@@clapostrophy NOPE, actually ACTUALLY 😄… her husband BOUGHT the muffins (my guy 🙌🏾) and SHE BROUGHT the muffins. This muffins angle is just ridiculous. 🤣
Just let this be a lesson to you all that any muffins you choose to provide can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to retain your muffins.
I love how the abrasive lawyer is trying to mislead the psychologist into agreeing with her by using trick questions, but is failing miserably and keeps getting corrected. Does she not realise that this lady is literally a doctor of the mind?🤣
thats the job of a defense attorney… they have a difficult task to try and persuade the jury and provide enough evidence against johnny, they know this. The attorney is doing her job
Psychologist: "May I clarify what occurred, so we can stop talking about the muffins?" Lawyer: "Your honor, at this time I'd like to call the muffin on the witness stand..."
@@amylee0870 I mean, she is not arrogant. She is trying her best.....when there are so many evidence against your client a laywer can do nothing else but be extremely difficult.
You would think the muffins were involved in a murder , that the muffins were the murder weapon, or if the muffins exploded and killed someone , there would’ve been less questioning about the muffins
Did her husband go with her for dinner and drinks at JDs house? She wasn't hired yet so did she tell him where she was off to all dressed up? He'd have to be brain dead not to know and yes if someone told me that there husband bought these muffins for you and me, I'd assume it meant me. They should have vetted her more. Amber's doctors are going to have a field day with her testimony.
@@lindasmith1105 this isn't her first high profile client, her husbands knows how the game runs and he also knows that she isn't allowed to say anything concearning her clients...I think he should trust her enough by now. Also, where did she state that her husband was with her during the dinner? And just because someone says "someone brought muffins (for you)", wouldn't make me assume that he brought them knowing who I am. As she already stated, he brought the muffins for them, but only knowing that it was a high profile client based on the fact that they had to clear the office. Again, he should know the rules of confidentiality by now very well
I guess your right. I don't know. I watched a video with Dr. Grande he brought up a lot of points. Also on court to they had a body language expert in who said she was not telling the truth or hiding something when she was asked if she told her husband about Amber. I'm sick of this whole thing been home with covid too long. I go to therapy and trust is a huge issue for myself. Her diagnouses was too perfect
That lawyer is so outclassed, outwitted and definitely out of her league here. This is going to do so much damage to her career. She took a high profile case that she was unprepared to handle.
Huh? Can you rephrase that, what I understand is that you said witnesses are dealt with in a hostile way, then you said “but”, that’s what I don’t understand. If a witness is being treated hostile that means the lawyers are being disrespectful to them.
Thats not what hostile means in the context of witnesses. i mean, yes, screw this lawyer. But "hostile witness," doesnt mean the witness is being aggressive, belligerent, or otherwise disrespectful. It means their testimony is in some way opposed to the position of the party who is calling them. Typically more likely to be lying or misdirecting.
I'm really impressed how well-spoken and collected she was. She was not gonna be intimidated by Heard's lawyer and cracked such concisely worded answers to defend her credibility.
@@CartoonHangout What I meant---and I am sure you understood---that the average Jane/Joe would have considered what she said "okay". I don't want to get into a philosophical argument, so of course, you are technically correct. Wow, this is a waste of time lol. I think this entire trial---both sides---is full of psychobabble and nonsense. I was only on here because of the Stern comment.
Absolutely AM s lawyers keep asking everyone the same questions in different ways multiple times to try and get them to slip up and discredit them create reasonable doubt. A kid straight of law school could do a better job then these lawyers, I’ve never seen lawyers like this before Objection hearsay lol they sound ridiculous
This is what happens when a stupid person tries to slander someone who's intelligent. I'm honestly impressed at how bad Amber Heard's lawyers are, it's incredible.
Lawyer isn't necessarily stupid, but when you take on a case with no real defense, you try some pathetic methods to get paid, and get an impression of being so. Hence most lawyers don't want to take on losing cases to preserve their reputation and not having to stoop to weak arguments making their lawyering look bad.
One could tell this psychologist was being very careful about how she answered the questions. She was trying to answer correctly and accurately. The defense was going for the “gotcha” question, but there were no muffins there.
Notice how the psychologist was quick to answer, “you are incorrect” instead just answering, “no” when Amber’s lawyer was trying to get the witness to agree she said/did something
Lawyer: You told your husband correct? Psychologist: No Lawyer: But you told your husband correct? Psychologist: That is still incorrect. I really feel like the lawyer wanted to try a third time.
What's great is she was BLUFFING that they had her conversation, with her husband - Dr. Curry called her on it and they DON'T ! ... And the jury saw it.
@@its_nuked She would purposely do some tricks that are only used as a last resort, such as asking questions like "Do you think A AND B?" Even though the psychologist only thinks A and not B but because the psychologist is, well, a psychologist, she's able to evade these sort of traps
@@its_nuked The bottom line is that it’s unfortunately more about how the information is presented than what the information is. So attorneys will have a plan to ask questions in a way that frame their argument in a positive light. This lawyer is attempting to attack the doctor’s credibility and make her look like a fame seeker vs a legitimate doctor, therefore make the jury question her credibility. This is a very tacky and sexist approach. More typically, a lawyer would try and poke holes in the way the science is applied, look for mistakes, or if they’re being petty, question their professional qualifications. Suggesting this lady is a fame mongerer was very below the belt and backfired. Just anecdotally, (not a legal professional) I’ve seen heavy handed approaches in a lot of cases from the 80s and 90s. It seems like something that perhaps resonates better with older generations, but in today’s world, it doesn’t really fly. Especially in this scenario, where a defendant is trying to paint herself as a feminist hero, yet her defense team is attacking a female doctor in a very sexist and disrespectful way.
How the wording is structured and manipulated can cause answers to work in the lawyers favour. However, one of the people who wouldn’t fall for this is a psychologist. She should have known better but I guess thenlawyer was clutching at straws and then just got school by the dr
Also the lawyer is doing her best to discredit the professionalism and qualification of the witness. Here she tries to imply that the psychologist was so starstruck and excited to meet Amber she bought muffins. However, the psychologist comes back and says no. We always buy muffins and there’s protocol in place for celebrity clients… so her husband could assume a celebrity guest was coming due to the actions that were taken that day.
She wasn’t hired by Johnny Depp or his lawyers, she is hired by the court to testify on the facts, that will fall one way or the other. She even testified to that on the stand when being questioned by Amber’s attorneys. In this case, it is beneficial for Johnny and not for Amber
Yes she was. Expert witnesses are paid for by which ever side brings them in. So if Depp loses the case, he has to pay for it. If he wins then it comes out of the settlement. The attorneys initially pay for them but they get paid back one way or another. What she testified about was that she will give the facts unbiased as a professional. You only have her word for that. She gets paid no matter what she gives as testimony.
@@maheephoenix4398 psychologists are not allowed to disclose who their patients aren’t without permission so if she had told her husband who she was bringing the cupcakes for, she would have violated patient confidentiality
To be fair, the lawyer has so little to work with, she is reduced to this nonsense... I imagine that lawyer,is thinking her career is dead after this You get the feeling depps lawyers are laughing at heard lawyers
@@irishboyrants8086 She's talking about the psych... who IS very accurate and careful how she speaks. Was not sarcasm. Maybe you should take OP's advice as well, my guy!
I am not on Ambers side or anything, but this is what most lawyers do. Confuse people and catch them offguard or break their defense. Thats also what police officer do in interviews. Very common technique to spot liars.
@@ddtwo yeah it is a common tactic but you have to be subtle about it if everyone knows what your doing there guards up and most importantly the jury doesn't like/trust you unless the opposition is just as bad it easily breaks the case although if if you fluster them right and they rush to explain they can lie on instinct or choose a poor lie or the lawyer can just use it so the witness brings up something you can branch off from instead of you jumping to bring something seemingly unrelated up
As someone who is getting their masters in forensic psychology, this woman (Depp’s team’s retaining psychologist) handled this so beautifully and we are currently studying her as a model for how we should handle cross examination. Well done👏🏻
it is hilarious that this lawyer thinks she is the smartest person in that room, and the entire room is laughing at her when she asks the most absurd questions and tries to twist the Psychologists words. Its clear that everyone in the room knows what she is trying to do, and how bad she is failing at it
The lawyer tried to discredit the psychologist, it is a cheap trick for when you have no ammunition in your case. So glad the psychologist didn't fall for any of those trick questions.
Yeah I noticed that's what they do to any and all "witnesses" who have any positive comments or answers in favor of Depp, immediate character assassination to discredit everyone and everything. Her defense is as much of a joke as she herself is.
@@Urmom-cw3fu Nah, the lawyer's just rephrasing the questions again and again, enough to confuse and mess with someone's head, that may affect their answers. It's like intimidation or something.
Her lawyers are SO unprofessional. She was really arguing with the judge over an objection? So glad they're doing so poorly, Amber deserves a team like this
Why were the muffins not brought into the court and presented as evidence? What kind of muffins were they? What ingredients were used in the preparation of said muffins? Which bakery were they from? Why were the jurors not given muffins to eat so they could better understand the feelings and thoughts of the people surrounding the muffins. I can't believe they went with the "Muffin Strategy" without muffins present in the courtroom. All these points and more are vital to fully understanding the muffin scenario. I DEMAND MUFFINS NOW!!!
I agree totally 🙃 wouldn't it be so awesome if Johnny's team actually brought in muffins so that when Amber Heard gets on the stand they can show her the muffins and as her if those were in fact the muffins that were bought for her🤣😅🤣😅
@@Coxon9 Sadly, that was my immediate assessment. But then her smarts joined along, substantially increasing her “Hot AF Score” to a level bit too high for immediate feedback from the judges apparently. They are still intently discussing this situation in private, and should be announcing any time now, a clear and thorough explanation for us.
I hope his advocates brings up that a guitarist never would hurt their own fingers. I saw someone else write this and realised how brilliant it is. Hope this point can reach them if they haven’t already.
@@Dinosaurs_with_laser_guns he said its the only thing that brought him peace since he was 12! Someone hardcore into guitar doesn't go lopping their fingers off! And we know what a musician Depp is.
@P J doesnt matter too much in the sense that it it varies a ton even when only taking people that seem similar in terms of intelligence based on conversations like this.
it would also look bad if she did not try? ------- --And yet ??? It could actually also be a, not entirely poor defense, maybe ?? If the lawyer, did NOT do her job, or did it really poorly ... Hmm?
I genuinely wish I could stay as cool as this woman. She holds herself with such class. You cant tell what she’s directly thinking, even though we all know she thinks this lawyer is a moron 🥲
The fact this intelligent, professional woman has to respond to questions BLATANTLY trying to paint her as a potential mistress (meeting up with Depp for "dinner and drinks") is so frustrating. I can only imagine how annoyed she felt being there in person.
If someone doesn’t send this woman a basket of muffins that says “my condolences” after the trial ends then I will be sorely disappointed Edit: So are we sending blueberry or chocolate chip? 🥳
The way she got stumped so bad, after her question got objected, was HILARIOUS. After that wasn't allowed, she fell apart. Clear example of a stupid person. This lawyer is a joke and ruined her entire career through this single line of questioning. You can see Johnny Depps lawyers smiling and whatnot, because they know this just got a lot easier.
To be fair she is trying to defend something the whole world saw happen..she def defaimed him..i honestly wonder how the first trial was lost..i mean i know defamation is hard to prove but come on....tbh i think the lawyer should use this bpd histrionic diagnosis to her advantage..in defamaition you have to prove the person knowingly lied on you but the dr said it's questionable how much she can take responsibility for anything at some point...maybe that's an easier out...if she can't take responsability and is a pathological externalizer of blame without realizing she may very well believe that he was the abusive one.
I almost feel bad for the lawyer, who is clearly bumbling stumbling and losing face trying to scramble up a line of reasoning. Bet she wishes she never took the case.
yes you really do… what you don’t understand that in this case to be an attorney for amber heard is going to require a lot to try to persuade the jury and public opinion. They’re doing their job
I just totally got her 😂 When you just ask your husband to get you something... In this case MUFFINS 😂😂😂 You just want him to get it for you, happy wife, happy life 😁
@@clairewilliams3081 and such a waste of everybodys time. Lawyers should be fined if they repeat over and over irrelevant questions for the sake of extenting the trial.
So Dr. Curry said something in the like of "My husband bought these muffins" and Amber took it as "My husband heard that you were coming, so he ran out and got muffins for you"
The muffins thing was meant to discredit the witness (accusing her of breaking patient confidentiality by telling her husband Amber Heard was coming in). Completely backfired, just showed how narcissistic Ms. Heard is, that when she heard that the husband had bought the muffins, she assumed the muffins were for her specifically and he must be trying to impress her.
They were doing what you just said. They were desperate to fish for possible confidentiality breach. "when she heard that the husband had bought the muffins, she assumed the muffins were for her specifically and he must be trying to impress her" is just pure fiction, unless someone testified that she actually said that. Even that wouldn't necessarily be narcissistic, as many times people do tend to make an extra effort to please rich/famous people.
@@Baychimo I am speculating, not creating fiction. Luckily, youtube comments are not a court of law, just a court of public opinion, and I'm allowed to speculate here. Obviously Ms Heard was the one that brought up the muffins to her lawyers, and held the belief that the husband knew she was there based on this.
The hard pivot form “you asked him to pick up the muffins” to “would you agree domestic violence can be verbal” is mental. What exactly goes on in that attorney’s head 🤣
This is one of those moments where I realize why people hate lawyers. This lawyer was trying desperately to guide the psychologist into perjury. That was her whole intent and when it failed, she didn't know what to do.
@@Cowtymsmiesznego But if the witness is telling the truth it is also "quintessential" to the process that the lawyers don´t skewer the truth that the witness has to offer
That's just what lawyers do, let's say if the witness was actually lying(not like this psychologist) It's absolutely essential that lawyers try to trap them into a pool of their own lies to win the case and prove the witness is lying. Though it comes off as immoral to do this, you've got to admit, if it was Depp's lawyer doing this to Heard's team, we would instead praise the lawyer calling said lawyer "smart"
@@blakan1478 The lawyers don't decide on the truth of the matter - the judge/jury does. Also, that's why both sides have their lawyers, each trying to "skew" to their client's side.
Edit: The biggest thing in court is paying attention to how the questions/statements are formed. This psychologist did not let anything slip. She made sure to confirm the wording before answering and to word her statements in ways that could not be twisted. Given her intelligence and qualifications, it does not surprise me that this Lawyer could not play her.
While her field of work is definitely half of the reason she doesn’t get tripped up, the other would be her being an expert witness who does this for a living, and has come across the obvious traps, that people like AH’s attorney sloppily set up many times before.
@@DeathnoteBB I think we all know that lol. Not sure what the point of your comment was. I did say psychiatrist so technically I'm wrong, but yea, I'm aware of her profession, credentials, years of practice, ect. I simply said she is very thorough, attentive, & pays attention to the small details like sentence formation.
this trial has taught me that I could never be this patient. I'd be flipping out after the 3rd stupid question and this psychologist and johnny deserve a friggin medal for putting up with this
This lawyer is so unlikable, so convolouted, so confusing, so obtuse and has such an abrasive personality the jury would rule against her no matter what!
There were points where she wasn’t getting anywhere and was audibly and visibly annoyed. Sighing loudly and being needlessly argumentative after the judge had passed a ruling on an objection.
It is weird how such a charismatically deficient lawyer could have risen far enough to gain employment on a high profile legal case. I realize cases should not hinge on that sort of thing, but with jury cases, they really very often do.
They're trying to question the psych's credibility and bias 1. Asking if she would be here if she had found anything in Depp that would negatively impact his chance in the case; unanswerable at this stage, saying yes would mean she didn't find anything "wrong", saying no would give the opposition leverage as it creates doubt in the client's stability and claims 2. The muffins. The vague implication of "my husband got these for us" is he knew exactly who would be eating them, as if she had told her husband who she was meeting with; this would discredit her as untrustworthy in the case for sharing confidential information 3. Trying to make her seem like she's lying. Previously-at the beginning of the clip, she had said she does not often meet with high-profile clients. During the description of the muffins story, she says "we have to clear the office when we have high-profile clients, as we often do." the vague implication being she has a lot of high-profile clients when the obvious meaning is that the office she works in often has high-profile clients.
@@wallykimball8829 I think they're trying to show she broke confidentiality, and it becomes increasingly obvious that is not the case despite how desperate and juvenile the defense tries to be. You do not need to know WHO a person is to buy muffins for them to be shared between them and your wife. You do not need to know who someone is to know that they are important. You can enjoy a meal during an interview without it being a bribe.
@@RotaAbyssian I agree. These lawyers try to make any innocent act or gesture appear to be shady and manipulative. 90% of what they say is pure scum lawyer-ese. I liked the irony of Amber's lawyer implying motives inspired by a "high profile" case. Because Amber's lawyer is motivated by pure altruism.🤩
I think we should stop saying that she has bad lawyers; that gives Amber some sort of justification when she inevitably loses. I think we all need to realize that Amber has no case and these poor lawyers are have to grasp at every straw.
This is of the utmost importance. It's clear that Amber is already being judged by the court of public opinion. But the lawyers are just doing their jobs. Granted, some of these leading questions and the omission of details don't paint Amber's lawyers in a favorable light.
I still would hardly call them "poor lawyers" because they're still being pretty damn rude, patronising and condescending. Then again that's the game I suppose.
I like that she kept reiterating that it was not her responsibility nor within the scope of her job to prove that domestic violence took place rather she clearly and accurately restated multiple times that her job was to evaluate her client's mental state. She's great!
the muffins story will be forever remembered. I wonder which bakery made them. They should close an ad with this Doctor because she now deserves all cams on her. Very professional, polite and concise. My math teacher in school would lose for her. Applause! 👏👏👏 AH's team deserves an ananas. What a bunch of idiots! where did they buy their diploms?
As an attorney, never ever ask a question you don't already know the answer to. This is especially true when you have no clue what you are actually doing.
Elaine knew the answer though. Technically… the husband knew a big client was in the office. But he didn’t know who it was. Heard’s team tried to manipulate the jury into thinking Curry told her husband she was testing Amber Heard. Had Curry said “yes, my husband knew a client was coming in” Elaine would’ve moved onto another topic because she got her yes answer. And Depp’s team would’ve had to redirect and clarify the muffins story. All in all some horrible tactics employed by Heard’s team.
What a DISGUSTING lawyer. Trying to twist words and trick people into saying something they didnt mean because they got confused. This is why people despise lawyers.
Had dinner and drinks with Depp…like having drinks isn’t a typical thing? With dinner? I hate how they try to paint it as a negative thing. The sigh of defeat after getting stubbed by her answers is so satisfying.
Lawyers typically tend to do this to discredit a witness. They’ll ask the same question multiple times in different ways to try and catch someone slipping up to try and sway the jury in favor of their client
The way that this lawyer was trying to use shady, unprincipled manipulation tactics on a trained physiologist and thought it would work is truly laughable
@Justin Kerns "It's my OPINIONS guys!! I know nobody asked, but I have OPINIONS." Here's your crown of douchebaggery my guy, wear it with pride as you look around and see everyone against you.
I have so much respect for this woman! Professional, intelligent, non-biased and unwavered by the defense’s allegations and super inappropriate treatment of her as a witness and as a professional psychologist. This lawyer is gradually starting to treat witnesses worse the more frustrated she gets. She exhibits emotions of fear and anger in her voice and behavior towards all the witnesses the further this case goes along. I’m still shocked at how far the judge lets the defense go with repetitious drilling. I have yet to see where they have accomplished anything besides wasting the courts time and only proving that they are unprofessional and in over their heads.
@@acommentator4452 I don’t. It’s Amber’s fault that they even have to fight this hard. Amber lied to her lawyers and they’re just now starting to realize it. If I were her lawyers, I would drop her. If they stay through this whole trial, it’s only damaging their reputations and I’m pretty sure it’s fair to say, they don’t have much left lmao.
Defense: "If Ms Heard is such a violent person, why do you think the muffins allowed themselves to be eaten by her?..... We object!!" Judge: "To your own question?" Defense: "Yes".
It's amazing how effortlessly the psychologist answered the questions despite them being so poorly worded and so clearly misleading. The lawyer was trying so desperately and so blatantly to get her to say something incriminating.
its not poorly worded. they were designed to trigger the psychologist. but it backfired because it didn't work. they underestimated her. the type of questions and ways of questioning would have normally worked on everyone else.
People are saying shes a bad lawyer due to her attitude. Like of you have no case it might be wise to try and butter up the jury/judge instead of berating them
This lawyer is either horribly incompetent or is at a point in her life where her mind is no longer sharp and she is not capable of performing her job. She is embarrassing Heards legal team.
Amber’s lawyer: Why did you give muffins to amber? Psychologist: I didn’t, i bring muffins to work on the regular and had my husband pick them up cause i was late Amber’s lawyer: Why did your husband give amber muffins? Psychologist: 😑
i love when the lawyer asks a stupid question and the psychologist just looks bewildered for a few seconds- if this wasn’t a dv case i would think it’s hilarious but it’s really just embarrassing
The way the lawyer completely lost it after the objection was sustained was hilarious! She felt like a lost child. She kept saying " but the bias" to which the judge had to reiterate" objection sustained"
She was like "how else can i trick her into admitting my statement which can broadly be interpreted as her having something going on with Depp?" and didn't have a plan B prepared for when even the Judge knows what's going on
Hard to believe Heard insisted on this approx. $600/hour dolt to represent her. Also hard to believe her liability insurance policies covered the expense! And then when Scamber Heard's liability insurers sued Heard for breach of contract ( they don't pay defendants who are NOT innocent and for 6 years and throughout the trial were found by a unanimous jury verdict to have intentionally lied, with malice and abused the Plaintiff), she fled to Europe while they were trying to attempt service of process. Elaine, was it a coincidence that her liability insurers were trying to serve your client a subpoena to get their money back that they paid out to you. I kinda hope Elaine didn't send them her last bill until after the verdict. At least they wouldn't have thrown THAT amount in the toilet. Whoever said "You get what you pay for" was as ridiculous as Heard's attorney!
Her little smile while answering is so funny to watch. As psychologists, we are trained to predict behaviour. She knows what's coming from the lawyer and she's 10 steps ahead of Heards lawyer😂😂
Johnny Depp's lawyers could have easily objected to many of the questions. The fact that they did not just shows how confident they are that the defense has no defense.
As a clinical psychologist, seeing a competent psychologist in such a high profile case warms my soul! Like in any profession, we are in a Bell curve distribution, with some psychologists better than average, while some worse than average. Dr. Curry looks like the former.
@@nonamesinenomine I would not even say that the lawyer was incompetent. They try all kinds of underhanded techniques to get a witness to say or agree with a phrasing that they want. Part of the job. If asking stupid questions and looking silly gets their case a win, so be it. It's entirely up to the opposing lawyer to object to such underhanded questioning.
@@joanamagalhaes3381 it was not having drinks it was an interview and within that interview dinner and drinks were served so painting it as like she was drinking with jd and it was like some kind of a romantic relationship is just stupid xD
Man that objection shut that lawyer down COMPLETELY. She was so shaken that she started asking inane questions, for example, about muffins. Props to Dr. Shannon Curry for keeping as straight a face as she could after such a question. I personally would have laughed my ass off and need a moment or two to come back down.
The whole line of questioning was problematic. EVERY witness in EVERY court room is brought forward to support the team who brought them's case. If the judge allowed that, then EVERY witness in the trial would be out.
Love how the psychologist knows that Heard's lawyer is fishing for specific answers regardless of relevancy and she's not having it. She knows how to keep the questions on track and not let the lawyer derail her.
Elaine is like "You never hit a home run in the World Series, did you?" Curry, "That's not within my profession" Elaine: "So you didn't hit a home run?" Idiot
"you got muffins" "can I clarify what happened so we can stop talking about the muffins" >clarifies "why did your husband get the muffins for Amber heard" this lawyer must want muffins
I wouldn't say he's a pure soul, he's still a human and has his faults. The entire relationship was toxic and he was clearly the main victim, and deserves his life back. Especially as he had to watch Heard gain in her resume.
The lawyer is intentionally leaving out details and the psychologist is intentionally putting them back in. Sad and hysterical. Evidently ONLY the witness has sworn to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The lawyer is free to do whatever the hell she wants.
What does muffins have to do with this!!!!!! I give so much respect for Dr. Curry, I saw Dr. Curry walking out of the court house we all clapped for her...
it would have made sense that if only JD n his team would have the dinner and amber just came n talk. that way it would look like that JD would be bribing. but adding muffins to the case doesnt make any statements
Is that what clinicians aspire to - mowing people down? Yes, she’s sharp and effective on the witness stand. And yes, the opposing counsel is flustered and at times rude, even ridiculous. But weird use of language from “one clinician” cheering on another, in all caps.
@@mystique592 she failed miserably, then proceeds to question the judge's acceptance of an objection, and didn't have a similar question ready to still make the point. I can't blame them to be cought SOOOO MUCH of guard, they took the case from a now proven and documented expert liar.
With respect (genuinely!), Everyone could see how professional and excellently experienced at her job Dr.Shannon Curry is, and was on the stand (although I’ve seen some odd comments from a few who don’t agree, but from the entire contents of each of those comments, I’m guessing they’re hurting from their own traumas, of perhaps not being believed (from my own personal experience). I must also say, that is refreshing to see nice comments from one professional regarding another professional (of the same profession or another).
LMAO heard’s lawyer was SO frustrated when the judge sustained the objection to her question. Love to see it after Mr. Rottenborn objection to every single question that doesnt favor them
Especially hilarious that this was like a textbook example of speculation... She literally asked her "what do you think would have happened if your findings were different than they were".
I love that this just further proves the psychologist's diagnosis of Amber lol. Her grandiose sense of self i.e. psychologist's husband bought muffins and she goes on to interpret it to her lawyers as "She was so excited to interview me and was bragging to her husband who bought me muffins."
Agree. As the psychologist explained the "muffin situation", I took it as: the husband brings muffins whenever she is meeting with a high profile person. There is a history and pattern to this. Office is cleared of staff, high profile person comes, husband brings muffins. Amazing how Heard's lawyers tried to manipulate this into "the husband knew it was Amber Heard therefore that is why he brought the muffins", really reaching here.
@@apushman Actually she said she always brings muffins herself, regardless of the client she's seeing that day, but ocassionally when she runs late her husband does it for her. So it's not even something special she does for special clients, she just likes muffins and has a helping husband 😆 but ofc Amber interpreted it in the most self centered way possible.
She got the psychologist to admit she had drinks and dinner with Johnny and his team, and got her to admit she’s not Board certified. She did her job. Besides u cant diagnose someone after only speaking with with for 12 hours.
not exactly...I inferred something else. Amber LIED when she told her lawyer that the psychologist told her that she told her husband that she was meeting with Amber Heard. The lawyer planned to use it against the psychologist. The lawyer found out while questioning that her client, Amber, had given her bad information. You could almost hear the wind coming out of her sails and she realized she had "nothing" on the psychologist. There was literally no way to discredit her.
You know your case is bad when you have to make out-of-context-muffins your smoking gun. Speaking objectively, compared to the "hearsay" guy this lawyer actually seemed borderline competent. She tried to paint a picture that the psychologist was biased & fame-hungry & seduced by Depp but in the end she didn't have much to work with & she knew it. Even with muffins on the table _(sorry...not sorry)_ the psychologist clearly knows how to do her job & maintained her credibility.
I mean she earn more than 700$ an hour. You would expect that she is competent. I actually wondered why she didn’t ask her how much money she earns with that case
@@Infiltator2 dangerous to ask questions to don’t know the answer to. It would look bad if the answer is the same as other less high profile cases, it would enhance her reputation and make the lawyer look bad in front of the jury. Unlikely to be in the briefing or depositions given to Heards team. Basically a risky question.
Did you catch this bizarre exchange as it happened?
mffuin
I did
Yeppers
Yes!!.. Mega pints and muffins for everyone.👏👏
Yes I did and it was hilarious, the woman is on more drugs than both of them put together.
That psychologist was a BOSS. She was articulate. She was qualified. She was explicit. She was unflappable. SHE BROUGHT MUFFINS.
NOPE, her HUSBAND brought the muffins! When I learned one thing from this case thus far it is unarguably that!
@@clapostrophy NOPE, actually ACTUALLY 😄… her husband BOUGHT the muffins (my guy 🙌🏾) and SHE BROUGHT the muffins.
This muffins angle is just ridiculous. 🤣
read that one word wrong...oopsie
ruclips.net/video/qOCC3RBzNrM/видео.html Finally its here.
Her husband was the muffin man
Imagine trying to pull psychological tricks on a psychologist.
ikr
Yup... Pure stupidity.
Lol
Uno reverse card
Lol.. destroyed
My favourite line, "May I clarify what occurred so that we can stop talking about the muffins?" Perfectly said.
*Lawyer continues to talk about the muffins*
"But didn't you say..."
"No!"
Okay already - enough with the muffins.
Brilliant. Just goes to show how corrupt the law system is when Muppets like this one can be a celebrity lawyer
Time:?
If I were a lawyer, I wouldn’t try to fool a psychologist with cheap mind-tricks. This lawyer is a duffer.
That’s why you are not.😛
@@Why-are-you-reading-this tf?
@@Why-are-you-reading-this L
@@Why-are-you-reading-this so according to your commet, does lawyer usually does this cheap mind tricks?
@@Why-are-you-reading-this 🫥
Just let this be a lesson to you all that any muffins you choose to provide can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to retain your muffins.
Well shoot I guess gotta bring in cookies now.
Miranda Muffins.
🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂😵💫
I was looking for comment of this sort 😅
If you can't afford muffins then some will be appointed to you 😆
I love how the abrasive lawyer is trying to mislead the psychologist into agreeing with her by using trick questions, but is failing miserably and keeps getting corrected. Does she not realise that this lady is literally a doctor of the mind?🤣
I don't think she has realized this yet
I'd liken it to a snake questioning an owl
thats the job of a defense attorney… they have a difficult task to try and persuade the jury and provide enough evidence against johnny, they know this. The attorney is doing her job
@@Opticillusion160 very poorly
@@Opticillusion160 Oh you're 100% correct, but I'm sure we can all appreciate how well Dr Curry is handling herself, right? 🤣
Psychologist: "May I clarify what occurred, so we can stop talking about the muffins?" Lawyer: "Your honor, at this time I'd like to call the muffin on the witness stand..."
Dangit I was waiting for that...
😂😂
The way that this psychologist absolutely schooled this lawyer, just gives me absolute joy lol.
The attorney is so arrogant and intentionally difficult, it makes the psychologist's handling of the situation even sweeter to watch.
Yes !
@@amylee0870 yeah , her face at 4:46 tells everything 😂
@@amylee0870 I mean, she is not arrogant. She is trying her best.....when there are so many evidence against your client a laywer can do nothing else but be extremely difficult.
The way that this phycologist looks makes me :)
Johnny’s lawyers: “Amber attacked him with sustainable injuries and proof of false accusations and blackmail”.
Ambers lawyers: “muffins”
Lol
You would think the muffins were involved in a murder , that the muffins were the murder weapon, or if the muffins exploded and killed someone , there would’ve been less questioning about the muffins
Do you know the muffin man?
@@NgatiDreadz The muffin man?
🤣🤣🤣
Only Amber could believe a husband picking up his wife's muffins is a narrative that actually revolves around herself.
She's desperate !
Did her husband go with her for dinner and drinks at JDs house? She wasn't hired yet so did she tell him where she was off to all dressed up? He'd have to be brain dead not to know and yes if someone told me that there husband bought these muffins for you and me, I'd assume it meant me. They should have vetted her more. Amber's doctors are going to have a field day with her testimony.
Facts! Lol
@@lindasmith1105 this isn't her first high profile client, her husbands knows how the game runs and he also knows that she isn't allowed to say anything concearning her clients...I think he should trust her enough by now. Also, where did she state that her husband was with her during the dinner? And just because someone says "someone brought muffins (for you)", wouldn't make me assume that he brought them knowing who I am. As she already stated, he brought the muffins for them, but only knowing that it was a high profile client based on the fact that they had to clear the office. Again, he should know the rules of confidentiality by now very well
I guess your right. I don't know. I watched a video with Dr. Grande he brought up a lot of points. Also on court to they had a body language expert in who said she was not telling the truth or hiding something when she was asked if she told her husband about Amber. I'm sick of this whole thing been home with covid too long. I go to therapy and trust is a huge issue for myself. Her diagnouses was too perfect
That lawyer is so outclassed, outwitted and definitely out of her league here. This is going to do so much damage to her career. She took a high profile case that she was unprepared to handle.
Ya and she's trying to use basic got ya ticks on psychologists isn't going to work
@@Lockie98th
Exactly!
The lawyer also has this snarky I'm smarter than you attitude which just makes her being a dunce so much more hilarious 😂
I mean, I don't want to defend her, but she probably doesn't have much to work with xD
@@FinleyLava
True story.
A witness can be treated as "hostile" but these lawyers can behave deplorably and disrespectfully all day long.
Huh? Can you rephrase that, what I understand is that you said witnesses are dealt with in a hostile way, then you said “but”, that’s what I don’t understand. If a witness is being treated hostile that means the lawyers are being disrespectful to them.
@@adamsheriff2468 I think the laywer is very manipulative also in her tone and voice .
This Psychiatrist is really wise in her responds
a hostile witness is declared so that an attorney can ask questions that otherwise might be considered "leading"
Hearsay
Thats not what hostile means in the context of witnesses. i mean, yes, screw this lawyer. But "hostile witness," doesnt mean the witness is being aggressive, belligerent, or otherwise disrespectful. It means their testimony is in some way opposed to the position of the party who is calling them. Typically more likely to be lying or misdirecting.
She owned her with that answer about her scope of responsibility as a psychologist
sure did....lol. i was like damn......
I'm really impressed how well-spoken and collected she was. She was not gonna be intimidated by Heard's lawyer and cracked such concisely worded answers to defend her credibility.
The word "owned" is a bit strong don't you think? She was just okay if one is going to be somewhat objective.
@@Holden1296 Whether you think she did okay or 'owned her' is subjective no matter what, technically.
@@CartoonHangout What I meant---and I am sure you understood---that the average Jane/Joe would have considered what she said "okay". I don't want to get into a philosophical argument, so of course, you are technically correct. Wow, this is a waste of time lol. I think this entire trial---both sides---is full of psychobabble and nonsense. I was only on here because of the Stern comment.
That lawyer was trying so hard to discredit the psychologist but all she did was make herself look stupid.
Absolutely AM s lawyers keep asking everyone the same questions in different ways multiple times to try and get them to slip up and discredit them create reasonable doubt. A kid straight of law school could do a better job then these lawyers, I’ve never seen lawyers like this before Objection hearsay lol they sound ridiculous
She even tried to describe amber but ended up describing Johnny being abused and the lawyer doesn't realize she actually asked those questions hehe
I sooooo agree!!!
But you have to admit, she did it well.
@@adamfurtaw915 the baker is the muffin man.
Muffin man: JD finger does not exist
This is what happens when a stupid person tries to slander someone who's intelligent. I'm honestly impressed at how bad Amber Heard's lawyers are, it's incredible.
exactly my comment. so sad to see that these people are in fact licensed attorneys.
Lawyer isn't necessarily stupid, but when you take on a case with no real defense, you try some pathetic methods to get paid, and get an impression of being so. Hence most lawyers don't want to take on losing cases to preserve their reputation and not having to stoop to weak arguments making their lawyering look bad.
Thats her job homeboy. It aint personal but it sometimes seem that way.
One could tell this psychologist was being very careful about how she answered the questions. She was trying to answer correctly and accurately. The defense was going for the “gotcha” question, but there were no muffins there.
I know right. You can’t use psychological tricks on a psychologist 😄
@@LeviAck178 she could see everything form a mile away, it's an impressive skill
Yeah the psychologist did muffin wrong.
There were muffins there.. just not for Amber. They were for everyone.
Notice how the psychologist was quick to answer, “you are incorrect” instead just answering, “no” when Amber’s lawyer was trying to get the witness to agree she said/did something
Lawyer: You told your husband correct?
Psychologist: No
Lawyer: But you told your husband correct?
Psychologist: That is still incorrect.
I really feel like the lawyer wanted to try a third time.
What's great is she was BLUFFING that they had her conversation, with her husband - Dr. Curry called her on it and they DON'T ! ... And the jury saw it.
😂
Needed all the strength they could muster to not think "Third times the charm"
she rly thought she'd change her mind
“That you’re incorrect is correct” gotttttem
This is not a tactic you employ against a psychologist. It's not even a tactic you should employ as a lawyer. Council got owned.
Hi, i have literally never looked at court stuff before and am slightly lost, why do people keep talking about a tactic? What was her strategy?
@@its_nuked She would purposely do some tricks that are only used as a last resort, such as asking questions like "Do you think A AND B?" Even though the psychologist only thinks A and not B but because the psychologist is, well, a psychologist, she's able to evade these sort of traps
@@its_nuked The bottom line is that it’s unfortunately more about how the information is presented than what the information is. So attorneys will have a plan to ask questions in a way that frame their argument in a positive light. This lawyer is attempting to attack the doctor’s credibility and make her look like a fame seeker vs a legitimate doctor, therefore make the jury question her credibility. This is a very tacky and sexist approach. More typically, a lawyer would try and poke holes in the way the science is applied, look for mistakes, or if they’re being petty, question their professional qualifications. Suggesting this lady is a fame mongerer was very below the belt and backfired.
Just anecdotally, (not a legal professional) I’ve seen heavy handed approaches in a lot of cases from the 80s and 90s. It seems like something that perhaps resonates better with older generations, but in today’s world, it doesn’t really fly. Especially in this scenario, where a defendant is trying to paint herself as a feminist hero, yet her defense team is attacking a female doctor in a very sexist and disrespectful way.
How the wording is structured and manipulated can cause answers to work in the lawyers favour. However, one of the people who wouldn’t fall for this is a psychologist. She should have known better but I guess thenlawyer was clutching at straws and then just got school by the dr
Also the lawyer is doing her best to discredit the professionalism and qualification of the witness. Here she tries to imply that the psychologist was so starstruck and excited to meet Amber she bought muffins. However, the psychologist comes back and says no. We always buy muffins and there’s protocol in place for celebrity clients… so her husband could assume a celebrity guest was coming due to the actions that were taken that day.
She wasn’t hired by Johnny Depp or his lawyers, she is hired by the court to testify on the facts, that will fall one way or the other. She even testified to that on the stand when being questioned by Amber’s attorneys. In this case, it is beneficial for Johnny and not for Amber
Yes she was. Expert witnesses are paid for by which ever side brings them in. So if Depp loses the case, he has to pay for it. If he wins then it comes out of the settlement. The attorneys initially pay for them but they get paid back one way or another.
What she testified about was that she will give the facts unbiased as a professional. You only have her word for that. She gets paid no matter what she gives as testimony.
@@zlmdragon. so is that muffin question is to ruin her credibility as a Psychologist?
@@zlmdragon. why your (Dr Curry’s) husband brought Muffins for Amber Heard? I don’t quite understand why Amber’s lawyer asked such question.
@@maheephoenix4398 psychologists are not allowed to disclose who their patients aren’t without permission so if she had told her husband who she was bringing the cupcakes for, she would have violated patient confidentiality
@@vanessaspeaksAnd the point of the questioning was to imply that “omg I’m on the Johnny Depp case and I’m gonna tell people”.
This psychiatrist is a better attorney then Amber turds lawyer....
Psychologist
But YES
Well spotted!! LOL
Its only because Amber has no defence. Shes guilty
Ahhh amber turds 😂
To be fair, the lawyer has so little to work with, she is reduced to this nonsense...
I imagine that lawyer,is thinking her career is dead after this
You get the feeling depps lawyers are laughing at heard lawyers
I need to learn how to talk like her. She's so accurate and very careful how she speaks and how she confirms information. Ugh amazing.
wow, I thought the same😮👌🏻
Just think before you speak and say it in your head before you say each word
@@Camothor10 My guy, it’s called sarcasm!
@@irishboyrants8086 She's talking about the psych... who IS very accurate and careful how she speaks. Was not sarcasm. Maybe you should take OP's advice as well, my guy!
just be intelligent lol
This lawyer isn’t looking for truthful answers she’s just trying these trick questions to get her to purger herself.... it’s shameful.
I am not on Ambers side or anything, but this is what most lawyers do. Confuse people and catch them offguard or break their defense. Thats also what police officer do in interviews. Very common technique to spot liars.
@@ddtwo yeah it is a common tactic but you have to be subtle about it if everyone knows what your doing there guards up and most importantly the jury doesn't like/trust you unless the opposition is just as bad it easily breaks the case
although if if you fluster them right and they rush to explain they can lie on instinct or choose a poor lie
or the lawyer can just use it so the witness brings up something you can branch off from instead of you jumping to bring something seemingly unrelated up
@@kellynolen498 yet this hasn't worked all trial.
Trick questions? Worst magician I have ever seen.
That’s literally what lawyers do
As someone who is getting their masters in forensic psychology, this woman (Depp’s team’s retaining psychologist) handled this so beautifully and we are currently studying her as a model for how we should handle cross examination. Well done👏🏻
I'm taking a class on how to become a clown, and Elaine is my inspiration she's truely a master at the craft
As someone with a psych degree, how do you all justify having drinks with any party of the case prior? TF?
@@apeyoutube7485 it was an interview?? food and drinks were served as a sign of hospitality, its not like they were partying
@@Ro-Ghost💀
She is the definition of what people call “beauty and brains”
Most definitely
Absolutely!
She's very lovable, charismatic, and is paid in muffins
Absolutely!
Yea she's the whole package!
Such a calculated, well-spoken, intelligent woman. What a great choice to have her be the one to do this.
Beautiful and intelligent. Lucky husband
We’re talking about the Psychologist right?
If so then yes, lady is fine in every way
I agree, she had that lawyer at a loss in so many ways.
She is professional and ethical. Easy to see.
The obvious goal of the defense: use up ALL of the retainer money and pretend “we were fighting for you honey”
What's hilarious is that they're playing mind games with a psychologist... a forensic psychologist of all people
Exactly lmfao
Money makes people stupid and desperate
Don't mess with someone whose career is studying people
😂😂 true she’s sooo calm
This ^
it is hilarious that this lawyer thinks she is the smartest person in that room, and the entire room is laughing at her when she asks the most absurd questions and tries to twist the Psychologists words. Its clear that everyone in the room knows what she is trying to do, and how bad she is failing at it
The lawyer tried to discredit the psychologist, it is a cheap trick for when you have no ammunition in your case. So glad the psychologist didn't fall for any of those trick questions.
Yeah I noticed that's what they do to any and all "witnesses" who have any positive comments or answers in favor of Depp, immediate character assassination to discredit everyone and everything.
Her defense is as much of a joke as she herself is.
I even see you here haha. Hi girls
well she IS a psychologist.
Can you explain the trick
@@Urmom-cw3fu Nah, the lawyer's just rephrasing the questions again and again, enough to confuse and mess with someone's head, that may affect their answers. It's like intimidation or something.
Her lawyers are SO unprofessional. She was really arguing with the judge over an objection? So glad they're doing so poorly, Amber deserves a team like this
But muffin’s 🤣😂. How much are these lawyers getting paid? 🤔🤦🏻♂️
I am laughing at how she sighed and needed a few seconds just to say she disagree with the judge.
@@manwell235 the sigh was what did it for me, too haha. I was like "Is this lady NUTS?" HAHA
The muffins have spoken.
@Jerry RN we can assume it is without a doubt a large amount of muffins 🧐
Why were the muffins not brought into the court and presented as evidence? What kind of muffins were they? What ingredients were used in the preparation of said muffins? Which bakery were they from? Why were the jurors not given muffins to eat so they could better understand the feelings and thoughts of the people surrounding the muffins. I can't believe they went with the "Muffin Strategy" without muffins present in the courtroom. All these points and more are vital to fully understanding the muffin scenario. I DEMAND MUFFINS NOW!!!
I agree totally 🙃 wouldn't it be so awesome if Johnny's team actually brought in muffins so that when Amber Heard gets on the stand they can show her the muffins and as her if those were in fact the muffins that were bought for her🤣😅🤣😅
Hahaha! This statement just took away all the stress I had today. 😂😂😂
🤣🤣🤣
😂 😂 😂
the muffins are paid actors
Lawyer: “ Who brought the muffins?”
Psychologist, “ The muffin man”
Lawyer, “ the muffin man?”
Psychologist, “ Yes!!! The muffin man!!!”
Would you agree that it is a FACT that the muffin man resides on Drury Lane?
Do you know the muffin man?
"Well, she's married....to the muffin man."
Hahahaha
Next they'd bring the Muffin Man on the stand haha
Psychologist is super clear and articulate, she handled herself with a level of poise and elegance hardly found these days. Well done!
In other words, she's an actual professional :D
She is also a complete smoke show.
@@Coxon9 ????
@@FrancisCastiglione it means she’s smoking hot lol
@@Coxon9 Sadly, that was my immediate assessment. But then her smarts joined along, substantially increasing her “Hot AF Score” to a level bit too high for immediate feedback from the judges apparently. They are still intently discussing this situation in private, and should be announcing any time now, a clear and thorough explanation for us.
The psychologist seem very intelligent. She knows what she's doing and talking about. She seems all facts and I love it!
Kinda hard to have a doctorate if you're dumb
She knows what she's doing, very impressive.
I hope his advocates brings up that a guitarist never would hurt their own fingers. I saw someone else write this and realised how brilliant it is. Hope this point can reach them if they haven’t already.
@@Dinosaurs_with_laser_guns he said its the only thing that brought him peace since he was 12! Someone hardcore into guitar doesn't go lopping their fingers off! And we know what a musician Depp is.
@P J doesnt matter too much in the sense that it it varies a ton even when only taking people that seem similar in terms of intelligence based on conversations like this.
This lawyer can’t stop interrupting people. Grasping desperately at straws trying to plant seeds into the jurors heads
it would also look bad if she did not try? -------
--And yet ??? It could actually also be a, not entirely poor defense, maybe ??
If the lawyer, did NOT do her job, or did it really poorly ... Hmm?
That's her job
@@alexbogiatzis9855 and she's failling at it
Shes's grasping for muffins okay lol
I was going to say the same thing
I genuinely wish I could stay as cool as this woman. She holds herself with such class. You cant tell what she’s directly thinking, even though we all know she thinks this lawyer is a moron 🥲
I adore this psychologist. She is so bright and present and attentive and really annunciates.
Also confident. She had the polor opposite facial expression as amber did.
same but all i could focus on was the pansexual hoodie
She's intelligent, beautiful and eats muffins
@@edgardocasenas4084 that is literally all I want in a woman
Lol yeah she's really cool
The fact this intelligent, professional woman has to respond to questions BLATANTLY trying to paint her as a potential mistress (meeting up with Depp for "dinner and drinks") is so frustrating. I can only imagine how annoyed she felt being there in person.
YES! Ugh and the muffin thing where they asked her "why her husband brought muffins for amber heard" like ffs drop the tactics already
also the fact that she is married as well. its a insult to her and her husband
As if the lawyer wouldn't have dinner with anyone but only with her dear husband.
They ruined that angle then by bringing up her caring husband who buys muffins for her, truly they're clueless.
Does she have any social media? She is cool I wanna follow her
If someone doesn’t send this woman a basket of muffins that says “my condolences” after the trial ends then I will be sorely disappointed
Edit: So are we sending blueberry or chocolate chip? 🥳
AHH ME ME I WILL
LMFAO BRO START A GO FUND ME I'LL DONATE FOR A BIG ONE HAHAHAA
I think she’s done with muffins.
But more importantly "weren't they really hash brownies not muffins and this would have led to AH having a incorrect assessment" correct.
After this trial... what man is ever gonna want to go near her. Muffins mite be the only thing she can eat. If ya no what i mean
The way she got stumped so bad, after her question got objected, was HILARIOUS. After that wasn't allowed, she fell apart. Clear example of a stupid person. This lawyer is a joke and ruined her entire career through this single line of questioning. You can see Johnny Depps lawyers smiling and whatnot, because they know this just got a lot easier.
To be fair she is trying to defend something the whole world saw happen..she def defaimed him..i honestly wonder how the first trial was lost..i mean i know defamation is hard to prove but come on....tbh i think the lawyer should use this bpd histrionic diagnosis to her advantage..in defamaition you have to prove the person knowingly lied on you but the dr said it's questionable how much she can take responsibility for anything at some point...maybe that's an easier out...if she can't take responsability and is a pathological externalizer of blame without realizing she may very well believe that he was the abusive one.
Oh wait amber said on audio she was rhe one who is abusive...i dunno...i have no idea how they won in uk
@@irenedove2881 I think in the UK Depp was suing a gossip rag and not Amber Heard herself.
@@vintagearisen ahhhh thaaank you! That makes so much sense
I almost feel bad for the lawyer, who is clearly bumbling stumbling and losing face trying to scramble up a line of reasoning. Bet she wishes she never took the case.
Imagine trying to play manipulative mind games with a psychologist 😂
Or the "who's more charming" game with Johnny Depp xD
@@profdocjones2679 ? Please
This psychologist isn’t Harley Quinn so I don’t know why this lawyer insists on acting like a Joker.
@@tristanmagnus1964 because that lawyer's a clown
@@stevejones69420 that makes sense lol
If this trial has taught me one thing it’s that you really don’t need to be that intelligent to be a very successful lawyer
If this trial has taught me anything it's that there's always a price to pay for handing out free muffins.
@@jacksimone1677 😂😂
The lawyer isn't stupid.
@@greyngreyer5 Heard's attorney? She comes across as pretty stupid.
yes you really do… what you don’t understand that in this case to be an attorney for amber heard is going to require a lot to try to persuade the jury and public opinion. They’re doing their job
Psychologist: Can we stop talking about muffins?
Lawyer: *M U F F I N S*
I just totally got her 😂
When you just ask your husband to get you something... In this case MUFFINS 😂😂😂
You just want him to get it for you, happy wife, happy life 😁
The whole muffin conversation was both hilarious and ridiculous in equal measure 🤣
@@clairewilliams3081 and such a waste of everybodys time. Lawyers should be fined if they repeat over and over irrelevant questions for the sake of extenting the trial.
This had me rofl, I am in tears!!😂😂😂
🤣🤣🤣
So Dr. Curry said something in the like of "My husband bought these muffins" and Amber took it as "My husband heard that you were coming, so he ran out and got muffins for you"
The muffins thing was meant to discredit the witness (accusing her of breaking patient confidentiality by telling her husband Amber Heard was coming in). Completely backfired, just showed how narcissistic Ms. Heard is, that when she heard that the husband had bought the muffins, she assumed the muffins were for her specifically and he must be trying to impress her.
Literally! And it correlates with Dr.Curry's diagnosis of HPD
ruclips.net/video/qOCC3RBzNrM/видео.html Finally its here.
They were doing what you just said. They were desperate to fish for possible confidentiality breach.
"when she heard that the husband had bought the muffins, she assumed the muffins were for her specifically and he must be trying to impress her" is just pure fiction, unless someone testified that she actually said that. Even that wouldn't necessarily be narcissistic, as many times people do tend to make an extra effort to please rich/famous people.
@@Baychimo I am speculating, not creating fiction. Luckily, youtube comments are not a court of law, just a court of public opinion, and I'm allowed to speculate here. Obviously Ms Heard was the one that brought up the muffins to her lawyers, and held the belief that the husband knew she was there based on this.
So true!
The hard pivot form “you asked him to pick up the muffins” to “would you agree domestic violence can be verbal” is mental. What exactly goes on in that attorney’s head 🤣
Best to jump off of that sinking ship and try another one. That would be my guess. This whole trial is nuts.
What exactly goes on in that attorney’s head? Uhm.... muffins?
She is trying to get her to slip and say something wrong
She realised the muffins strategy was leading nowhere so she switched
This is the sequel to Inside Out, but the memories are full of 2 things, law and pastry.
This is one of those moments where I realize why people hate lawyers. This lawyer was trying desperately to guide the psychologist into perjury. That was her whole intent and when it failed, she didn't know what to do.
Well, if the witness *was* lying, that's how we would find out. It's quintessential to the process that lawyers do this.
@@Cowtymsmiesznego But if the witness is telling the truth it is also "quintessential" to the process that the lawyers don´t skewer the truth that the witness has to offer
That's just what lawyers do, let's say if the witness was actually lying(not like this psychologist) It's absolutely essential that lawyers try to trap them into a pool of their own lies to win the case and prove the witness is lying. Though it comes off as immoral to do this, you've got to admit, if it was Depp's lawyer doing this to Heard's team, we would instead praise the lawyer calling said lawyer "smart"
@@blakan1478 The lawyers don't decide on the truth of the matter - the judge/jury does. Also, that's why both sides have their lawyers, each trying to "skew" to their client's side.
@@Cowtymsmiesznego exactly
“You’re incorrect that is not correct” has to be the truest statement I’ve ever heard lmao
Edit: The biggest thing in court is paying attention to how the questions/statements are formed. This psychologist did not let anything slip. She made sure to confirm the wording before answering and to word her statements in ways that could not be twisted.
Given her intelligence and qualifications, it does not surprise me that this Lawyer could not play her.
unrelated but the psychiatrist is gorgeous and smart to boot, quite to opposite of amber turds lawyer
While her field of work is definitely half of the reason she doesn’t get tripped up, the other would be her being an expert witness who does this for a living, and has come across the obvious traps, that people like AH’s attorney sloppily set up many times before.
@@invincible9462 yes! This is WORTH whatever $ she's paid. She knows what's coming before it's said. That's amazing.
She’s a psychologist. It’s literally in the video title
@@DeathnoteBB I think we all know that lol. Not sure what the point of your comment was.
I did say psychiatrist so technically I'm wrong, but yea, I'm aware of her profession, credentials, years of practice, ect.
I simply said she is very thorough, attentive, & pays attention to the small details like sentence formation.
this trial has taught me that I could never be this patient. I'd be flipping out after the 3rd stupid question and this psychologist and johnny deserve a friggin medal for putting up with this
Bro you need to see Johnny's accountant video. Sharp memory, calm and clear to the point. Not to mention numbers don't lie
I feel the same
@@succubusrat6886 numbers can lie if manipulated by the right person, but this wasn’t was the case
That’s exactly what AH’s lawyers are looking/aiming for so you’d be playing right into their hands lol
I think Johnny also deserves a muffin.
This lawyer is so unlikable, so convolouted, so confusing, so obtuse and has such an abrasive personality the jury would rule against her no matter what!
Agreed! Seems like her questions being convoluted and confusing is completely intentional though.
I agree. She's extremely unlikable.
There were points where she wasn’t getting anywhere and was audibly and visibly annoyed. Sighing loudly and being needlessly argumentative after the judge had passed a ruling on an objection.
It is weird how such a charismatically deficient lawyer could have risen far enough to gain employment on a high profile legal case. I realize cases should not hinge on that sort of thing, but with jury cases, they really very often do.
@@veep5712 Sounds like Johnny's team.
They're trying to question the psych's credibility and bias
1. Asking if she would be here if she had found anything in Depp that would negatively impact his chance in the case; unanswerable at this stage, saying yes would mean she didn't find anything "wrong", saying no would give the opposition leverage as it creates doubt in the client's stability and claims
2. The muffins. The vague implication of "my husband got these for us" is he knew exactly who would be eating them, as if she had told her husband who she was meeting with; this would discredit her as untrustworthy in the case for sharing confidential information
3. Trying to make her seem like she's lying. Previously-at the beginning of the clip, she had said she does not often meet with high-profile clients. During the description of the muffins story, she says "we have to clear the office when we have high-profile clients, as we often do." the vague implication being she has a lot of high-profile clients when the obvious meaning is that the office she works in often has high-profile clients.
I love this woman! So much patience during this awkward exchange. She's such a professional!
She’s a psychologist, so I doubt this is the weirdest conversation she’s ever had 🤣
it's kinda her job
@@stingerjohnny9951 true
The woman shared her breakfast with amber, apparently you can not do anything nice for amber without being punished for it.
It almost seems like they're trying to make some creepy implication about the husband who bought the muffins.
@@wallykimball8829 I think they're trying to show she broke confidentiality, and it becomes increasingly obvious that is not the case despite how desperate and juvenile the defense tries to be. You do not need to know WHO a person is to buy muffins for them to be shared between them and your wife. You do not need to know who someone is to know that they are important. You can enjoy a meal during an interview without it being a bribe.
@@RotaAbyssian I agree. These lawyers try to make any innocent act or gesture appear to be shady and manipulative. 90% of what they say is pure scum lawyer-ese. I liked the irony of Amber's lawyer implying motives inspired by a "high profile" case. Because Amber's lawyer is motivated by pure altruism.🤩
she’ll use anything against anyone
Fr
I think we should stop saying that she has bad lawyers; that gives Amber some sort of justification when she inevitably loses.
I think we all need to realize that Amber has no case and these poor lawyers are have to grasp at every straw.
Very true and well said.
They're faced with a hopeless task and it absolutely shows.
You're so right
This is of the utmost importance. It's clear that Amber is already being judged by the court of public opinion. But the lawyers are just doing their jobs. Granted, some of these leading questions and the omission of details don't paint Amber's lawyers in a favorable light.
It would help to hear from Disney. Can they not be forced to testify i wonder?
I still would hardly call them "poor lawyers" because they're still being pretty damn rude, patronising and condescending. Then again that's the game I suppose.
the fact she brings muffins for her patients is so adorable to me
I watched this part live and I actually was embarrassed for the defense, yikes
turds lawyer: I object, hearsay! judge: it was your own question 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Yeah they’re embarrassing. I’d be surprised if they’re hired for anything high profile after this
@@liliths_gf3075 anything else even
They're certainly not doing any favours for their own reputation.
1000th like
I like that she kept reiterating that it was not her responsibility nor within the scope of her job to prove that domestic violence took place rather she clearly and accurately restated multiple times that her job was to evaluate her client's mental state. She's great!
When your biggest defense is trying to trick witnesses into puns, it's because you have nothing and you're going to lose.
the muffins story will be forever remembered. I wonder which bakery made them. They should close an ad with this Doctor because she now deserves all cams on her. Very professional, polite and concise. My math teacher in school would lose for her. Applause! 👏👏👏 AH's team deserves an ananas. What a bunch of idiots! where did they buy their diploms?
no she will win
@@oz4549 nah
@@oz4549 naaah
@@oz4549 she'll win alright...she'll win a room at the local mental institution
As an attorney, never ever ask a question you don't already know the answer to. This is especially true when you have no clue what you are actually doing.
Elaine knew the answer though. Technically… the husband knew a big client was in the office. But he didn’t know who it was. Heard’s team tried to manipulate the jury into thinking Curry told her husband she was testing Amber Heard. Had Curry said “yes, my husband knew a client was coming in” Elaine would’ve moved onto another topic because she got her yes answer. And Depp’s team would’ve had to redirect and clarify the muffins story. All in all some horrible tactics employed by Heard’s team.
What a DISGUSTING lawyer.
Trying to twist words and trick people into saying something they didnt mean because they got confused. This is why people despise lawyers.
Yes, this lawyer seems like she’d fit in well at Capitol Hill
Until you need to hire one. lol
Amber Heard found lawyers as slimy and dishonest as she is. Gross client. Gross lawyers.
Had dinner and drinks with Depp…like having drinks isn’t a typical thing? With dinner? I hate how they try to paint it as a negative thing. The sigh of defeat after getting stubbed by her answers is so satisfying.
Lawyers typically tend to do this to discredit a witness. They’ll ask the same question multiple times in different ways to try and catch someone slipping up to try and sway the jury in favor of their client
The way that this lawyer was trying to use shady, unprincipled manipulation tactics on a trained physiologist and thought it would work is truly laughable
Psychologist*
@@Madchemist002 thanks for correcting me. Dyslexia gets in the way sometimes 😂
@@lydiax2178 thats not dyslexia. you just typed it in wrong.
@@lydiax2178 "it's my DYSLEXIA guys!! I know nobody asked but i have DYSLEXIA."
@Justin Kerns
"It's my OPINIONS guys!! I know nobody asked, but I have OPINIONS."
Here's your crown of douchebaggery my guy, wear it with pride as you look around and see everyone against you.
I have so much respect for this woman! Professional, intelligent, non-biased and unwavered by the defense’s allegations and super inappropriate treatment of her as a witness and as a professional psychologist.
This lawyer is gradually starting to treat witnesses worse the more frustrated she gets. She exhibits emotions of fear and anger in her voice and behavior towards all the witnesses the further this case goes along. I’m still shocked at how far the judge lets the defense go with repetitious drilling. I have yet to see where they have accomplished anything besides wasting the courts time and only proving that they are unprofessional and in over their heads.
might be in Johnnys interest to let them, if they come off as desperate / aggressive it helps his case.
she is fearing having to face her client if they do not win... i almost feel sorry for her.
@@acommentator4452 I don’t. It’s Amber’s fault that they even have to fight this hard. Amber lied to her lawyers and they’re just now starting to realize it. If I were her lawyers, I would drop her. If they stay through this whole trial, it’s only damaging their reputations and I’m pretty sure it’s fair to say, they don’t have much left lmao.
It’s gone on this long so let for the memes we are getting out the case
And a stone cold fox.
Even a year later this is so fun to watch again.
Defense: "If Ms Heard is such a violent person, why do you think the muffins allowed themselves to be eaten by her?..... We object!!"
Judge: "To your own question?"
Defense: "Yes".
Objection! Did I read that right?? HEARSAY!
ruclips.net/video/qOCC3RBzNrM/видео.html Finally its here.
😂😂
@e Why do you people do this?
Calls for speculation…
It's amazing how effortlessly the psychologist answered the questions despite them being so poorly worded and so clearly misleading. The lawyer was trying so desperately and so blatantly to get her to say something incriminating.
its not poorly worded. they were designed to trigger the psychologist. but it backfired because it didn't work. they underestimated her. the type of questions and ways of questioning would have normally worked on everyone else.
I would literally hire this psychologist as my lawyer, she is just perfectly organized and forthright in her answers. Absolutely schools the lawyer
hiring a psychologist as a lawyer sounds actually quite stupid in my opinion
@@mrskillerchicken Yes. I would hire her as my psychologist.
I don’t think answering questions well is really what lawyers do
she isn't a lawyer though..??
@@spaceowl9246 no she’s a forensic psychologist
"Objection: speculation."
"That's not speculation." she says as she realises it's speculation.
Amber’s attorney is infuriating. She knows she has nothing so she keeps going after character and memory/lack there of.
That's the best they can do right now. People calling her lawyer unintelligent are forgetting that she has no hard proofs or evidences.
My theory its that she is with jhonny so she is doing a terrible job on propuse to loose
@@gerarquiaFM they're getting payed by amber lol why would they do that
To be fair, if there is nothing that goes to prove their side, that’s basically all lawyers have left.
People are saying shes a bad lawyer due to her attitude. Like of you have no case it might be wise to try and butter up the jury/judge instead of berating them
This lawyer is either horribly incompetent or is at a point in her life where her mind is no longer sharp and she is not capable of performing her job. She is embarrassing Heards legal team.
It could also be that Heard gave her incorrect details that the lawyer thought were going to hold up. Either way she looks foolish.
that's Joe bidens cousin
In all honesty, her legal team was already embarrassing based on past testimonies.
@@JohnDeanMusic where did you find that out? Certainly isn’t online so how do you know
Maybe she wants Johnny to win 😂😂
Amber’s lawyer: Why did you give muffins to amber?
Psychologist: I didn’t, i bring muffins to work on the regular and had my husband pick them up cause i was late
Amber’s lawyer: Why did your husband give amber muffins?
Psychologist: 😑
Amber n her lawyer both r brainless don't mind em
a real bruh moment smfh
Lol.. Yeah Epic Moment !! 😅😅
😭
😂😂😂😂
4:45 “ I’m asking you a question I’d like you to try and answer the question “
Imagine talking down like that to someone way smarter than you are lmao
i love when the lawyer asks a stupid question and the psychologist just looks bewildered for a few seconds- if this wasn’t a dv case i would think it’s hilarious but it’s really just embarrassing
It’s not a DV case, it’s a defamation case.
@@Daniel_Addy A defamation case regarding the allegations of domestic violence and abuse.
@@EclecticallyEccentric I’m not sure what point you’re attempting to make, other than to state the obvious !
Embarazeeed
@@Daniel_Addy ah yeah technically, but the accusation that started it was abuse, so i think it still counts.
If you know the muffin man or his location, please contact Amber Heard's legal team. His testimony is pivotal in this case.
He’s on druery lane 😂
If only they had a Muffin Button.
ruclips.net/video/fWdKtAWdSXg/видео.html
Drury Lane
The muffin man?
🤣🤣🤣
The way the lawyer completely lost it after the objection was sustained was hilarious! She felt like a lost child. She kept saying " but the bias" to which the judge had to reiterate" objection sustained"
She was like "how else can i trick her into admitting my statement which can broadly be interpreted as her having something going on with Depp?" and didn't have a plan B prepared for when even the Judge knows what's going on
Hard to believe Heard insisted on this approx. $600/hour dolt to represent her. Also hard to believe her liability insurance policies covered the expense!
And then when Scamber Heard's liability insurers sued Heard for breach of contract ( they don't pay defendants who are NOT innocent and for 6 years and throughout the trial were found by a unanimous jury verdict to have intentionally lied, with malice and abused the Plaintiff),
she fled to Europe while they were trying to attempt service of process.
Elaine, was it a coincidence that her liability insurers were trying to serve your client a subpoena to get their money back that they paid out to you.
I kinda hope Elaine didn't send them her last bill until after the verdict. At least they wouldn't have thrown THAT amount in the toilet.
Whoever said "You get what you pay for" was as ridiculous as Heard's attorney!
This woman is amazing. "lets stop talking about the muffins 😂". Lawyer is as dumb as a rock.
How dare you insult the Rock, the rock is more articulate!
@@nicholaslawlor8623 "a rock" not "the rock"
Her little smile while answering is so funny to watch. As psychologists, we are trained to predict behaviour. She knows what's coming from the lawyer and she's 10 steps ahead of Heards lawyer😂😂
That's what I was thinking ......hoe does she think she can confuse a psychologist
So she’s on her client’s side and there to make sure she proves that Amber has a disorder ?
@@axpublisherdigital what a random question. How did you come up with that from the comment Miss Nerd left?
@@axpublisherdigital You sound like one of AH 's lawyers
@@axpublisherdigital respectfully, Ms. Bredehoft, aren't you supposed to stay away from clips of the trial while it's still ongoing?
What sort of muffins? Gluten free? Her lawyer didn’t go deep enough with that line of questioning 🙄
Indeed. She should have demanded a precise description of the muffins. Including the smell, texture and crunchiness. And chocolate bits.
Blueberry...
Chocolate chip...
Banana... With nuts/without?
I mean, maybe all that fiber could explain the dookie! 💩😂
Objection your honor they were cupcakes!
@@stellaallbright4750 HAHAHAHAHAHA!
🤣🤣
Imagine having so little evidence that THESE are what you must resort to.
Johnny Depp's lawyers could have easily objected to many of the questions. The fact that they did not just shows how confident they are that the defense has no defense.
They look somewhere between bored and amused and I find it very funny
@@natsinnett9751 lmao the dude to the left of Depp looks CHECKED OUT. Man looks like every kid on the last week of school.
better to let them look like idiots than object to this. they waste 10mins on just talking about muffins
@@daniel61206 well yes, that is my literal point, but thanks I guess?
@@daniel61206 where would
#Muffingate have come from if they had objected?
This lawyer: “your honor, this woman’s husband bought muffins so clearly, Mr. Depp beat Ms. Heard to a pulp and shat in her bed. Case closed.”
😂 😂😂 🤣🤣🤣
😆😆
Deuces
😂✊
🤣
As a clinical psychologist, seeing a competent psychologist in such a high profile case warms my soul! Like in any profession, we are in a Bell curve distribution, with some psychologists better than average, while some worse than average. Dr. Curry looks like the former.
It's even better she's so competent while being interviewed by such an incompetent lawyer
@@nonamesinenomine I would not even say that the lawyer was incompetent. They try all kinds of underhanded techniques to get a witness to say or agree with a phrasing that they want. Part of the job. If asking stupid questions and looking silly gets their case a win, so be it. It's entirely up to the opposing lawyer to object to such underhanded questioning.
Do you think its professional of the psychologist to have drinks with Johnny Depp and his team?
you are not a clinical psychologist
@@joanamagalhaes3381 it was not having drinks it was an interview and within that interview dinner and drinks were served so painting it as like she was drinking with jd and it was like some kind of a romantic relationship is just stupid xD
Can we send a muffin basket to this lawyer as condolences for her being fired?
Only if they had Johnny Depps face on them.
Man that objection shut that lawyer down COMPLETELY. She was so shaken that she started asking inane questions, for example, about muffins. Props to Dr. Shannon Curry for keeping as straight a face as she could after such a question. I personally would have laughed my ass off and need a moment or two to come back down.
Where exactly please?
The whole line of questioning was problematic. EVERY witness in EVERY court room is brought forward to support the team who brought them's case. If the judge allowed that, then EVERY witness in the trial would be out.
@@homiekeen23 You probably found it already but at 4:42 the question starts, the objection to this question is what I'm referring to.
I was so shocked she had the nerve to ask it 😭 wow
@@-007-2 If you didn't see my client rob the store you wouldn't be here today, is that correct? Bias, got'em.
Love how the psychologist knows that Heard's lawyer is fishing for specific answers regardless of relevancy and she's not having it. She knows how to keep the questions on track and not let the lawyer derail her.
Imagine trying to “outsmart” a PSYCHOLOGIST of all people!
To be fair a lot of psychologists are idiots themselves. This is just an intensely smart and level-headed person vs a total moron
Yeah right it’s impossible to do that no one could
Some people can absolutely outsmart a psychologist. However, there's a key word. Smart. She isn't.
The psychologists I know aren't very bright
@@AmandaVieiraMamaesouCult this one seems to be though, at least smart enough to not be tricked by bargain basement “Gotcha!” Style questioning
Elaine is like "You never hit a home run in the World Series, did you?"
Curry, "That's not within my profession"
Elaine: "So you didn't hit a home run?"
Idiot
"you got muffins"
"can I clarify what happened so we can stop talking about the muffins"
>clarifies
"why did your husband get the muffins for Amber heard"
this lawyer must want muffins
lol
😂😂😂
He’s such a pure soul and honestly wants the truth to be known. It’s disgusting what she’s done to him. Down right atrocious.
Um. Pure soul? Hmmm
@@Soletssee Pretty sure ambers lawyers have been lying the entire time and being disrespectful.
@@Soletssee "drugs" "alcohol" "substance abuse" is what you're going to say?
I don't know about him being a pure soul, but I sure as hell hope Amber gets stomped on hard (metaphorically speaking) with both boots,. she is vile.
I wouldn't say he's a pure soul, he's still a human and has his faults. The entire relationship was toxic and he was clearly the main victim, and deserves his life back. Especially as he had to watch Heard gain in her resume.
The lawyer is intentionally leaving out details and the psychologist is intentionally putting them back in. Sad and hysterical. Evidently ONLY the witness has sworn to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The lawyer is free to do whatever the hell she wants.
the lawyer? free to fall flat on her face.
Just like the police.
What does muffins have to do with this!!!!!! I give so much respect for Dr. Curry, I saw Dr. Curry walking out of the court house we all clapped for her...
it would have made sense that if only JD n his team would have the dinner and amber just came n talk. that way it would look like that JD would be bribing. but adding muffins to the case doesnt make any statements
@@murtazarizvi368 Exactly muffins had nothing to do with this…
As one clinician to the other. She did an EXCELLENT JOB mowing them down.
It’s a pity that lawyer doesn’t seem intelligent enough to grasp that she lost this one.
How long was your process of becoming a clinician?
Is that what clinicians aspire to - mowing people down? Yes, she’s sharp and effective on the witness stand. And yes, the opposing counsel is flustered and at times rude, even ridiculous. But weird use of language from “one clinician” cheering on another, in all caps.
@@mystique592 she failed miserably, then proceeds to question the judge's acceptance of an objection, and didn't have a similar question ready to still make the point.
I can't blame them to be cought SOOOO MUCH of guard, they took the case from a now proven and documented expert liar.
With respect (genuinely!), Everyone could see how professional and excellently experienced at her job Dr.Shannon Curry is, and was on the stand (although I’ve seen some odd comments from a few who don’t agree, but from the entire contents of each of those comments, I’m guessing they’re hurting from their own traumas, of perhaps not being believed (from my own personal experience).
I must also say, that is refreshing to see nice comments from one professional regarding another professional (of the same profession or another).
LMAO heard’s lawyer was SO frustrated when the judge sustained the objection to her question. Love to see it after Mr. Rottenborn objection to every single question that doesnt favor them
Including his own 😂
That was my favorite part
Objection. That's hearsay.
"Rottenborn"...
Especially hilarious that this was like a textbook example of speculation... She literally asked her "what do you think would have happened if your findings were different than they were".
I love that this just further proves the psychologist's diagnosis of Amber lol. Her grandiose sense of self i.e. psychologist's husband bought muffins and she goes on to interpret it to her lawyers as "She was so excited to interview me and was bragging to her husband who bought me muffins."
Agree. As the psychologist explained the "muffin situation", I took it as: the husband brings muffins whenever she is meeting with a high profile person. There is a history and pattern to this. Office is cleared of staff, high profile person comes, husband brings muffins. Amazing how Heard's lawyers tried to manipulate this into "the husband knew it was Amber Heard therefore that is why he brought the muffins", really reaching here.
@@apushman Actually she said she always brings muffins herself, regardless of the client she's seeing that day, but ocassionally when she runs late her husband does it for her. So it's not even something special she does for special clients, she just likes muffins and has a helping husband 😆 but ofc Amber interpreted it in the most self centered way possible.
She got the psychologist to admit she had drinks and dinner with Johnny and his team, and got her to admit she’s not Board certified. She did her job. Besides u cant diagnose someone after only speaking with with for 12 hours.
@@kirstenrox234 I mean but she did just end up looking like a fool. She asked for like 6 minutes about muffins.
@@bakabaka8235 *sigh* y’all really have no idea what y’all are talking about and it shows
*wildly speculates*
"Objection, speculation"
"That's not speculation!"
What the hell 😂😂😂
"That goes to bias your honor" LMAO
The fact that a lawyer wants to go against what a judge says is astronomical.
She told her lawyer that the psychologist 's husband bought muffins for her !!!!! what a woman ...
And even tho she made it perfectly clear, the lawyer ask her again about the muffins 🙄
I don't know how well muffins work for bribery; but, I bet if he'd known who the celebrity was, he'd just have picked up the muffin stumps.
I thought the same thing!!!! Delusional!!!
not exactly...I inferred something else. Amber LIED when she told her lawyer that the psychologist told her that she told her husband that she was meeting with Amber Heard. The lawyer planned to use it against the psychologist. The lawyer found out while questioning that her client, Amber, had given her bad information. You could almost hear the wind coming out of her sails and she realized she had "nothing" on the psychologist. There was literally no way to discredit her.
Hahahaha this one is stuck in my head. Allegedly, the psycholigist's husband bought Amber Heard a muffin. Wow!!! Just wow!!! Brilliant!!
You know your case is bad when you have to make out-of-context-muffins your smoking gun. Speaking objectively, compared to the "hearsay" guy this lawyer actually seemed borderline competent. She tried to paint a picture that the psychologist was biased & fame-hungry & seduced by Depp but in the end she didn't have much to work with & she knew it. Even with muffins on the table _(sorry...not sorry)_ the psychologist clearly knows how to do her job & maintained her credibility.
FR!!! 💀
I mean she earn more than 700$ an hour. You would expect that she is competent. I actually wondered why she didn’t ask her how much money she earns with that case
@@Infiltator2 dangerous to ask questions to don’t know the answer to. It would look bad if the answer is the same as other less high profile cases, it would enhance her reputation and make the lawyer look bad in front of the jury. Unlikely to be in the briefing or depositions given to Heards team. Basically a risky question.
I have "do you know the muffin man" stuck in my head. LOL I feel so bad for Johnny, but this trial has been comical thanks to Amber's lawyers.
Snap
The muffin man?
@@brendamccormack4576 well... She's married to the muffin man.
@@strangr_uk and they happened to live on Drury lane at the scene of the crime
who lives on drury lane ?
- Objection
- I don’t agree
Wtaf?????🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣