting him ever. That’s why Ambers legal team hired her. It’s scary when a person’s arrogance is over her knowledge.
They hired her because they've worked with her before. No surprises there.
She looks like a person who responds to money more than logic.
That's not disgusting, that's just basic rationality; If x then y...
Example: IF Amber Heard was abused by her partner THEN the person who is her partner abused her.
IF what she is saying is true, and the psychologist provedd it to be true, then simple rationality allows the psychologist to make a literally undeniable assumption... If its true...
is she a witch? a fortune-teller or something? how can she judge someone without ever meeting them…
Kinda curious on why they were bullying the other Psyche so hard, yet were going along with this ones.
Wow, wow and wow. I AM a Doctor in Psychology, specializing in both clinical and forensic psychology. I have been a licensed mental health practitioner for over 20 years in Florida and I am blown away at the veracity of this so called expert. To sit in court and make the assertions that she has made without ever interviewing both parties is truly insane. Most of these experts are nothing but hired guns, hired because it strengthens one side over the other. In my 20 years plus of experience I have only testified as an expert twice. Why you may ask, well let me tell you why. As part of my agreement I must meet with all parties involved and I will report it as I see it. Most of the time my findings are not what the hiring legal team is looking for. Therefore, I get paid for my time and never get called as an expert. This “expert” is doing a huge disservice to my profession.
Veracity? Maybe you meant audacity?
But yeah this witness is scummy af.
I think that's the question bredehoft asked to dr. Curry whether if she would not be testify in court if her examination doesn't provide anything to depp's defense
@@bluehazard2 correct.
They just keep shopping for an expert witness that is beneficial to them. And that's the only one they bring forth at trial (obviously)
@@drebk Might explain why this one's so bad; slim pickings
Is veracity the word you mean or something negative like mendacity or duplicity?
Veracity
/vəˈrasɪti/
noun
conformity to facts; accuracy.
"officials expressed doubts concerning the veracity of the story"
Similar:
truthfulness
Opposite:
falsity
habitual truthfulness.
"voters should be concerned about his veracity and character"
They change the tone of your comment drastically.
"I never met with Johnny because typically we see cases where men are the aggressors... And Miss Heard told a very convincing story" Thats essentially what she just said... Wow
En qué minuto??
From 0:00 to the end
Don't forget paid a boat load too.
She actually said that it was her understanding that JD didn't sit for psychological evaluations, thus she never saw him. She also plainly stated that "there are limitations inherent in that" - [in assessing a relationship with information about, but no personal evaluation of, one of the parties]. I heard it, I'm sure the jury heard it.
typically--gender stereotype story--(speaks for itself)
Any Psychologist understands that when they only speak to one partner they are getting a biased account of the relationship dynamics. For this woman to testify under oath as a witness for Amber without ever meeting or speaking with Johnny Depp is beyond malpractice.
She seemed to have no belief that a guy could be abused, calling all abuse from Amber "if true" or "a response to his violence".
Oh really yet Depps team paid for a clinician that didn't evaluate depp.
Well said. I totally agree.
She only wants one side. She's a professional paid witness for anyone that will pay her.
This, as the husband of an MHP my wife is beyond shocked at this, she works in FP and would never ever ever testify w/o talking to both partners.
You can tell this woman is absolutely on Amber's side. There's a lot of money floating around this room and it bet she was paid well with how she speaks.
I hope the judge can sense that too.
@@pratyashi191 me too 😊 but I personally since she's biased on Amber's side as well. Yesterday she questioned a certain evidence and Johnny's lawyer had to explain several times as if she didn't see it before. That's concerning..
@@pratyashi191 Unlikely, shes also a woman thus in her nature to sympathize more-so with another woman . But I do hope she possesses wisdom.
History shows; past Judges did not always have wisdom.
@@stormking1973 She's a judge first, then a woman here. I hope JD wins!
@@stormking1973 that's not the case . I'm a women and a former victim of dv, yet I believe that johnny was the victim here. Johnny's lawyer made good points about the psychologists use of he him pronouns when talking about the perpetrator of dv, and she her when referring to victims
This woman admitted having no experience testifying about male spousal abuse where the abuser is a female.
No matter what the jury decides, whether they see what we see or not, Johnny saved his reputation in the eyes of the world and confirmed the respect and admiration his work earned him for decades.
Amber, good luck in the afterlife to you... In your gold digging career
i wonder if anyone from hollywood would take amber heared... such a fake snitchin betch...
And good luck to Johnny in the afterlife in his quest to get as loaded, abusive and stinkin’ sloppy as he wants and still able to score a beautiful woman almost half his age. Particularly, since money won’t mean a damn thing. Right? How silly can humans be?
@@TheresaLyonhart
Where is evidence of Depp's violence ?!
That is what the case is about. Not being 'loaded', verbally 'abusive' or 'sloppy'.!!
Why would she need to have experience testifying to be good at her job?
That’s like saying you can’t be good washing the dishes until you testified in a court of law.
Wanda, like so many, are sad human beings. Worshiping celebrities like gods isn’t a way to live your life.
@@TheresaLyonhart Recently created channel trolling, big surprise, post your info you coward
She’s getting so flustered and emotional on almost all of her responses. Nothing like the previous psychologist we have come to know and love.
Exactly
She becomes more redish by every moment, at the end of her testimony her face was pure red. Also when she talked with depps lawyers she would look at them and when talking to ah lawyers she will mostly try to look at the jury...
She was there and was looking sexy AF
She was a target for a very definite sociopath. Unfortunately, many Psychologist/psychiatrist have a plethora of issues themselves. The good ones can see past the B.S. of where the person is pulling the wool over their eyes. There are some psychs who also have an agenda and side with women/men based on their own issues. This is obviously one of them. If she can't spot a phony/sociopath she's a terrible psych. It's why the defense hired her. Easily strung along
Yup. When you are on the dishonest side, it is tough to win any real argument.
This woman is the last person I’d have testify on my behalf.
She’s very gruff.
I think this lady has BPD...haha but im not qualified to diagnose her...oh wait that doesnt seem to matter here does it! Hahahah
Everyone on Amber's team, is an utter joke. Apropos, for this witness to be on her team.
Love Johnny, but this doc is sharp. She’s got the attorney all flustered.
If you're of the male gender, probably yes.
What kind of an insanity is this? Without even looking at the man she reached the conclusion that Depp was abusing Amber? I think she needs a psychologist for doing this..
She just ruined her own career. Dawn Hughes is the most unprofessional "psychologist" I have ever seen. Just awful. Hope she gets thoroughly investigated after this. This is just disgusting. She must be stripped of her license.
Yesss You're Right
Unfortunately this is par for the course for all medical "professionals" today.
I hope so too, but since I believe she practices in CA, the CA Bar or AG, probably won’t bat an eye.
I wonder how much money she got from Amber heard to do this
@@jnnkmm $500 an hour she said today
Dear God this woman absolutely refuses to defend a man against a woman, she's defended or sided with MANY men but only when the other party is ALSO male. She's terrifying
Yes! That was huge, Depp’s lawyers should’ve poked around that a little more
That’s terrifying, and it goes to show you why ordinary people have so little faith when it comes to our legal system. You can buy and pay experts if you have the cash.
Well she did claim that a woman abusing a male is not a big thing. That since he is bigger and stronger than her it doesn't amount to anything near as bad as men abusing woman. That when a woman is abused they feel trapped and helpless. And that is something that johnny doesn't feel.
She is a pos.
Depp's lawyers , one point at a time, shredded this radical feminist.
she should be sacked and have any medical licencing revoked...and all the cases she has given testimony in should be reviewed.
The fact that an "expert" psychologist claims that they can assess a relationship without talking to both of the parties tells me one thing: unqualified.
Exactly …👍
Yep
Oh but she’s not an expert witness but you should definitely trust her “expertise”
Would someone PLEASE tell Amber to drop the suit and get out of town while she may have just a little bit of dignity left. This woman is destroying what is left of her career. She is still young to be all washed up but it looks like that is what is going to happen. Will anyone be surprised to read/hear in 5 years or so she is broke. I won't.
True
This lawer is very smart. He kept the Psychologist by her neck. The last part about assessing the relationship by only questionning Amber Heard is right on point. He did it respectfully.
18:35 She basically said you can get both sides of a story by talking to only *ONE* side. 🤦♂️🤪
Respectfully? If anyone spoke to me with that nasty tone I would level him. She kept her cool and more than held her own.
@@TheresaLyonhart lol if you resort to "leveling" anyone then you're an unhinged person and this is clearly why you're an Amber Turd supporter.
@@TheresaLyonhart įįšš
YTTYyuu
I hope APA investigate if this woman's "testimony" violate professional ethical guidelines for giving biased and unprofessional opinions. State board should also investigate and revoke her license (if she has one).
You’re Crazy! Your just a Depp fan!!
I suspect ANY case she’s been involved with in the past will lead to those accused asking for a retrial due to this lady’s quality of work done.
With this in mind, it doesn’t mean all her victims came to her with lies. The true victims she helped out will be the ones hurt because their cases will likely get a retrial.
This lady is just bad for the system.
or have her done for purjory as she is lying about facts
To elaborate on this, I think the specific law, if it exists, would be around how "comprehensive" an assessment should be to qualify to be used in testimony. An assessment consists of "methods" and each method should be peer reviewed and accepted in the wider scientific field. She may well have used established peer validated methods, however, she could have easily left out other methods that would have contradicted the case she was trying to make. There needs to be a law to protect against this. I'm sure there already is, mad if there isn't!
she should be removed as a witness anyway because if i am not wrong in what i saw, she adressed the jusry directly, which, if i am not wrong again, is a pretty big no no.
Dr Curry: "It is not the job of a psychologist to determine whether or not an event took place".
Dr Hughes: "Johnny did it".
It's so true
On point
@Zi Kun Zeng sounds good to me. Very fitting
@Zi Kun Zeng I love zhangs
@Antonia non opinionated source?
The other therapist made a compelling comment on how therapists can be biased towards their patients and this was an excellent example of that: this woman is 100% on Amber heards side
This woman is being paid handsomely by Heards' team of Lawyers. It's all about the money.
You mean Dr. Hotness?
It annoyed me that her lawyers tried to make the other woman look bad because dinner was served while she was meeting with Johnny and his lawyers like she would jeopardize her career for a nice dinner and drinks.
And she may lose her license because of it as she also filled out all of Amber's testing questions.
no shitting my bed sherlock lol
That lawyer is smart af. His line of questioning baits you in and corners you, you have no option but to say things you would rather not. Polite too!
He definitely did his homework. The question about pay and the error in the transcript not being corrected imay have the jury "query" her truthfulness.
This woman is awful! Imagine how many lives she must have ruined , she being involved in 50 + cases as she stated.....
Doesn't bare thinking about if she herself is a untreated cluster b
YOU ARE RIGHT. SHE IS NOT SOMEONE WHO I WOULD SEND MY LOVED ONE TO. SHE IS UNETHICAL.
But how johny like person trapped to her?he has good brain.but still how he trapped.
Money 💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💵💵💵💵💵💵💵💵💵💵💵💵 Speaks.
@@vyasjwalit3999 She was acting nice and cute.
She is literally abusing her position of authority. She cites the literature, but then argues feelings as it pertains to evaluating a relationship without meeting with both parties. This is why people don't take psychology seriously.
I couldn’t have said it any better myself. 👏
You must know that in the cases of various forms of abuse, PTSD, and so forth, when there is a legitimate perpetrator, either they cannot be located or refuse to come in, and (absent court order) it is always their right to refuse to come in. It is not a stigma to refuse and proves nothing either way. Hence these disciplines _have to_ develop ways to determine whether the patient is being truthful. She explained that under direct examination.
Shouldn't you say Psychologists? You said you're fine with the literature, but have an issue with that woman adding her own opinions, ergo the problem is her.
Well said
@@lcunash8093 The problem with psychology is the execution, by psychologists, ergo there is a problem with psychology.
Good thing to note is how the attorney treats this witness. He never interrupted her, allowed her to completely answer a question (even if that answer wasn't favorable), and never spoke in a very demeaning tone. Total opposite from AH lawyers
He's probably following that old rule to never interrupt your enemy when she's making a mistake... or maybe he's buying time and selling her 'rope' to hang her arguments with.
none of that "we need to respect the court's time" BS
RGB23 Well spotted and said!! 👍
last time he let her speak in full session which is why now he has plenty of her holes to poke
Rumpole of The Bailey said “Cross examination does not mean you examine someone crossly”
I do think it’s telling her only examples of men being abused are children and men being assaulted by other man, not a single example of a man being abused by a woman. I don’t think she really cares about male victims of female abusers even if she says otherwise.
The tone of that lawyer’s voice, in addressing a professional, is demeaning and nasty. I wonder how much money Depp is paying his little team of lawyers for representing him?🤔
@@TheresaLyonhart they’re lawyers. The whole point of the. Is to discredit each other enough until the jury is swayed
@@TheresaLyonhart this is perfectly normal questioning and tone of voice. They aim to unnerve and 'break down' other lawyers and witnesses of all sorts as well as the opposing person in the trial.
Absolutely agreed! She talks about psychologists having this bias though, only to display it herself. Very sly!
@@TheresaLyonhart yeah the tone is horrible, very much like the tone Heard's lawyers have. it's their job, and I get frustrated listening to lawyers pretty often too, but it's just their job in these situations. it's not the lawyer's job to be fair or understanding, quite the opposite
She’s a hostile witness, her anger towards men and particularly in this case is evident she is trying to sway the jury!
lol most of the jury in this case is male, she's digging herself a grave
Exactly
@@Raresstanciu1 nah that's not how it works, look at all these male reporters attitude towards Johnny, in fact all the female reporters have been somewhat generous towards Depp a lil bit.
Don't forget the jury is mostly consistent of men, so I don't think this is working in her favour.
Man hater allegedly
I don’t think she should have used any pronouns as an expert. “Victim and perpetrator” are what I believe an unbiased expert should use .
They/them also works. Just refer to victims and perpetrators. We do this in business and management when talking about management interaction. (Managers would do X and in turn employees will do Y. They intend to do something etc.)
Its basic professional courtesy.
Pardon me, but what's wrong with using pronouns She and Her? Isn't Amber Heard a woman? I'm slightly confused!!!
@@marjanp4784 using speicifc pronouns comes off as being biased and generalizing an entire gender to fit a narrative.
As an expert, she needs to be objective and non biased and state that both sides have a point and not just label all men as 'abusers' and all women as 'victims' such as what this so called 'expert' is doing
@@marjanp4784 it's wrong cuz a lawyer can do just this it brings in doubt .
btw i live in the netherlands and i follow the story!!
The fact that she says she has played a role in many cases is deeply disturbing. Someone should re-evaluate those cases. I can't help but think you will find at least 1 person who was unfairly treated due to her expertise.
Her ‘expertise’ 😂
"expertise"???
She sounds like someone who makes A LOT of money off people's misery.
Good point. I suppose many of those people can't afford a team as Mr Depp do to demolish a professional layer
I think we will find atleast 1 male who was served justice
Thanks Dan Tom, good call.
As a soon to be psychiatrist I can clearly say, without the shadow of a doubt, that this woman is extremely biased and unprofessional.
I don't know how she achieved all those accolades, or a board certification for that matter, without anyone suspecting foul play. My head of psychiatry was made aware of this clip and he said, word per word: She would have been fired within a week in my hospital, such shoddy and biased work really brings disgrace to our profession and that's the reason why a lot of people don't trust psychiatrists in the first place.
That being said, I'm not american nor I work in the US, in our country doctors tend to be scrutinized way harder. People like Dr. Hughes, generally speaking, don't get to work in the medical field at all.
@Chezco Not really true, but I'm sorry you've had a bad experience. Find a better doctor. Those doctors are quacks. SSRIs dont work forever, don't expect them to. There are far more treatment options than a SSRIs and any doctor worth his degree should have explored those with you before they ever threw you on an SSRI. SSRIs are dangerous.
@Chezco You ever try having a daily routine with Kava? It takes some practice, a bit of patience to get acclimated, but once you get the effects it can really give you some peace for some time each day.
@@inawrocki207 is that the root from the islands that you mix in water to make a muddy drink?lol
@@timothyclark796 Lol It is. It's absolutely wretched. It's also, ironically, the only state-altering substance that doesn't make me absolutely sick.
Find a new profession, being a professional liar and ruining other's lives or assisting them in destroying their own lives just seems bad and wrong.
I'm a psychotherapist and this Dr is the perfect example of the wrong reasons someone becomes a mental health professional. The need to feel above, important, in control. Whether Dr Curry is correct or not in her assessment, her response was professional, not personal like observed here....
I remember reading that a vast amount of psychologists/therapists have disorders themselves. It takes crazy to deal with crazy. Even so much as reading that one therapist intentionally got her client to break up with her bf so she can start dating the clients BF.
As a fellow psychotherapist with 13 years experience I completely agree.
I’m a research psychologist and I agree, too.
Yes! This woman is awful. For me, she gives off very negative energy.
Dr Curry was EXCELLENT 👏👏👏👏
As a psychologist who deals with ipv, she’s an absolute disgrace. Someone needs to review her cases asap. Her claiming that psychologists should check their bias’ and then her coming in with nothing but bias is hilarious and the “battered woman syndrome” is quite outdated and was originally published as a way of discrediting the “battered husband syndrome” in the 70s/early 80s. Not only does she need to brush up on recent studies but she also needs to take her own advice and check her bias which is harmful and reinforces the male perpetrator stereotype; it’s especially damaging in cases like this one.
The fact that she provided an assessment without meeting Johnny or as she saw him, “the perpetrator”, is a huge red flag and she should never have been allowed to testify in the first place without having the insight from both sides. Disgusting.
Well said.
I don’t think you should be allowed to have anyone testify for you when you’re paying them that right there says they’re gonna say what you want. Also my question is, Isn’t that her job to just meet with the one person she was hired to talk about
@@kthomas5149 the difference between AH and JD hired psychologist is that AH psychologists gave a foregone conclusion about Johnny without evaluating Johnny. So if she only evaluated AH, then fairly the results should only revolved around AH at all.
She also said...hearsay. That she understood Johnny didn't want to do something. That should have been called out.
For her: men can be the victims, but only when the perpetrators are men?! I'm surprised Depp's team didn't catch her on this point. She completely feigns ignorance, or disregards mentioning, where women are the perpetrators in IPV against men.
I’m glad that the lawyer pointed out that she continued to use ‘she’ instead of unbiased pronouns
yep and notice she is backpedalling
Yes!
This was so obvious and wrong, I'm glad Depp's lawyer is addressing that directly
Cause Johnny’s lawyers are good.
I was slightly miffed that he didn't refute her claim that she was only using them in direct relation to the case, and not in a general sense. She was totally using those pronouns in a general sense, indicating an inherent bias.
Strange how throughout the line of questioning they were no objections can really see the difference in skills of both attorneys
the fact AHs team let this lady testify for her makes me think theyve given up on the case HAHA
Oooh look who I found
Bruh !! internship?
pathetic
@@senpaiisnepali yes howd u know 🤨
I like how AHs also means American Horror Story
"I've testified in hundreds of cases."
"I only testify 1-2 times in a year."
So she has been doing this about 50-100 years and if she started testifying at the age of 18 then she's now 68-118 years old.
Her face certainly says so. Lol
Lmao
she worked on hundreds of cases, the vast majority not going to trial
But it does make you wonder how many court trials she has , testified in that ..are actually criminal trials as there would most , definitely be some perjury charges there .. seriously some people are so dumb when it comes to courts of law and what you can and can't legally do ..makes my brain hurt
@@0Y0L I'm cackling at this hahah however i think the distinction lies in the vast majority not making it to a court case such as this @Black
She is the perfect witness for AH. Arrogant, self-righteous, argumentative and just wholly unlikable. She is not fact finding and she is obviously biased. Her entire entire statement should be tossed out.
This lady annoyed the crap out of me & she was reading her notes, which isn't allowed & I loved when Johnny spotted her doing it & told Ben!!
She’s the type of witness very few lawyers would want on the stand. Not only is she hostile and argumentative, she makes illogical conclusions that only buttress the position of the lawyers that pay her.
I'm just imagining this psychologist testifying that some regular John/Jane Doe partner is violent, without ever having evaluated them. Their lives could be ruined by this kind of practice. I don't understand how a psychologist is allowed to form an "expert opinion" without interviewing both parties.
She tries the well ive done hundreds of cases like these so that means that this new case must be like this. Which is absolutely wrong when you have to look at both sides objectively. Glad the lawyers for JD ratted this bad woman out. 1 down many to go.
@@mishswb4950 this is riveting!
Of course she’s good at what she does, her office has been in an expensive street in Manhattan since 2005.
Let's not forget that she contradicted herself on several occasions and bent the rules of the courtroom by reading from her notes when specifically told not to. She didn't recall anything. Even Johnny's lawyer had to take notes. Something tells me that's how she passed her exams in school, especially if she does this in front of everyone in a courtroom, which has cameras pointed at her.
The attorney laid out clearly that this psychiatrist:
1) Is a money chaser
2) Never testified for a male victim abused by a female partner
3) Made her evaluation without ever talking to JD
The difference between this attorney and AH's team is night and day
JD's team? Because, this is exactly how AH's team works lol.
i love how she corrected that she isnt paid $100/hr, but $500/hr like its going to help the defense.
@@cerebrumexcrement She was so proud of herself too. 🙄
Psychologist, not psychiatrist- big difference.
@@ChristopherBergsten err... JD’s psychologist met with both Amber and Johnny, had fully balanced experience with both male and female victims, and was honest and consistent on the stand.
Now she is a psychic...she hasn't met Johnny Depp, but knows he is an abuser.
He is a heterosexual male; that is all she needs to know.
She knows everything 😁
I wonder how many men’s lives she has destroyed being an “expert witness” in family courts.
I assume 50
The fact she has never met Johnny is going to torpedo her testimony.
dont think so ... i am no expert and a absolute johnny defender BUT external data/facts/report save a lot of time on her part of the work. I see her point, still to access a realationship at least one meeting should be required, but thats why she is an "expert" and studied that profession.
Claiming someone did something based on your client’s work is Hearsay, Amber’s lawyer’s favorite word. In other words, Amber’s team is contradicting themselves
@@victorwallec2534 But she is expert witness in this particular case so of course it matters.
@@dandx67895 thats true, but she mentioned medical reports and i think she meant also reports of depps pscholgy condition by other "expert" on their field ... + (those lies of heard are consisent with the facts givinen in those reports)
+ my comment was about this beeing a bomb shell in the trial ... its a minor thing in my opinion
The turd in the bed, the cut off finger, audio reports ect. are bomb shells, but this stuff in the video is no comparable and only over convuluted in my opinion
@@victorwallec2534 She never met him though thus she only has Amber's bias and lying side. The fact that she doesn't see this and has never testified for a man against a female abuser means she has no merit.
I'm a psych student and even *I* know that you can't come to a conclusion without talking to both parties since people can still manipulate psychologists/therapists. Just cause you study psychology and how people behave doesn't mean you're already immune to being manipulated.
Look what you learned if a burned out starlet tells you it is so, no need to speak to the other partner! Lol this witness is a fool 🤣
Everyone believes amber and did before she spoke today and told her side is that not the same thing
Ok but do you not think it’s biased for depps forensic psychologist to meet with him & his legal team at his house for dinner and drinks before she evaluated amber? She went into the evaluation with pre conceived notion that amber is crazy and abusive
@@alicialapchak5449 exactly, both sides are entitled to hire a biased 'professional psychiatric witness'
@@alicialapchak5449 at least she met her.
This totally breaks my heart for those lives of people she has come in contact with that she was paid $500 an hour to destroy.. Shame on her.. I hope she never makes another dime off others misery.. Listening to her I was talking back to her! She has no common sense as to what she was doing! This is book sense NOT common sense.
I absolutely agree with you. The sheer arrogance of this woman is insane. The amount of money she extorts from people who actually need help is mind boggling.
I agree
Yup! U gotta wonder how much innocent men were sent to jail cause of her
How’s she “credible” if she didn’t meet with both parties? Take her out of the courtroom what a fool. She should be investigated after this
Yes!!! Send her ass to trial 😡
thats your only takeaway from this?
man...
look a little deeper.
@@Anon-xd3cf take a little deeper to what? Amber's Turd?
@@Anon-xd3cf he/she/it never said anything about its the only takeaway from this.
@@Anon-xd3cf he’s saying that she should’ve interviewed Johnny and asked about his side of the relationship. She has only heard ambers side
It’s clear she’s bias, I hope this woman’s license goes into review. Therapists like her cause more harm to people who genuinely need help.
Fully agree
@aaron singer ok autocorrect thanks for that (sarcastic voice)
Exactly
@aaron singer lol look at this fine specimen past comments. Accusing people of idolizing a celebrity and has multiple posts on this trial. Put the phone down.
@aaron singer You used the word “dumb” incorrectly.
I'm watching this with my sister who is a psychologist. She's shocked at the stark difference between Dr. Curry and Dr. Hughes. The tones are very different too. While Dr. Curry was articulate and very professional, Dr. Hughes sounds angry. Anyway, it's crazy that she would label men as the abusers and the women as the abused. Her patients should find a new doctor she seems to be doing more harm than actually helping patients.
She seems to be the typical anti-masculinity third wave feminist. Graduated with one goal in mind and that was to bring down the patriarchy via helping women even when they’re in the wrong. She’s an example of why so many Americans don’t trust any kind of “professional”.
Not just that, but with Dr Hughes I’m noticing a lack of muffins…. Without the muffins involved the attorneys had to focus on the case! No one wants that! Lol
Funny how a "board certified" is looking like a clown in court than the one that's "not board certified"
@@WanderingMind_ actually ...might be something more folks need to learn...the value of board certified is not only overrated but possibly compromised more than it is reliable.
Also Dr Curry never pointed her finger, where Hugh seemed to make out that men are always the abusers, she said that JD was highly abusive where as Amber was only mildly 😕😳 was always a male perpetrator when she gave examples 😲
"You can't assess a relationship without talking to both parties can you?"
Dawn: "Yes you can". First of all, how is she even a psychologist, or in any position of power whatsoever when this is how incapable of basic thought she is? All I see is a bitter old woman, not a professional. I'd go as far as to argue that she's probably landed more than just one innocent person in prison with her bias.
I agree with all of this!
Yes! Yes! Yes! And I'm guessing she didn't lose one wink of sleep about it! Ugh!
Apparently you can if you were paid 500 bucks an hour... 😏😏😏
She is basing her evaluations on a prejudicial basis, never having met or conferred with Depp. She is argumentative and unbelievable in her testimony.
Abusers will not talk to evaluators. He refused to be evaluated. Red flag.
@@Ohioblues What? JD never refused to be evaluated, she clearly stated that she deem JD not to be stable enough to be evaluated.
@@Ohioblues yeah because she is a saint right?
Her answers clearly indicate an inherent bias relating to "Female on Male violence". Only refers to Male on Female, Male on Male, Female on Female with the exception of defending women who have killed their Male partner "as a result of domestic violence".
One possibility is that she has never encountered such an event (extremely unlikely given her claims as to number of cases handled) other is that she refuses to take such cases and the third is she is being deliberately "opaque".
In real cases of abuse and PTSD, when there is a legitimate perpetrator, they often cannot be located or refuse to come in, and (absent court order) it is always their right to refuse to come in. It is not a stigma to refuse and proves nothing either way. Hence these disciplines _have to_ develop ways to determine whether the patient who does come in is being truthful, evasive, guarded, or exaggerating, etc. She explained all that under direct examination.
I don't blame Depp if he declined to be evaluated by her, and I don't understand why Heard agreed to talk to the muffin lady.
Normally I roll my eyes at lawyers picking apart words of testimonies, but I definitely noticed that she repeatedly referred to victims as "she" and "her" when NOT specifically referring to this case but speaking generally about victims of abuse.
Ok I'm on Johnny's side but on average more women are victims than men in straight relationships so that is not that strange
That was pissing me off yesterday too. Surprised it took so long to bring it up.
Yeah, she basically implies women are the abused.
@@Shasha-jo5iv Men don't go to police in abuse cases and abuse from females mostly is attack on character. Physical abuse is definitely domain of men beacuse on avarage we are stronger but abuse comes in many forms.
@@Shasha-jo5iv Yes on average that is true. But individually it is not. Every case need to be treated separately based on the evidence presented and not based on the "average". Without acknowledging this, it could to biases and wrongful judgement. An average person may make that mistake, but a professional/expert should not. They should respect that every person man or female could potentially be the victim and need to be objective first.
Wow she actually just said, as an expert, that she can assess a relationship based on one persons account. Is she even qualified? What is going on over there
Right
Yea guess i can be a psychologist too, based on my zodiac lol
I am so shocked about it!
@@dellchica2373 🤣😂🤣😂
@@djames251 😄😄😄👌
"I'm not making $100/hr that was a mistake"
"Oh okay, then how much are you making?"
"$500/hr"
Bro she impaled herself with that wtf
She can't determine whether a crime was committed,That's up to the courts, Why didn't the lawyer bring that up Bias Elaine?
I’m SO GLAD this lawyer brought up the fact that she was only using “she/her” as the victim & always the abuser referred to “him/he” !!
I get the vibe this Dr has some serious anger issues towards men. I get she focuses on women victims but sounds like something pushed her so far that way
@@GooseyGoWooWoo yeah, money
The answer to the Question at 6:31 really hammers this "Experts" bias home too.
Couple this with the Lawyer specifically bringing up her saying to "Pay attention to gender bias" before leading into this line of questioning. It was undoubtedly done to ensure that the Jury would be keeping "Gender bias" in mind for these subsequent questions.
Her reply clarifies quite clearly she has only exclusively treated, made reports for and testified IPV cases where the male is the victim of another male. Explicitly stating "Same Sex" couples.
Meaning she has never done so in male & female cases, where the male is the victim and the female is the abuser.
@@soulsurvivor8293 thank youuu I’ve been looking for someone to comment this cuz I didn’t know how to word it 😂
The entire process is about hearing both sides. This "expert" just stated she doesn't need to hold herself to the same standard as the legal system in which she's giving testimony. WOW.
What's the shock? She doesn't have to hold herself to the same standards as the legal system. Why would that be shocking to you?
Listening to this whole thing and she's just a professional in dodging the correct answer to a question. Then continues to say she didn't develop a professional opinion on Depp even tho she's testifying on heards behalf 😆
@@BuddyBurlison - She doesn't have to develop an opinion on Depp to testify on behalf of Heard. Do you not grasp that?
@@matthewyabsley do you not grasp that you cannot assign the role of perpetrator and victim without knowing the full dynamics of the relationship? If in her own practice she wants to half ass fine- but to go on trial is idiotic.
She doesn't answer questions she talks in circles
“I’m not making a conclusion on Mr.Depp himself”
*proceeds to say that he was the abuser*
LOLOLOLOLOL!! Soooo TRUE! Good catch.
This lady has more than likely had innocent men put in prison there needs to be an investigation into other cases she has been involved with
She reinforced the notion and statistics of women being victims and men being the perpetrators with all her biased assessments.
Excellent point! She is truly scary, her woman- biased hatred of men is clearly evident. WHY wouldn't she review all the assessments, reports, and data AND interview both parties? I hope she is disciplined and her personal attitudes and practices reviewed. Professionals like her are dangerous in their work with such vulnerable clientele.
“How else would you know without her telling you?“ I heard this snide remark from Depp’s lawyer and I think this is precisely the point, she had never talked to Johnny but she diagnosed their relationship…
Diagnosed the relationship by assessing only one party. She did not diagnose it accurately then.
Anyone who has ANY common sense, knows there is three sides to every story. His side, her side, and the exact truth in the middle, because most people don't remember every single thing that was said, or done, or how it happened, ect...
@@richsweeney1115 That cliche is too inaccurate for reality. It literally could be 100% one side is truthful and the other side 0% truthful. Real life is not a cartoon. It could also be 98% vs 2% etc etc.
@@Redbeardian they're not saying that it's 50/50 that each side is being truth. They're saying there's 3 sides to the story. Person as story might be 99 truthful and the other is 1 percent truthful. The point still stands there's 3 sides, person a, person b and the 100 percent truth
@@Redbeardian no, that IS real life.....most people don't remember everything in a fight .....it's not a cliche'....most people understand it
She did NOT evaluate DEPP personally....BUT HEARD'S attorneys decided to put her on the witness stand?!?!?
Is THIS making sense to anyone?!?!?
My GOD.....this has become a nightmare circus....for Johnny & his attorney team.
Never in my life... have I ever witnessed such a LEGAL DISASTER!!!!!
I think we all agree heard's legal team is a joke. 😂 It's almost like they don't like her.
Distractions
This so called expert witness left me in total shock. I'm sitting here with my jaw on the floor. Unbelivable that she think she is able to evaluate a relationship only from one side. I thought it took at least two to tango. Isn't that a relationship? Or is it really possible to have a relationship with only one self? I never knew you could, but ok. Today I learned something new, obviously........Unbelivable. I've never come across a more biast socalled expert, before.
“Always takes two hands to clap “ a very old saying 🤦🏽🤷🏽♂️
Well you would also if you were paid 500 bucks an hour... 😏😏
This is what we call a “Hired Gun.” She has an existing relationship and history with the defense and was brought in to substantiate the claims, not to run evaluations to make a professional and unbiased decision.
EXACTLY! Thank you.
THIS. This comment should have more likes.
I saw yesterday an explanation as to why she isn't a hired gun that says what you want, she is more like a crusader that says the exact same thing every time she gets hired. Both types are despicable and dangerous.
And Anbers lawyer “Karen” had the nerve to go on about Shannon Curry psychotherapist having “dinner & Drinks” with Johnny
Her testimony for the other trials must all sounds the same. "I interview only the women and I believed her while disagreeing and disregarding others."
She is a prime example of why people do not respect the field of psychology
wokeness ruins everything!
Fortunatelly, there is Dr. Curry
@@gstar3569 nothing to do with wokeness. This is simply a biased person who is unwilling to take her own field seriously
@@serban031 She's obviously a raging leftwing lunatic. Crazy eyes and everything.
its one of very few fields that do require utmost critical thinking abilities. You dont have any physical graphs to look at like surgeries do. Most psychologist are textbook clowns for very good reasons.
Her unprofessionalism is classless. The tone in her sarcasm her arrogance her attitude is disturbing. Does she think the jurors and public can't see through her unprofessional behavior? She's way to personally invested.
Esp insane when u compare everything u just mentioned to dr curry’s time on the stand. It’s night and day.
You’d be shocked how stupid the average juror is.
Jurors may be swayed as she looks at them
Shes a feminist
Tbh, the justice system is very much like wrestling. You have goodies and baddies during the show; but afterwards, everyone are the best of friends, win, lose or draw!!
She isn't being paid to give a true professional opinion, she was paid to side with Heard and argue for her lies through the lens of her profession. Two VERY different things. The board who she is responsible to need to review her status immediately.
Johnny's side used a psychologist that spoke very unbiased and kept saying things like "those things are beyond the purview of a psychologist" or "that was not my task" or "that doesn't exist in psychology". This woman on the other hand is willing to bury someone on a "she said!" Without pictures or records of broken bones or stays or any proof other than words.
💯
"Experts" like this have caused people to be put to death.
Is she a MeToo feminist too?
@@kevinjanghj probably
Notice that even in her list of cases where she's had male victims of abuse she never mentions women as abusers. She's very particular about specifying instances where men are abused by other men, thus allowing her to maintain the 'men as abusers' narrative.
Not to help her but but she did briefly mention women on women cases.
@@alexschild5389 but not women on men, right.
@@alexschild5389 it is strange that she hasn't treated men who are the victim of abuse by females when statistically, most child abuse is commited by females (obviously tilted by the fact women are more often primary care givers). It is almost as if she actively avoids cases in which men are the victims of abuse by women.
@@alexschild5389 That's because it doesn't help her. If her only frame of reference for female abusers is woman on woman then it only further emphasizes her bias by highlighting how she only frames men as abusers.
Well, she was talking about her experience.
Even a Mother knows you talk to each child that’s involved in an argument, so you can get to the heart of the problem. There’s ALWAYS two sides to every story. Speaking to one child would only give you HALF the story.
Whenever my dad spoke to me I lied about my brother everytime. I always claimed to be the victim because I didn't want to get in trouble.
That's not her role though. All she was hired to do was evaluate whether amber heard suffers from mental distress in a way that is consistent with battered wives
less than half the story.
in reality, if you have two kids and you only talk to one of them in the event of a problem...then you get less than half the story.
in reality both will likely try to hide parts of the truth, in reality both have their own narratives and reasoning...in reality they are both kids operating in a world incompatible with adult reasoning and logic (which comes with years of experience).
Point is, kids or not, listening to only one party in a two party problem ignores the possibility of other additional parties, ignores a larger context and assumes truth without scrutiny.
none of this is good.
honestly if someone approach you and want to hire you it would be hard to approach Mr Depp since he is not paying.
Whereas Dr. Curry did not just meet with both AH and JD but was also wined and dined by JD.
Yes. "I used female pronouns because I was referencing this case." No you were not. You were referencing IPV in general. There is no excuse. She should have said "A victim enters into a relationship with good intentions.." etc. She does know better. I believe she intentionally chose pronouns to sway the jury. Outside of that, she's being a WHOLE lot more cautious about her wording in cross than in her initial testimony.
They VERY CLEARLY asked her a question about IPV as a phenomenon, and she explained it in terms of women being victims and men being abusers. It was such a blatant lie it's incredible, I hope the jury caught that. Neither Amber nor this (somehow) board-certified psychologist that her team brought to the stand have any credibility.
In fairness, the vast majority of victims of IPV are women. (I am NOT an Amber Heard fan so don't freak out, I'm just saying the discussion around this case needs more nuance, it's all got way too black and white)
@@Erin-ho8qu Except when testifying she should have NEVER used those biased gender identifiers. Victim and abuser should have been used, not he/she.
@@Erin-ho8qu She is a forensic psychologist. This is a legal case. It IS black and white. That's the issue. This woman has been writing forensic reports and giving testimony for over 20 years. This particular speech she gave she's given hundreds of times. She chose her words very very carefully, and chose to portray victims as females and perpetrators as males very purposely. During her testimony she made several of these errors - not just with her use of genders here, but repeatedly claimed things that just were not supported by the data, and on cross-examination she got way more careful about what she was saying.
when asked about her bias, she started with "I believe men can be PERPETRATORS...as well as victims. She could have just said men can be victims. It is a psychological ploy to word associate while appearing to answer the statement. She is totally trying to create a bias in the jury. The lawyer should have shed light on her techniques to give them less power, instead, they appeared unnoticeable and natural.
She’s never met Depp! She’s only reviewed Heard and documentation arising from Heard’s various (I’m a victim) initiatives. This is as 1 sided as it gets. She’s waisting the courts time, and should have her license questioned. It’s ridiculous for her to suggest that a relationship can be assessed by not examining/interviewing both parties. It’s like only one spouse going to marriage counseling.
I don't even get how this is allowed!!
Did Depps psychologist evaluate him?
@@8randi both!
@@8randi his psychologist doesn't need to i believe
@@8randi the evaluation of Amber, as I gathered, was requested by the judge in their UK trial. She claimed that she suffered trauma. So, for judge to know she's telling the truth she was ordered to get evaluated.
She approved it to persuade the judge she's telling the truth and thinking she can fake psycho exams.
Turns out, she's lying. Makes you wonder how the hell she won the UK trial.
JD was not oredered to get evaluated as he claimed he doesnt suffered any trauma, so the judge didnt think it was necessary.
It’s “professionals” like her, that allow victims to continue to be abused and that allows perpetrators to build their confidence to continue to perpetrate.
you couldn’t have said it better !
Experts are bought & paid for…there’s always one expert who testifies to one thing, while the other testifies something completely different. If one expert happens to be a better liar, than they usually win over the jury.
Anybody else notice something?
Every single time she was asked if she had testified on the behalf of a man, she said ‘same-sex couple violence’.
LITERALLY.
EVERY.
SINGLE.
TIME.
Like literally go back and watch it!
She may have said ‘I know woman can be the abusers’ but her responses say otherwise. Why did she feel the need to clarify that it was same-sex? She could have just said ‘Yes, I have testified on behalf of a man before’. And left it at that - she’s not lying. But she always felt the need to add in that it was male-on-male abuse.
I am overjoyed that Depp’s legal team were able to spot this! Thank you so much!
Only gay men. Crazy.
Indeed. She never testified in favor of a man when a woman is involved.
Yeah apparently she is the ruling expert but never testified on behalf of a man against a woman.
It is crazy how this person could be allowed to work in such a field.
She probably thinks that women CAN be abusers, but only in a same-sex relationship.
Personally, I see her deflecting to not incriminate herself. She displays so many narcissistic characteristics, she may also be an abuser. People that lie this often and twist rhetoric, it becomes their reality of truth.
Despicable. This woman isn’t operating as an expert, she’s operating as a juror - but with information (and payment) only from one side.
She never testified in defense of a man against a woman abuser.
Oh my… what do that tell you👀
EXACTLY
FACT.
Exactly 💯
One word to describe her "professionalism." DISPICABLE. I am highly embarrassed for her and those of her profession that have to witness this.
despicable
👍👍👍👍
She is very sexist
What??? What part was despicable? Her answering every question clearly and professionally to his bumbling stuttering attempts to discredit her? Jesus, the hate and vitriol is real with so many of you ? He was toxic af!!
@@evien3790 -_-
This woman is articulate in defending her wrong agenda. This is what gives clinical psychology a bad name.
i don't think clinical psychology has a particularly bad name
Camoflauged abuse. I have many stories about people in trusted positions of authority that have abused. Doctors convicted, etc. People have a hard time speaking out about this, just like men have a hard time speaking out about being abuse by a partner.
100% agree
@@007april60 IMO, violence against men today, is STILL viewed as funny or not a big deal. Just watch some comedies or the reactions of those around you to violence from females, directed at men. It's NOT AT ALL EVEN CLOSE to the same.
It's a long way off for that. "Professionals" who show up in court like this don't help either. Knowingly twisting facts to fit data with a clear bias against men from the outset, all with the goal of perpetuating the saintly woman/violent man stereotype.
In this case, when BOTH parties haven't even been included in the assessment, it's ridiculous that it's even allowed as expert testimony. Seems clear that it's not even a *completed* evaluation "product" and it's allowed?? If someone could hit the reset switch on our justice system plz?
Edit: 🤣🤣 "ramble rant"
Spends months preparing then tries to be cutesy about her testifying being a small part because she's only actually testifying in a courtroom for minutes?? As if the entire goal of the rest of the work isn't preparing for that point. Fairly evident agenda, especially considering which types of questions she gets all cutesy and evasive/obfuscationary about...
What stood out to me about her testimony prior to this was exactly what Depp's attorney pointed out. Specifically she used this "female victimhood" by saying something about parents being concerned and wanting to take care of "their daughters" as it pertained to domestic abuse. I
That bias stood out to me, hope it did to the jury.
I can't imagine any juror missing her chronic insistence on using she/her, in a transparent attempt to sway them. Personally, if I were a juror I'd be offended that she thought me so stupid.
“I don’t testify on behalf of anyone”
…….
“I testified on behalf of a man on….”
Yes!! i caught that, also !! LMAO!
Lol. Yea she testify same sex male relationship.
And she just said she is beholden to AH legal team. Ie she has been hired at 500$ and hour by them before so she has to be biased or they won’t hire her again. And that issue is separately from her own baggage and bias against men. She also has the face of a bully imho. Imagine her in a relationship, yikes.
good catch/observation....thanks for that one.
This woman made a diagnosis of PTSD a year before she bothered administering the CAPS5 test (the gold standard test for PTSD). When she finally did, it was for this trial. It's an interpreted test. Meaning her bias was definitely a factor in its interpretation. She's nowhere near as professional as the first psychologist.
I was thinking the same thing! You always want to use more than one type of assessment technique for a comprehensive evaluation because rating scales on their own can be so subjective (even ones that are considered the gold standard for their respective domain). It's crazy that she didn't bother doing more behavioral observations or interviews or anything lol....yikes
Let’s not forget that psychologists are not truth finders
@@jamiehorwitz1227 experts like her wouldn't know the truth if it slapped her in the face
Also the first psych testified that the PTSD diagnosis showed 19 of the 20 symptoms and that such a finding is indicative of exaggeration
The first Psychologist, Mrs. Curry, shits all over this biased "unprofessional Psych doc"
This is so scary. Getting an "Professional opinion" without knowing the other party. I guess all her opinion was one sided.
She is not qualified to make assumptions when he has never met or talked to him. If she knew Amber was being abused, doesn't she have the right to report to police? I am probably wrong but would welcome an answer to it.
I'm kinda hoping that the people who gave her this power are hearing this. I think her license should be revoked just by admitting to the fact that she only got one side of the story. She doesn't deserve $500/hr nor does she deserve her license. This was absolutely disgusting to see her malpractice and going to court like that.
That woman shouldn't have authority, she's a professional testifier, she's paid to make Amber win not to tell the truth
As is all those depp pays
@@ASHMANDAN the difference is the expert witnesses on JD side have a unbiased testimony record lmao. Its like a racist have a Grand dragon as a expert witness vs the plaintiff has a Preacher of a multiracial church for their expert witness. then You come in and say the are both the same lmao. No one clearly shows public records of being clearly biased lol🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 this has to be a troll post
ABSOLUTELY!!!!!!
Paid to stretch and spread AH lies.
I believe you may be right. I wonder how many evil ex-wives have passed her name along with to future evil ex-wives. No way to get that percentage, but I'd bet it's high!! I cannot believe she teaches people how to testify in cases- when she truly sux at it!
This is crazy she makes assessments without meeting Johnn?! How is this even considered worthy of court testimony? Dare I say...HEAR SAY!
THANK YOUUU!! I NEEDED THIS!!!!
My man!
💯
Just out of curiosity, did you write 'hearsay' separately on purpose?
this woman is using her expert status to defend woman in court for large sums of money. the fact she’s siding with amber in this case shows that she’s not good at her job, it’s dangerous and i wonder how many other innocent men she’s got convicted.
💯💯💯🙌🙌🙌
How is that any differrent than what Mrs. Curry did for Johnny?
Nice profile picture, dude.
@@BlGGESTBROTHER she is siding with one side unlike dr.curry or so it seems
@Big Brother the difference is Mrs. Curry met Amber and then came to the conclusion. Dr. Hues never met Johnny and still accused him to be the abuser.
I’ve worked as a domestic abuse Detective for years. To establish the truth you never ever allow personal prejudices or beliefs without substantial peer reviewed evidenced opinion on a case. This supposed psychologist has stated clearly that she views circumstances where females reporting violence will use violence and it’s perfectly fine. Self defence is different to responsive violence/ instigating violence . Heard has clearly admitted confrontational conduct and violence on Depp. She’s clearly been unable to substantiate injuries she states she sustained. I have seen this same unprofessional conduct by female social workers. They make judgements and opinion on their own life experiences and prejudices. They overwhelm their ability to be objective . It’s extremely counterproductive to establishing truth and dangerous in such circumstances as a trial. I certainly view this supposed expert as being compromised by her deep and inner prejudices. They corrupt her assessment and she will vehemently deny that’s the case. Simply put she believes men are naturally predisposed to violence and women are naturally receivers of such violence 99.9 % of the time. The research she refers to is no doubt weighted to that opinion. Who did the research, what is their background, how was it peer reviewed and by whom .? When someone like this person states things with such conviction and certainty without any first hand witness experience you need to treat it with extreme caution.
A domestic abuse detective is a job? I'd love to learn and apply
@@ValentijnEnJack I joined the police in the UK and worked my way into that specialism . I’m now retired . That and child abuse investigation are something you need to enter with caution . It’s not a walk in the park and very distressing at times . Don’t be deluded it’s otherwise . You have to know you can handle walking through hell !!! Wherever you are you’ll need to join the police or become a lawyer and work in that specialism . It’s takes many years to build up skills and abilities to investigate properly and ethically . You cannot allow you own views to cloud your judgement . The first rule is to establish the truth and not prove your hypothesis!!
Good luck . 🙏
@@markwalker4142 Thank you for your nuanced and insightful answer! I hope you enjoy your retirement!
But the media (thereby the people) were conditioned to be the judge and executioner for the past 8 years. You can see that even recently by how people defended Will Smith for the wrong reasons. And in the past years, it's completely fine to dismiss a true self-defense as self-defense when it involves a certain skin color and other times call it "justice" when another skin color does it and it's applauded by the same media.
It's society that is a mess because of the people making up the society and it's accelerated by the media.
@@markwalker4142 that's incredible thank you for doing what you did. 🥺
This doctor is weirdly defensive and hostile. She is totally a professional witness. How can you make an assessment without speaking to both parties? 🤔 it's mental. ANYTHING Amber has told her is hear-say.... unfortunately her testimony is damning as well, because it's purely emotional. The whole "Gone Girl" bottle thing is just ridiculous. If JD HAD done that, AH would NEVER had hung around. Ever. She isn't suffering ptsd, nor was she ever in fear for her life, that's obvious in all recordings and interactions we've seen between them. She provoked him every way possible. I feel sick.
You mean unprofessional ?
@@DMOWAIVERS not necessarily. There are people who in essence do nothing but be a "professional" witness. She has all the degrees and education and talks the good game. I was a pro bono paralegal in a case where a guardian ad litum NEVER worked a day in her life but was always called upon to "interview" the parties and always sided with mothers...we had her recused from my case after tracking that. Why do you think JUSTICE is blindfolded? It's whoever tells the best story!!!
@@DMOWAIVERS no, I mean getting paid as a job to testify. Sorry, I didn't explain it well lol. She charges $500 an hour... wow, right?
@@maureenmcdonough700 I wasn’t sure what she meant. I understand what you’re saying though. Behavioral and verbal cues can get you places.
@@julianaFinn ooh okay I thought you meant like how she behaved or her abrasiveness.
There was another witness who charges like 900 something per hour.. like where did my life go wrong ? 😂
This lawyer did a really good job in showing what kind of "psychologist" she is. If she were truthful she wouldn't be so annoyed and pressing about things not asked for... This woman singlehandedly made psychology go back 200 years in time.
Missed chance though @18:57. He should have asked if she asked to speak to JD or requested for her to evaluate JD. EVERY time 1 person claims they are in a sour relationship they ask BOTH parties! Another missed chance i think.
I noticed when she admitted amber heard was violent & abusive towards Johnny she had a reason and excuse for every single one of ambers behavior. You can tell her motives saying things about amber when she hasn't even taken the stand yet.
Objection, hearsay 😂
@@hobsonator7940 OBJECTION, HEARSAY! THE OBJECTION IS HEARSAY YOUR HONOR!
Actually it's even better that he didn't ask that question because then JD would appear as if he dosen't want to show the truth which is not a good point for him in front of the jury.
@@alexwho6491 she actually reminds me of amber same irritable behaviour and very bias.
This is one of the worst witnesses in the entire case. Her undermining and sarcastic tone to her side stepping questions and answering in a round about way all if it is frustrating. Her credibility is seriously in question here. He lack of professionalism is astounding. Completely partial and biased.
Sarcastic tone? I didn’t hear it.
A self report of a headache at a doctors is MASSIVELY different to a self-report of being abused, which is what amber reported. Such as broken nose from a headbutt, swelling, bruising. ETC. These would get checked and documented
It's cleary different but also, you go to the DR and say you have a headache. You know the headache is because you were up all night partying, drinking and smoking. But you left all that out when you said to the DR I have a headache and don't know why. You are playing the DR to get what you want. And the DR isn't asking the right questions to give a clear assessment
She sucks at her job & she’s too set in her ways to even see what she’s doing wrong. ugh no wonder why Amber’s legal team hired her.
yea she does need to meet both parties…it’s called confirmation bias lady! is you receive biased information of course you are going to develop a biased opinion!
Probably the only doctor that was willing to lie about Amber.
The legal team for Johnny wanted to exemplify a bias against men by this psychiatrist? psychologist? But I think they missed the mark because she does represent men but only if they are gay and she seems to say that she is involved in suits with many homosexual couples. So who's to say she isn't a woke leftwinger who is biased against traditional relationships and that's why when the opportunity arose she represents the female in a heterosexual couple? Leftwing people are hyper focused on victim status individuals and that blinds them because they assume victimhood for people groups they and people like them beli3ve to be marginalized in society. Johnny, a straight white man, is considered a member of an oppressor group to people with a leftwing mindset so who's to say that isn't her bias?
It’s really incredibly irresponsible and dishonest to have assessed someone without treating them, let alone even meeting them. Imagine an orthopedic surgeon diagnosing a fracture without ever seeing the patient themselves or seeing any X-rays, but relying on someone else telling them it was broken. She’s a hack, straight up.
Lol. 🤣😅😂 well said 💯💯💯
Couldn't of said it any better man 🙏🏼
Good analogy!
Devil’s advocate.
In a trial the jury is presented with evidence from both parties and has to come up with an assessment of guilt or innocence. Are we therefore saying that a jury is not in a position to reach a conclusion as they have never met or interviewed the parties involved?
@@siegeism The jury is literally there watching the parties being interviewed.
Her voice immediately began shaking when questioned about her pronouns. Attorney hit straight to the heart of the matter: She thinks that women are victims, men are perpetrators. Specifically states that her only case testifying in court for a man was in a man-on-man partner violence case. Still treating a man as the perpetrator. She had NEVER been so involved in any case where an adult female was the perpetrator of violence, yet according to research these comprise approximately half the cases of domestic violence (most of which are never reported by male victims).
The lawyer should've rephrase the question to ask if she had ever testified about a heterosexual WOMAN being a perpetrator.
She also says she is not an expert witness because most trials don't go to work but she does extensive background work. Curious about her female on male violence numbers (or lack of)
What research? If it exists, I would love to read it. I’m surprised about the 50-50 split
But she didn’t provide any sketchy muffins, right? I rest my case
Of course, her type does this often. They reinforce stereotypes and use confirmation bias to push an agenda. Most likely a radical feminist one.
I can't tell you how sad this makes me. I'm 67 and as a child when I say my mother beat the hell out of my father time and time again while saying if you lay a hand on me ill call the cops. During this time men were thought to always meant to be the abuser. If my father had defended himself and she called he would have been jailed no matter what. This women is no better than those police at that time. It's because of people like her the balance of justice is still unbalanced. She is a travesty and should be investigated.
I am so sorry that as a child you had to see that. Yes abuse against men happens very frequently but it's extremely under reported , even in this day and age.
“Not necessarily totally blind”
Perfect for calling that out!!!!
And she never mentions defending male victims of female abusers!!!!! Only male victims in a same sex couple.
Yeah prosocuter wanted people to come up with that on their own.
And couldn’t really be honest that clearly it’s a guesstimate. Which being honest in that regard could actually make someone look better, In my opinion. I believe it’s better to be honest and try to back that up, then try to defend a lie lol
@@Cantatos Don’t have to. Bear in mind the Jury will SCOUR the records for stuff like this, and he left several things like this that now sit permanently in the record. He toed the line safely so he couldn’t be objected to while using roundabout methods to expose her.
This is so frustrating. Why did no one call her out for the multiple times she contradicted herself?!🤦🏻♀️
Dont need too. Everyone with a brain sees this madness on full display. Lol
@@ClaytonWK still, JD's Lawyers should have addressed it
They do, without attacking her directly. Like at the very start, where JD's lawyer drops the words "gendered stereotypes" multiple times, with strong pronunciation and a pause, so the jury can readily take it to their notes, make her repeat the words and denial of it and then recall examples of her using "gendered stereotypes" in yesterday's deposition. Guess what the jury remembers of this interaction?
Calling her out would actually just help her. The atty was smart to let her continue to contradict herself because the more contradiction she say the more the jury wont favor AH side
@@navo159 he addressed her wrongs yesterday so it's obvious hes on his toes
I'm a psychologist, and this lady is why we have a bad name.
Guy asked if she testifies for men in IPV cases; she says she works with abused boyscouts (not what was asked).
The next guy she talked about wasn't abused by a woman, but by inmates (not what was asked).
He asked again and she talks about experience with trauma and sexual abuse, not IPV (not what was asked)
They accuse her of siding with women every time and she defends with a male vs male case (also not what they said).
I think the only thing she was truthful about is most of her work being evaluation and report writing. Unfortunately that's reality for most of us.
FYI, if you're an APA member you're expected to work pro-bono at least 10% of your time as a gesture of good will from the practice. Not her choice.
Thank you for the 10% pro-bono work information
Thank you!
👍🏻 None of the men she treated were abused by a woman.
Thank you for that clarification.
Bravo! Thank you👏👏👏
This is truly disturbing knowing the damage that was done to people in the past and ongoing cases. Yikes!!!!
The contrast between her and Dr Curry is stark. She is passive-aggressive, Curry was controlled and pointed. Not bothered, simple and to the point and totally in control.
I blame Scientology
She sounds like she’s getting more than just an “expert witness” fee, probably more kick backs, favors, etc… she’s working hard & losing terribly.
Rosie O’Donnell comes and gives her they\them massages half price😛
Oh I’m sorry if I missed any made up genders! Shim
You are 100% correct. It is like she is fighting to find herself "not guilty". Not a good witness at all
@@Terrbel21 lmao!!! 🤣🤣🤣
But did she get muffins ?
“Not necessarily totally blind.” Is her standard to reach a conclusion on someone’s psychological profile. WOW
yes this is crazy
Actually insane she can be this lax in her job making $500 an hour and I'd be fired for incompetence doing the same thing at my 68k a year job.
Dennisson is a SAVAGE! I think this pretty much proved AH legal team resorted to unethical practices. Reason why they were all borderline unethical during the course of the trial
the moment she said she can assess a relationship by listening to a one-sided story and only the testimony/texts,I just rolled my eyes
JOHNNY'S TEAM DID THE SAME THING (FIRST) WITH THEIR PSYCH. EXPERT WHO DIAGNOSED AMBER WITH MENTAL DISORDERS WITHOUT EVER MEETING HER
Ikr
You would be able to assess an one sided relationship as well if you were paid 500 bucks an hour ... 😏😏😏
Whats really scary is
she isn't the only bad psychologist out there.
Lot's of emotionally damaged people are getting misled, and damaged further, by "educated professionals"
like her.
🙄
There are a lot of them that are just out for the money and other such things. They don't want to help or "cure" anybody (I'm aware cure isn't really the right word), They want people to stay damaged and be long term frequently returning clients for as long as they can manage to justify.
True, there is an immense amount of children that have to deal with people like her and can't do anything about it because they're a minor, they destroy so many, and help so little.
and this is why when people ask depressed people to "go find a therapist", their response is almost always "but they don't help"
@@MusicSounds that's why by just passing an exam u cannot become good psychologist for that u should also have a healthy brain
Yep. Many awful therapists out there. People look for one that validates themselves and their views and if you find one that does you probably found the wrong one.
What I get from her is, that she can tell me who am I in my relationship without talking to me and only based on what someone said about me. Brilliant