“Only 8 years” isn’t even that short of a time to practise. However her saying “no it was 15 years” is so satisfying. They tried to make a stupid point and she immediately shut them down. Iconic
Truth. Anyone who has extensive training for a job and then does that job for eight (or 15) years is probably capable of doing the most basic things within the scope of that job. Are there incompetent people in all professions? Yes. But we can't declare a lock of competence because someone has only held the job for a "mere" eight years. Laughable.
Imagine being a lawyer asking questions to a -psychiatrist- forensic psychologist and getting all of your questions answered with either a direct no or that's not my opinion or that's not quite accurate. Her lawyers are so unprepared.
Her lawyers were definitely unprepared, but this is a cross examination - the whole point is that the defense attorney would question the witness with leading questions in an attempted to get yes or no (or maybe) questions. I agree w your point though, Amber's lawyers suck lol
I love how she firmly replies "no that is incorrect" so no one is confused. All the jury is gonna hear is that everything the lawyer said was incorrect.
He could be guilty of murder and I would acquit him! That lawyer is a bully and nobody likes bullies! That jury looked pissed when they were leaving for lunch. This case is over already! They've checked out.
I loved how she frequently could answer "no, that's not correct" and then stayed mum, leaving the inept attorney twisting in the wind, trying to recover from this disastrous line of questioning.
Yes this was impressive. When someone says something about you that is wrong/a lie (especially if it paints you in a negative light) most people feel the need to immediately correct the information. However, the way she conducted herself made her look much more calm and professional, while also making the lawyer look silly.
holy crap. They way she goes out of her way to basically state, “No the diagnosis itself is not sexist. more women simply have it” gives me hope for humanity.
Have been diagnosed with it* Another important distinction versus your summary. Men are typically less likely to seek assistance with mental health conditions, meaning they are less likely to be diagnosed. I did also very much enjoy the lawyer getting bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder (two completely different and unrelated disorders) mixed up, and the doctor being able to say her statement was not correct based on one of those mistakes...
@@BlueXonar I agree and there could certainly be forms of sexism manifesting within the world of psychiatry as a whole that could influence those numbers, but that is so beyond the scope of this trial to determine it’s not even funny. Functionally, for this trial, the dsm-5 is what it is. It’s not as if all diagnosis in the dsm is biased enough to be thrown out of all law proceedings. (A good example of sexism in society affecting rates of bpd in women is that undiagnosed and untreated autism or adhd in women can present similarly to bpd. I don’t believe amber is autistic but it still skews the numbers. Women and girls are under diagnosed with autism and adhd because the research on both disorders was conducted on men and boys, as if that’s a baseline. The symptoms in women in girls can present differently but the diagnostic criteria is written based on research with autistic men and boys. So the autism criteria is accidentally designed in a way that is inaccurate for autistic women and fails to diagnose them. Later in life, struggling with untreated disabilities, they experience anxiety, depression and mood swings which can be mis-attributed to a personality disorder. Hence the sexism within the building blocks of the system that can really fail and underserve various disabled women. But not something the depp trial is concerned with
@@BlueXonar bro even in my country which is a lot more gender equal than any other country in this world has more diagnosed women with it. Just quit it. Theres always gonna be one side that has more than the other.
I've also heard that women most often get diagnosed with bpd while men get diagnosed with bipolar disorder, as they can be mistaken for each other. Might just be because women and men often present symptoms differently. Much like adhd which often is diagnosed in men when they're young and women when they're older, simply because the symptoms are different.
@@thespankmyfrank it’s not a sexest thing the clinical psychologist is right as saying women tend to have it more as women are more emotional and verbal whilst men are more physical (genetically built stronger) .. in this case is amber has the physical strength to give Johnny Depp a black eye speaks volumes
That's worse than the attorney yesterday that objected to the answer to his own question. Dang here are some attorneys that probably won't get hired again.
Let’s face it, the lawyer’s client is more of the problem than the attorney. They can’t make miracles happen and suddenly put AH in a good light. Those tapes did her in.
Yep, she is a professional expert witness, her job is mostly entirely evaluation and testimony, she is clearly excellent at her job, Depp's team got one of the best expert witnesses for the trial.
As Johnny Jims said ,they have nothing else. We speak about a completely fabricated case where not only the accusations are false but the supposedly victim turns out to be the abuser. Their job is to prove that unicorns exist.
She's a psychologist, not a lawyer, and she understands what she's talking about. Amber's lawyer is in such a bind that she is hurling legal jargon at the doctor.
yOu dONt UnDerSTanD whAt a SigNEd PLeaDiNg iS?????? No, I'm a psychologist not a lawyer. Do you know what Graduated and Reciprocated Initiatives in Tension Reduction are? Comorbidity? Reductionism? How about Hierarchical Stepwise Regression? Dr. Curry is here to testify, not take a vocab quiz on legal diction - and you definitely didn't need to use such a condescending tone, Ms. Elaine Bredehoft. Fun fact, she's considered one of the top lawyers in virginia, often top 10 - see cbclaw. She is an absolute disaster in this case, no wonder she quit. I think that goes to show that anyone would have a hard time trying to defend Amber Heard here. Also nice job copying Gypsee Nomad's comment nearly word for word lol
one skill that i’ve noticed about higher level psychologists is they choose words carefully. they answer to the words if they are formulated correctly rather than just answering to the supposive concept like other people do.
Well first she stated Bipolar is not caused by trauma, which is incorrect, it definitely can be and usually is. Then she started confusing BPD with Bipolar. But other than that the psychologist was great.
@@shaunross2995 I think she made it clear by saying that it is not a cause but it triggers the neurological/genetic areas which cause it. Although she phrased it more neatly than I did
@@shaunross2995 stating it is caused by vs can be caused by are two grossly differing statements. One requires trauma where the secone does not. See the difference? Words are important, especially when a lawyer is trying to use them against you.
@@shaunross2995 she did not say that, she said that there has not been a definitive cause as there's 2 groups with said illness, those who have gone through trauma and those who haven't. But according to her opinion and evidence out there, it could be genetic meaning that childhood trauma could be a trigger and not a cause.
The problems people have with lawyers are a modern thing that in my opinion is caused by the way the legal system has changed, it used to be that you hade to prove your legal point with evidence and witness testamony, however now its just easier to destroy the character of the other party as well as any witnesses they bring forward, lawyers come off as combative constantly try to play word games and have "Gotcha moments"
@@DelgueAdventures Doesn’t matter if she’s getting paid, lawyers go off reputation and losing a case like ambers is bad for their rep. Amber hired the shittiest lawyers anyway so who cares 💀💀
Very good witness. refused to be led, considered every question thoroughly, wasn't embarrassed or intimidated into agreeing to something she didn't understand and shut down every attempt to allow misinterpretation...all whilst remaining approachable and helpful. 10/10
Heard's Lawyer: Isn't it true that you are testifying in exchange for receiving dinner and drinks because you are a cheap prostitute who will lie on the witness stand for food? Dr. Curry: No, that's not true. Heard's Lawyer: Isn't it true that you personally knew Johnny Depp before you testified and would lie for him but Amber Heard's friends and other doctors don't lie in exchange for food? Dr. Curry: No, that's not true. Heard's Lawyer: I just want to be clear that I am accusing you of being a prostitute who is lying on the stand for drinks and food. Amber's friends and doctors who ate with her and knew her before testifying would never do what you are doing you cheap prostitute.
I think she gained an insane amount of credibility and relatability with the jury the moment she talked about not being a lawyer and not necessarily understanding some of the terms.
Retired attorney here. Appalling examination. A cardinal rule in conducting an examination is to never ask a question to which you don’t already know the answer. Also, in attempting to call into question the credibility or expertise of an expert witness, you never want to hear the words “no that’s not correct”. Counsel here not only got key facts wrong, but also gave the witness the opportunity to underscore her credentials. Example: “I am a registered clinical psychologist.” The “but not board certified” will still be in the jury’s mind, but this can easily be addressed if needed on re-examination. The attempt to suggest some form of relationship with Depp in an attempt to cast doubt on the witness’s objectivity, was also clumsy and was again handled meticulously by the witness. Counsel, in my view, came off badly. Her attempts to diminish the evidence and expert opinion of the witness ending up looking like a botched hatchet job. This and the calm, precise and respectful responses from the witness only served to embellish her credibility at the cost of counsel’s own.
I always thought the questioning was more more for the jury and court. Any legal persons worth their salt would already know the answer they are getting. It's not like witnesses are unknown. Isn't that stuff shared specifically so each side can build questions?
Is there any penalty for the lawyers if they deliberately try to present their facts wrong multiple times like this? I mean I know it's their way to discredit her but even a normal guy could see they're purposely doing that, and it should be pretty annoying for the jury to see this happened more than just a few times.
Yeah they were trying to make out that she was a great friend doing a freebie on the side. But she explained that she had an interview that happened to have a dinner in the or part of the interview. Much like going to an cafe to have an interview, then saying the interviewer paid for everything, because it wasn't an interview after all. Clutching at straws to try get the expert thrown out of court
Yep! The Good Dr. knows that the lawyer is a narc, and knows how to correct it. With words so precise, the narc can't manipulate her with "trick" questions and lies.
But to be fair No lawyer worth their Weight won't have a heigh level of Psychology Studies in their educational Background. Law School definitely requires it
@@dbs1013 too many people are personally attacking the lawyers for what they ‘believe’ without understanding that whatever a lawyer says IS NOT THEIR OPINION. They choose what they think is the best wording to sway the jury. She might think that it’s greatly impressive that the psychologist had been practicing for 8 years, obviously she’s not gonna say that because it doesn’t support her point.
They don't call them expert witness's for no reason. She did a fantastic job in giving clear information and not fumbling under the pressures of cross-examination.
Not only was she smart in her field and honestly very pretty, she had charisma and engaged with the jury - talking towards them, using inviting and friendly hand gestures, willingly explaining something to better inform them, etc. she never talked _down_ to them and made them feel stupid about the topics she is an expertise in. If anything, she made it feel like a friendly chat. Even as a viewer, I walked away more informed. People don’t want to admit it, but charisma plays a big part in cases like this (notably when they’re this high profile) with the jury. Yes, evidence is everything, but an expert witness that is very thorough, gives detailed explanations in an easy to follow manner, and engages with those who are the deciding factors in this case outside of a lawyer asking a questions….it goes a long way. You can tell who supports Amber through all of this with just today’s trial alone without them even having to outright say it, especially when it’s coming from the “believe and support all women” crew. I’ve seen so many comments today make backhanded remarks about how “ugly” she is, focusing on how she looks and speaks, ignoring everything she said and all that she has accomplished to imply she was _only_ hired for her looks. It’s a massive cope for this major W this woman brought for Depp.
@Slidin Expert witness means "a witness that is also an expert in a relevant field," not "someone who is an expert at being a witness." But yes, the doctor handles the witness position like a pro.
@@anhnhvn Well obviously lol I'm not calling her an expert witness because she was good at being a witness 🤦🤦🤦. An Expert Witness can be anyone with knowledge or experience of a particular field or discipline beyond that to be expected of a layman. In this case, Dr.Curry is a psychologist so that would be her expertise and she is testifying so that makes her a witness..
I love this woman. When anyone answers with "No, but", the lawyers won't let them continue talking. This woman simply says their statements are incorrect, forcing them to ask her what IS correct.
What was funny was Amber then tried to adopt that style of answering and it backfired because Camille had proof that when Amber said "that's incorrect", Amber had said the exact opposite, usually on more than one occasion.
I’m weak. The amount of times she’s had to say “that is not correct, no.” is pretty much just cementing this ladies future career failure. Nobody is going to hire Amber’s people after this. Yikes.
I disagree Even though their case has absolutely no grounds, they're trying their best to come up with something ,, it's not easy defending a loosing side
@@AmirAbuleil92 There less trying to come up with something and are more just re-using what they've already gone over but keep wording it in a different way. They get payed more if the case lasts longer and if it looks like they put in alot of effort, i honestly dont think theyre trying their best since they prob dgaf and know they can trick amber turd into thinking what they did was impressive.
@@AmirAbuleil92 I would think a lawyer that was actually trying would have consulted a psychologist before writing "gotcha" questions to ask a psychologist. This seems like the legal equivalent of "I've been paid millions to make this star wars thing but I've never seen star wars and don't plan to"
"ive been licensed for 10 years, and ive been practicing for 15 years" gets me every time. amber's lawyer needs to do a fact check and get her facts straight ngl.
Getting their facts from Amber lol 😂 who knows it all and copying everyone else’s styles and stares at them during this trail. She needs mental help, hope she gets it after this trail and Johnny finds healing ❤️🩹 Team Johnny (( Captain Jack Sparrow))
Yikes. Deliberately getting info wrong about how long she’s practiced, with the goal of diminishing her credentials? Pretty dumb strategy, and definitely not gonna get the jury on your side 🤦♂️
She thought she could prove that her disorder came from him. Don’t argue established science that was proven if you don’t know what it is on a basic level
the way she thinks that she is manipulating the witness and making everything confusing, when in reality it is complete opposite. Amber's team is a total clown show.
Not defending her attorneys, BUT they HAVE to grasp at the shortest and thinnest of straws, because Heard has no real platform to stand on, nor do her lawyers. Just look at the Depp testimony involving the tabloid hit-articles, what relevance does Hollywood lying and speculation have in a court case, when literally anyone off the street can publish a fake article. Rottenborn in particular is very quick to call speculation and hearsay, but in reality, it’s the only thing his team has to attack Depp’s defense. It’s a pathetic attempt, but it is what they are getting paid to attempt.
Yea. Amber's frmale lawyer can barely speak coherently. She is stumbling over damn near every other word which is distracting from the context of the question 🙄
I love how clear and assured this doctor is. It’s clear that she is educated and confident enough in herself to admit she doesn’t understand and still hold herself in a place that deserves respect
Yeah her confidence was her strength. It’s funny bc after a while, you could see she was trying to hide a smirk every time the lawyer asked a question. Her expression read “Oh this is gonna be fun.” Lol
Im glad she cleared that she did not just go to Mr Depp's house for "dinner and drinks". The lawyer was trying to make it sound as if they were being very irresponsible and like they were best pals in which case it would sound that she was biased. "I went to his house for an interview, dinner was served." Plain and clear.
Also, she was not interviewed by Johnny himself, but by his team. Turdy's lawyers are embarrassing themselves once again because they have no evidence on their side, must be exhausting. This isn't the UK and there won't be a biased judge (with connections to The Sun, by the way) to save them here.
... how to twist what actually took place... dinner and drinks??? No... an interview ... dinner was served! Trying to make the jurors think that Mr Depp had her around for a social get together. If I was a juror I would be thinking about just how manipulative the attorney was, trying her utmost to trip up someone who was far brighter than she herself was.
@@BeckMulhall congratulations! super proud of you two! getting a degree is exhausting and a serious commitment so I commend you both for your efforts! I hope you're able to help a lot of people in your fields
I'm not a lawyer. But the first I learned about being a lawyer was: "Don't ask a question that you don't already know the answer to." I'm amazed at how much AH legal team is just throwing shots in the dark.
Her first question is trying to make connections between Johnny and the doctor, it is pretty obvious they don't have any good evidence that the doctor's word isn't true.
I mean, what else can you do if you've got so little? My guess is that they're hoping to catch someone saying something in words that they can pull a technicality out of. Like "I don't murder children" and pulling "Now, they didn't say that _never_ murdered children." I just can't fathom the number of questions that they aren't correct for any other reason. If it's a serious attempt, it's embarrassing
As a current law student and a former collegiate mock trial competitor, I must say this doctor is an EXCELLENT expert witness. She is clearly listening to the questions thoroughly and answering each component with clarity and in a compelling manner (even clearer than the questions themselves were posed). On cross-examination, a witness must answer "yes" or "no" to the attorney's questions and cannot give too much context/pushback/explanation or else they risk an objection - she is able to say yes/no, but is still able to tear apart the questions by clarifying where the attorney was wrong or grossly mischaracterized a situation or statements. The sign of an excellent expert witness is that she is able to advocate for her side (Depp's legal time) whilst maintaining legitimacy and respect, and that she probably captivated the jury's attention much more than the attorney (who came across looking very unprepared and foolish). Props to this doctor - I hope they paid her the big bucks.
@Schoo Good question! What people might not know about court procedure is that both sides are obligated to stick to facts that are supported by evidence - but "facts" can be characterized VERY differently - and a legal team's job is to be very selective about what facts to present, how to present them, in what context. E.g. the doctor's meeting at Depp's home is a "fact" but Heard's legal team was attempting to characterize it as some casual, sleazy drunken party (though they didn't do a very good job at it). The doctor's obligation is to be honest but, as much as possible, communicate her opinion/research in a way that is favorable to Depp - which she does very well.
@@hannahtuboston3793 Thought the Heards-team was going for 'not a reliable expert because she was bribed with a dinner and drinks and therefore would never ever say something bad about John Depp'.
@@Jin-lx7or it's easy to make them look like fools when they have nothing and the defense have a LOT to back them up. It's easier to tell the truth than to prove a lie.
It's just good strategy in really any sense. Why bother wasting energy, time, or resources when you can let your opponents mistakes accomplish your own goals. In this case, all Depp's legal team needs to do, is object appropriately, and maintain good characterization. After that, Heard's legal team is doing all the actual damage to themselves by constantly taking unprepared shots in the dark. This is going to become a textbook case to study for future law students, since it EXPERTLY showcases that sometimes, the best solution is to let someone talk themselves into the dirt. Idgaf really about the specifics of this case, I'm glad to see Depp is a great dude, but I'm way more interested in the... what's the right word here... I want to see how deeply Heard's lawyers are gonna dig their own hole
literally the lawyer and Johnny are just drawing doodles while these idiot lawyers are getting destroyed by a witness, who needs to object to stupidity lol?
What a fantastic witness. She was not intimidated, kept her cool and respectfully offered correction when needed. She spoke with authority when talking about things pertaining to her expertise.
She's a psychologist. She deals with problematic questions and problematic people on a day to day basis. Dealing with a lawyer is pretty tame :D Also helps that she immediately identified the lawyer as someone who has absolutely no idea what she's talking about. Her massive confidence was very much merited in this case. Also, damn.. She so good lookin'...
Lmao. But honestly gotta give major props to the Doctor, This shows that she’s paying attention, and is actually smart, and also fearless in a way, she wasn’t afraid to give the corrections nor was she avoiding saying that she didn’t understand, I also admire that she didn’t lose her cool, especially when the Lawyer kept trying to imply that she inappropriately had drinks and knew Johnny and then asking her Questions with terminology that the doctor didn’t understand cus she’s not a lawyer. This Doctor didn’t get flustered and she actually followed the documents through. And didn’t pretend to read.
Psychologists that practice in a clinical setting are used to tracking discussions of great depth for long periods and understanding them. A few questions aren't going to throw her off lol.
@@Heroic11 Uhm, no. She is most definitely a doctor. She isn't a /physician/, but she's a doctor. Doctor does not equate to only physician (MD or DO), it is anyone that has pursued and acquired a doctorate degree in their area of expertise.
Imagine if these proceedings weren’t filmed. There’s a reason idiots like this lawyer represent people- there’s no eyes on them outside the courtroom. That, and there’s an old saying that pretty much says you can’t argue with an idiot- hence stupidity literally works sometimes in court.
It’s still not nice and actually I think it was a little annoying of her to confuse her. But sadly it is what it is. And the jury are normal people and they will definitely pick up on that. Edit- grammar
What I really admire about her is she straight up tells the lawyer I'm not an attorney so stop throwing terms at me I don't understand lool shit is annoying
I watched this yesterday and was stunned by this lawyer and how she perfomed so poorly here. I am not a lawyer but it is clear she screwed this up and the psychologist did an excellent job.
Actually, the psychologist incorrectly spoke the term bipolar disorder instead of borderline personality disorder. Also, when she says that environment can cause borderline personality disorder in conjunction with genetics, well that environment is often “trauma“. Therefore she is just wrong. Please contact me for further information, can be directly on this comment or on my TH-cam channel. I will be charging at most $1500 per hour. Thanks.
Yah no you should be fined for spouting nonsense at least 1.5 k. Mental health is very complex in your comment environment doesn't mean only trauma it can be trauma but other factors are there as well. Go do your own research.
The Lawyers have the ability to talk to all the witnesses beforehand, so really when you're questioning someone you should know the answer before they say it. I never ask a witness a question I don't know the answer to.
Coming back to this it’s still impressive. She’s such a good listener and very articulate. She’s so precise in her speech, while the lawyer can’t even say characterologically.
Yes, the Dr was incredible maintaining clarity in facts, words and representations. The defense attorney was horrible. At least half of her statements were incorrect assumptions. Or, she was doing that intentionally to confuse the jury. Who can keep all those statements and technical assessments straight in your head when most of what was said by the attorney were wrong or misleading?
No doubt it was a combination of incompetence and attempts to ruffle the doctor with her answers to make Depp look bad. I'm not a pro Johnny supporter here, and refuse to rule out any wrong doing by him in this relationship, as nothing is black and white in relationships, and as a substance abuser, it's hard to believe he didn't bring his m his own issues to it, which may have provoked her in certain ways, but the defence and Amber seem to be clutching at straws here. It generally seems a desperate attempt to make him look bad enough to say, "hey look, he couldn't have suffered in his career as result of defamation, as we have already shown everyone thought he was piece of shit"
while true too my knowledge that would mean you can be convicted because of that for instance while in school for marketing yes marketing. We had to take something akin to a law class on how to provide a agreement, well i was on the is the true or not team, we where down one person but the other team could not provide the facts to back up the statement and so we actually said that and we passed because we where able to provide a clear reason why.
The confidence this woman emits is incredible... She exposes everything so that everyone can understand, she's firm in her statements and knows how to defuse the ridicolous traps that are being thrown in her way like it's child play (like only a real professional can do). Yet they tried to discredit her expertise and poke holes in the quality of her work towards the whole situation and failed miserably. Add the ragtag lawyer team on the side of Scamber Turd into the mix and the job is done. Bullying witnesses, objecting their own questions, bringing ridicolous evidence to the table... Still, how the case is still not closed after her testimony is beyond me!
@@timm8998 yes! Exactly, she is just being honest. Although, keep in mind, she is an expert witness, both by the literal and legal term She has gone through many trials as a clinical psychologist. Practice makes perfect for keeping calm and collected.
@@timm8998 honest, yes. But the key is: she isn't someone you mess with as an attorney. She has her facts straight, she isn't intimidated in the slightest by twisted questions. I mean this in the most positive way: she's a master at mindgames. Like, it takes a movie character with plot armor, to even unsettle her.
Asking her if she's board certified is just as ridiculous as asking if she had passed the board. In that backwards accusatory way of asking the lawyer does. "And you haven't passed the bar exam have you?"
That's not quite the same. You cannot practice law without passing the bar but you can be a practicing clinical psychologist without being board certified. Asking questions about he credentials and time in practice is just an attempt to make the jury feel that she isn't qualified and to not give her testimony much weight.
@@rhoonah5849 exactly they were asking questions that had nothing to do with her profession. Again its like asking a construction worker if he certified to scuba dive. Its ridiculous and that was my point.
@@oldschoolgamer-w4u It is an accepted legal tactic but I find it to be a low ball tactic. One thing that I have learned is that having a degree, letters after your name or some arbitrary time in service does not make a person competent at their job.
@@Flexyourmemes Again, I understand what point you are trying to make but being a construction worker has nothing to do with being a scuba diver... you are comparing apples and oranges. Being board certified is indeed a higher level of credentialing for a doctor.
@silkart1......I'm not embarrassed for them at all. They've had a ton of time to prepare and they weren't. That's on them. It actually gets worse in another video. One of her lawyers tried to object to his own question. Lol
She got absolutely WRECKED. If a student of mine gave as many wrong answers in five minutes as this attorney asked wrong questions in five minutes, I'd have them doing drills for HOURS on end.
I don’t think that the lawyer was so much annoyed because she didn’t understand legalese, i think it was more because the psychologist didn’t allow the lawyer to manipulate her into assumptions. People tend to think they understand terms because of all these tv shows, however, the psychologist (maybe because of so many medical shows) knows that on such shows terminology is often misrepresented. Of course, now I’m making assumptions.
She didn't understand complex words, so the psychologist forced the lawyer to speak in a manner she can understand, wich is annoying for the lawyer, because can't make her trip in her answers
Just so people are aware, some lawyers aren’t skilled as court lawyers and instead are expert research lawyers. These people may be extremely skilled research lawyers who happened to know AH or be recommended to her. They also may be skilled court lawyers normally but you have to remember, AH is their client. I wouldn’t put it passed her to have lied to them about everything consistently and had them thinking “we can win this!” Only to be absolutely shocked by JDs lawyers who had actual evidence so now instead of trying to win the case that way they’re trying to come up with shit on the fly to try and make the witnesses that JD calls look incompetent, though it’s only serving to make them look even worse since they seem to be bad at improvisation. They could also just be outright horrible lawyers, like “objection: hearsay” guy. Who knows though.🤷🏻♂️
Just another example of why you should never lie to your lawyers, even if you’re guilty. Unless you’re AH, in which case lie to them all you want so you’ll lose the case
It was my understanding that a lot of permissible evidence planned to be presented in court has to be shown to opposing council. I could be wrong though
@@stephaniem895 You do I believe but even still you can admit new evidence literally the day before the trial if you so wanted to just to throw them off, though there are ways around it and to delay the trial and everything, but that also speaks to being an excellent trial lawyer or not.
It's funny how the psychiatrist is actually explaining really complex topics but i can understand it way more clearly than the lawyer who's explaining common stuff and still not making sense
“Trauma NEVER causes BPD?” This attorney clearly doesn’t understand that neurological-behavioral issues are not black-and-white issues that we completely understand by human science. Like, that’s like asking if a torn ACL is always sports-related. There are a myriad of unknown, unmeasurable circumstances that contribute to the human psyche in every individual, and the incompetence of this lawyer showing they have no understanding of mental health and are trying to beat a clinical psychologist in such an area is ridiculous and points to them clearly having nothing.
and what the lawyer doesn't get is that what they are realizing with BPD is that there is a more apt to be a genetic marker that is brought forth by trauma rather than just trauma bringing forth BPD
I think that was the point. The lawyer was fishing, trying to get the Doctor to say that, yes, "sometimes" it can cause it. Even if that chance is super low, if she could get her to say that it COULD cause it, then she'd probably instantly drop that line of questioning and leave it there so she can't clarify, for the jury to think about: "well, she said it could cause the issue, so maybe it did this time?"
@@naughtyskywalker9292 Dealt with it 5 years ago my Junior year of high school. Hyperextended my left knee in a basketball game, tore both my ACL and MCL. Had reconstructive surgery for them and was in PT for almost a full year. Shortly after started having even more problems with a tendon that became stronger than my joint so it would forcefully dislocate my knee with the smallest of sudden movements, so I had to have another surgery to thin the tendon out. Here we are almost 6 years later and I still have dislocations (Not as frequent as before the surgery, but still happens from time to time) and a weak joint that’s diminishing with every dislocation. There’s a reason why many sport career’s end even with a sprained ACL let alone a full tear.
"I'm a licensed psychologist" "bUt YoU'rE nOt bOaRd-cErTifiEd" I love how the attorney tries so hard to discredit her, when this psychologist probably knows more about why she's stammering and incoherent than she does.
@@nicolezhang8116 all board certified are licensed, you get a certification when you choose to get it you have to prove dominion of your field or some aspect of your field, it’s like a club basically you don’t need to get board certified, many people choose to because it gives an extra bonus to what you have under your belt, Board certification is not requiere to practice medicine or any other health field like psychology, after your license you can study an speciality like forensic psychology and you getting that degree it’s enough
You believed he was a good actor does not equates to thinking he is innocent...😂 I was fans of people whom I met and then found out were doing bad shit, ma'am is grasping for straws at this point and I LOVE IT
I agree with everyone that's saying: "Don't ask a question when you don't know the answer" and how that's the first basic rule of being a lawyer. I love how she was correcting the attorney, then saying: "I'm not a lawyer" and doing it respectfully to show the jury and judge that while she's being disrespected, she doesn't need to act that way to them.
This whole thing is weird. A lot of these questions were factual and should have been easy to establish in advance. How is this lawyer so poorly prepared?
I'm a licensed professional counselor in Texas, and if I ever have to testify in court, I hope I do at least half as well as this psychologist. She did an amazing job of staying in her professional lane and not let the lawyer put words in her mouth or misconstrue mental health diagnoses.
Yes. I managed a psych office for 14 years. I so admire Dr Curry and how she handled herself. She's an Ace at what she does. Everyone is praising her testimony and how she handled that woman Elaine
The lawyer seems like one of those retail managers that eventually gets fired after trying to blame her employees for things she should've been doing herself lol
That lawyer did an absolutely horrible job-maybe the worst ever seen on a national stage case. Totally cringe, embarrassing, poor preparation, consistently wrong… yikes.
Tbf it’s hard to make something out of nothing. We all know Amber is guilty, just need to prove it. Whereas amber’s team have to find a way to flip it round on johnny when there is no good evidence whatsoever
@@musky5972 This is a defamation suit and Depp's case is not bullet-proof. Instead of going for this abrasive 'everything and the kitchen sink' approach the lawyers could (and IMO should) have focused only on the technical deficiencies with Depp's complaint. Whether they win or lose the case, they are doing their client no favours by trying to smear witnesses, constantly interrupting testimony and in general acting as disagreeably as the court allows them to. It just reinforces the perception that their client must be just as unpleasant a person as the people she chose to represent her.
You can’t blame them though, Johnnys team has literally piles of evidence against Heard and it’s hard to argue the truth, all they can do now is prove biases and manipulate statements to discredit witnesses 😂
As a medical doctor its makes me furious how ambers lawyers are trying to tarnish the professional integrity of this psych expert. how they trying to say that women are disproportionately diagnosed with bpd more often. using words like a politician to a scientist will never work. i doubt this lawyer is doing this without a conscious intention to politicize the very science of psychology for the sake of one client.
Yes exactly. I was very annoyed that she was questioning the Doctor's credibility, but at the same time the Doctor held her own and she has probably now got a following of admirers or people she's inspired to work in her field, has probably now increased her credibility a whole lot more in presenting the testimony today which has probably sealed the case for Depp.
just remember she is doing absolutely everything she can to try to serve and protect Amber, though. she's simply attempting a difficult job which inhibits the act of defending someone who is completely in the wrong (AH)
This lawyer made me feel stupid with how much she kept stumbling over things. And I find it hilarious that she’s saying these “facts” with such confidence and then the person who actually knows these things, “uh no b*tch you’re wrong. Let me educate you”
She's over generalizing and stretching facts on purpose in an attempt to confuse the psychologist. Such are the antics of a sly manipulative lawyer tho.
I've never seen a lawyer struggle so much with asking questions. It comes across as just being really unprepared. I really thought the judge would've stepped in and asked the lawyer why she's constantly having a hard time with her cross examination. The lawyer getting so many things factually wrong, really damages any credibility of her ability at being a lawyer. It's going to be a lot harder for her to get clients with her terrible performance recorded and put on the internet.
Didn't think I would see lawyers like that since the Rosenbaum case. lol, those district attorneys came unprepared making stuff up as they go and my guy legit took a rifle and aimed it at the jury, how dumb can a person possibly get. And I see a resemblance here the Heard's lawyers. Some people aren't cut out for this kind of job.
Feels like she’s just as smart as JD was on the stand. Paying close attention to the PRECISE question they’re being asked and not falling into the trap of reeling off a bunch of unnecessary sentences that could lead them into trouble. 👌
I'm not trying to be an ass to JD. But she is much better during cross-examination then any other person that has been cross examined. She will be a huge part in winning this case for JD.
@@manlyman29 board certification is a process by which a physician or other medical professional (like a nurse) is tested in order to confirm that they have adequate knowledge of their specialty (eg cardiology). While this is a requirement for medical doctors, it is not a requirement for psychologists with a PhD.
This doctor is exactly how I'd like to appear under pressure. Inquisitive, unashamed to admit ignorance and professional in both knowledge, facts and patience.
"Dinner was served." BEAUTIFUL. JUST Beautiful. She made that lawyer look like a reaching idiot I'm the most awe-inspiring calm self-assurance. People who were debate dipshits in college, myself included, can see rhetorical genius at work. Even if it was just an instance, truly something to behold.
The lawyer really ran herself into the ground with these classic manipulative questions. She’s speaking to a DOCTOR OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY. Edit: added the word clinical
To be more specific she is able to act a forensic clinical psychologist which is a psychologist that can be asked to speak in court which is what happened here
they're not dumb they're lying and it's difficult for them to keep up with everything all they know is targeting the other person's character they have no proof all they know is to target and talk shit about the other person oh wait they are dumb though!
This woman has NO idea what she's talking about. Kudos to the doctor for firmly correcting all her mistakes and this woman trying to poorly word things in Amber's favor. This doctor sounds like she has a lot of pride in her profession (I hope she does!) and I appreciate the confidence she speaks with when correcting all the nonsense from this woman. While I understand she's trying to say things in Amber's favor specifically as a lawyer and that it's in part her job, trying to use false information or wording things poorly about such a sensitive topic (mental health and disorders), and to a professional in that field nonetheless, does her no favors. Idk what Amber was thinking or trying to do with this legal team she has. While I don't know them enough to straight up say they're terrible at their jobs (i.e. this is the only case I've seen them in so I'm trying not to judge them in their entire profession), this entire case was handled by them in such a pathetic way. I mean that's great for Depp lol you can even tell during the whole trial that he seems to thinks a lot of this is nonsense, but for real; this whole legal team is a disaster. All they seem to be able to do is read what's on paper/the internet and repeat it back to someone and ask if they read it correctly, and present useless or incorrect information. The fact is they really don't have enough evidence to defend Amber so they're grasping at straws and trying to get away with dumb things that they /hope/ will help their side of the case. At this point Amber's team just feels like a lost cause and it's kinda pitiful to me watching them in this case. I've seen plenty of lawyers in plenty of cases (albeit on TH-cam mainly) and this is by far the worst legal team I've seen.
I’m pretty sure they weren’t arguing for the articles’ truthfulness, but using them as evidence that JD got bad press before the Amber Heard incident. Unless they used articles another time that I didn’t see.
*_John 10.9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly._* _Jesus Christ loves you. Only Jesus Christ saves. Repent and be saved. God bless you, and the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all._ -
@@michaelh9649 It was after their one fight that made it to the news. A few of those publishers were, in a sense, on AH’s side. Depp mentions it before he’s interrupted by her lawyers.
This psychologist is clearly a very experienced trial witness and worth WAY more to Johnny’s case than whatever she’s charging him. She knows what lines of questioning to expect and how to counter them. She considers the wording of every question. She’s got all the information you’d expect an expert to have and always answers calmly and clearly. This case is great for her portfolio and she’ll raising her fee for sure!💰💵🤑
How unprofessional and downright aggressive line of questioning. Her composure at the things the lawyer is implying is further proof of how qualified she is for the work she was asked to do as a psychologist.
In my limited court experience, (im a paralegal only so I dont go to court all the time) its usually the lawyers who have to defend shit case who are aggressive and rude like this. its a tactic to trip up the person being questioned into getting angry and saying something they don't mean, or make them say it in a bad light. They tend to do this because the attorney can't rely on the strength of thier clients story, so they have to attempt to bring down the other side. Its kinda like talking louder to sound smarter, but on purpose. Its all tactics, some lawyers default to this combative style, and some attorneys choose a more quiet style, some switch up depending on the case.
This doesn’t even cover the worst moments. The lawyer was SO rude at one point, cutting her off and harshly saying “I asked you a question, I’d like you to try to answer it” all while the psychologist was in the middle of giving her an explanation. It’s hard to explain, just watch the full footage. It was so rude that people in courtroom were taken aback. This lawyer really harmed Amber’s case, seriously. She was unbelievably unlikable.
Dr. Curry is a magnificent witness. She commands respect in her mastery of her field, but also conveys humility, and isn't afraid to ask for clarification when she doesn't fully understand something. This is a woman who is secure in who she is, and doesn't feel the need to brag or pretend to know everything.
@Fury You send out a link without explaining what it contains or what you are on about. And the only thing you say is a very obscure "Finally it's here". I don't think a lot of people will click that.
I'm also a psychologist and this was just all the way *chef's kiss*. This was the difference between along questions to make a point vs asking questions to get the answer on full display, and the witness handled that lawyer like an absolute pro
Yes. This is the perfect example of “don’t ask a question you don’t know the answer to” when questioning someone. Even if the answers aren’t damning, it makes you look really dumb when the witness continually tells you that you’re wrong.
Her lawyers have zero professionalism. They're behaving like playground bullies. Multiple times they had it made clear to them that they have their facts wrong and they've just continued to persist, to the entire court's bewilderment. Hopefully the lawyers representing her are severely reprimanded for their inappropriate conduct once this case is concluded.
Yes. I’ve seen several occasions where the attorney asks a question, gets corrected by the witness, then asks their next question as though the assumptions which they had previously made were correct. Astonishing conduct really. Johnny is lucky that his witnesses have all stood up to this behaviour pretty well.
Her "team" have, practically, ZERO moral and/or professional competence. She is *unequivocally* stupid enough, to try word games with a PhD psychologist - in order to blatantly misrepresent said psychologist's own behavior; That woman needs to be disbarred and be forced to wear a helmet indoors - jfc. That wasn't just *_the dumbest thing_* that I've seen happen in a courtroom, it's in the top 10 dumbest things - *on this site.*
they are just trying to flood the juries mind with irrelevant info. The point of contention is the abuse allegation and the other day, Heards, laywers spent like an hour going over negative news stories about Depp prior to Heard's Op Ed. I guess to "prove" there were negative stories before her. BUT none of them were accusing Depp of abuse....
I love how she simply answers “that is not correct” with no elaboration, forcing the attorney to back peddle. she’s been prepped as a witness really well.
That's how you are supposed to answer on direct. Only answer the question asked. If the opposing attorney asks you "Do you know what time it is?", you answer "Yes". Nothing more.
@@trucid2 Yes, she’s been prepped well. A lot of witnesses can’t help it and start going off. She shows a lot of restraint especially with those stupid questions!!
The way the lawyer casually interchanges Bipolar Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder tells you everything you need to know about how informed she is on whatever she's talking about.
@@HurtsEnd lmao yeah, but of course she's not listening. she's fishing for a w and the courtroom is a war zone. not really the time to brush up on the psychology class you often dozed off in 30+ years ago in undergrad
I had never seen that expression before, and I have a mild eyesight problem. I read that as "sharp as a track", did a double take, "sharp as a truck", was thorughly confused, and finally, 3rd time I got it right, lol
I respect this witness. She wasn’t being fooled by some of these questions like ”you knew Johnny Depp.” I like that she right away shut that down and said that she didn’t know him. Had I been in this situation my answer would’ve most likely been yes because I would think that I was asked if I knew who he was and that I knew of him but not that I knew him personally which is what the laywer was trying to fool her in to answering.
Yes, in fact Amber's lawyers are extremely cunning and trying to entrap Depp's team into accidentally saying 'Yes'. This is actually a very subtle form of psychological war tactics. We might be doing a video about this soon.
She was an incredibly savvy witness, but that instant seems like it was good coaching on the part of Johnny's council. They knew that question was coming and she knew perfectly how to handle it.
I find it really clutching at straws when she asked "you had heard of him correct?" as if Johnny Depp is some unknown person. Quite literally one of the most well known actors in the last 10 years alone. It'd be more surprising if someone *hadn't* heard of him
Yes exactly thats their job to know your mind better than theirs and thats why they get paid highly more than any other non medical care provider. Their job is either to fix you or break you, I think you want to fall on the side of fix
Bo Co* You mean in Amber HEARTLESS legal team it would be a lie not a honest answer. They know full well she a liar and they hopped a board the sinking ship.
@@bryancole4022 she probably paid their firm way more than any other client have. And they definitely asked for payment upfront cause I doubt anyone working under contingency will represent a case destined to lose.
I am loving that the witness offers no help when the lawyer assumes, mispronounces, or in any other way botches her cross examination! That’s a court experience move, most people instinctively try to explain; this lady knows how to make lawyers earn their salary.
I love this lady. She knows how to teach, she's smart, she's beautiful, and she's so charming. If she was a teacher, I bet we would have a ton of graduates that enjoy their degree.
4:21 shows how much the intelligent and calm lady knocked the attorney off her feet. I’m watching every video in this case and every time I can’t stop smirking when I see such incompetent people doing their job.
Dr Curry was an impressive witness. I really appreciate the way she engaged the jury, rather than speaking only to the questioning attorney. I think this will have a very positive impact on them because they'll feel included and respected. Great work on her part.
I agree! Dr. Curry handled herself like a pro! Everything she said, described Amber to a tee! Muffingate was hilarious! Sounds like she has a very supportive husband! And, she’s very attractive! I bet Amber hates her with a passion!! 😅
Imagine thinking you can intimidate and manipulate a psychologist by twisting what they said.
BRUH I KNOW OMG
IKR LMAOOOOOOO
That's why their psychologist coz they'll end up psychoing you back hehe. She's got firm explanations over the woman lawyer
As if they haven't checkmated the entire scenario from jump 😅
Psychologist may have been thinking, this lawyer is trying to act like a manipulative psychopath and failing miserably.
“Only 8 years” isn’t even that short of a time to practise. However her saying “no it was 15 years” is so satisfying. They tried to make a stupid point and she immediately shut them down. Iconic
Truth. Anyone who has extensive training for a job and then does that job for eight (or 15) years is probably capable of doing the most basic things within the scope of that job. Are there incompetent people in all professions? Yes. But we can't declare a lock of competence because someone has only held the job for a "mere" eight years. Laughable.
8 years ain’t that much really
@@drewgreen7303 8 years is sufficient exposure to be competent at the job that doctor does.
@@drewgreen7303 You an expert?
@@carn9507 No, that's not correct.
Imagine being a lawyer asking questions to a -psychiatrist- forensic psychologist and getting all of your questions answered with either a direct no or that's not my opinion or that's not quite accurate. Her lawyers are so unprepared.
I mean what do they really have to work with. Ambers bs makes the lawyers look worse than they are
@@imatowel5930 yup
Her lawyers were definitely unprepared, but this is a cross examination - the whole point is that the defense attorney would question the witness with leading questions in an attempted to get yes or no (or maybe) questions.
I agree w your point though, Amber's lawyers suck lol
@@imatowel5930 sure but many of these questions could be googled and fact checked before to get a solid base, so you actually know what you are asking
@@TheAxeter yes but they have nothing so asking the same question hoping for a fuck up is the best they could do lol
the psychologist be like: are you really trying to manipulate someone who has studied manipulative behavioral disorders?
Fucyeahhh it’s hysterical to watch xD
LMFOAOAOOAOA
THIS!
Made me lol 😆 literally
In the lawyers defense she has like 15 years worth of experience on her side.
I love how she firmly replies "no that is incorrect" so no one is confused. All the jury is gonna hear is that everything the lawyer said was incorrect.
Yup that expression definitely sticks!
Objection, hearsay
@@tiagob5961 DENIED....lol
exactly. She's smart
He could be guilty of murder and I would acquit him! That lawyer is a bully and nobody likes bullies! That jury looked pissed when they were leaving for lunch. This case is over already! They've checked out.
I loved how she frequently could answer "no, that's not correct" and then stayed mum, leaving the inept attorney twisting in the wind, trying to recover from this disastrous line of questioning.
Such a power move
💯
Oh! Most definitely the Doctor corrected her in some facts the lawyer was wrong! Totally wrong.
That's the first thing good lawyers tell people before going to court, Don't over share. This Doctor did a great job
Yes this was impressive.
When someone says something about you that is wrong/a lie (especially if it paints you in a negative light) most people feel the need to immediately correct the information. However, the way she conducted herself made her look much more calm and professional, while also making the lawyer look silly.
This woman was so professional and matter of factly, the lawyer failed miserably
At first I thought the one in glasses was a professional lawyer and the other one was just an ordinary witness
Facts
I don't think factly is a word
Failed chatacterlogically
Hell johnny and his whole team have handled this whole trial absolutely perfectly
holy crap. They way she goes out of her way to basically state, “No the diagnosis itself is not sexist. more women simply have it” gives me hope for humanity.
Have been diagnosed with it*
Another important distinction versus your summary.
Men are typically less likely to seek assistance with mental health conditions, meaning they are less likely to be diagnosed.
I did also very much enjoy the lawyer getting bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder (two completely different and unrelated disorders) mixed up, and the doctor being able to say her statement was not correct based on one of those mistakes...
@@BlueXonar I agree and there could certainly be forms of sexism manifesting within the world of psychiatry as a whole that could influence those numbers, but that is so beyond the scope of this trial to determine it’s not even funny. Functionally, for this trial, the dsm-5 is what it is. It’s not as if all diagnosis in the dsm is biased enough to be thrown out of all law proceedings.
(A good example of sexism in society affecting rates of bpd in women is that undiagnosed and untreated autism or adhd in women can present similarly to bpd. I don’t believe amber is autistic but it still skews the numbers. Women and girls are under diagnosed with autism and adhd because the research on both disorders was conducted on men and boys, as if that’s a baseline. The symptoms in women in girls can present differently but the diagnostic criteria is written based on research with autistic men and boys. So the autism criteria is accidentally designed in a way that is inaccurate for autistic women and fails to diagnose them. Later in life, struggling with untreated disabilities, they experience anxiety, depression and mood swings which can be mis-attributed to a personality disorder. Hence the sexism within the building blocks of the system that can really fail and underserve various disabled women. But not something the depp trial is concerned with
@@BlueXonar bro even in my country which is a lot more gender equal than any other country in this world has more diagnosed women with it. Just quit it. Theres always gonna be one side that has more than the other.
I've also heard that women most often get diagnosed with bpd while men get diagnosed with bipolar disorder, as they can be mistaken for each other. Might just be because women and men often present symptoms differently. Much like adhd which often is diagnosed in men when they're young and women when they're older, simply because the symptoms are different.
@@thespankmyfrank it’s not a sexest thing the clinical psychologist is right as saying women tend to have it more as women are more emotional and verbal whilst men are more physical (genetically built stronger) .. in this case is amber has the physical strength to give Johnny Depp a black eye speaks volumes
So humiliating to say something with so much confidence ISN'T THAT CORRECT?! And the witness is simply like... no. 😭
IPV's taste good i like sierra nevada pale ale LOL
@Elon and depp.
Shut up.
Maybe she used too much AMICA cream...it effected her brain?!?!?! Hahahahaha
That's worse than the attorney yesterday that objected to the answer to his own question. Dang here are some attorneys that probably won't get hired again.
@Elon and depp. improve TH-cam and report this as spam
I like how confident and straight-forward the psychologist is with her responses in a court room, meanwhile the lawyer is just absolutely unprepared.
Let’s face it, the lawyer’s client is more of the problem than the attorney. They can’t make miracles happen and suddenly put AH in a good light. Those tapes did her in.
She did pretty well
This lawyer sounds like a Flounder... Just Floundering questions that make No Sense. 🤔🤨
Anyone truthful does not need preparation.
Yep, she is a professional expert witness, her job is mostly entirely evaluation and testimony, she is clearly excellent at her job, Depp's team got one of the best expert witnesses for the trial.
I'm straight up baffled at how bad and/or unprepared her lawyers are. They constantly have their facts wrong or present gossip articles as evidence.
I couldn't believe they were reading out magazine headlines as if they painted a true picture of Mr depp
they have NOTHING else
It's all about the cameras in the room
Yesterday's was the best... dude objected to his own question. Never seen that in my life except on a movie called liar liar lmfao
As Johnny Jims said ,they have nothing else. We speak about a completely fabricated case where not only the accusations are false but the supposedly victim turns out to be the abuser. Their job is to prove that unicorns exist.
She's a psychologist, not a lawyer, and she understands what she's talking about. Amber's lawyer is in such a bind that she is hurling legal jargon at the doctor.
yOu dONt UnDerSTanD whAt a SigNEd PLeaDiNg iS??????
No, I'm a psychologist not a lawyer. Do you know what Graduated and Reciprocated Initiatives in Tension Reduction are? Comorbidity? Reductionism? How about Hierarchical Stepwise Regression?
Dr. Curry is here to testify, not take a vocab quiz on legal diction - and you definitely didn't need to use such a condescending tone, Ms. Elaine Bredehoft. Fun fact, she's considered one of the top lawyers in virginia, often top 10 - see cbclaw. She is an absolute disaster in this case, no wonder she quit. I think that goes to show that anyone would have a hard time trying to defend Amber Heard here.
Also nice job copying Gypsee Nomad's comment nearly word for word lol
one skill that i’ve noticed about higher level psychologists is they choose words carefully. they answer to the words if they are formulated correctly rather than just answering to the supposive concept like other people do.
Elaine is snarky when asking the good Doctor why she doesn't know legal terms. Bad form!
The lawyer may be lacking sleep. Highest respect to this doctor who's so well spoken and articulate
Or the lawyer is just straight up bad
They lack sleep because of AH 🤣🤣🤣
@@arminlouieedar4995 Yes, Amber has frazzled her lawyers brain. 😂
I appreciate that charitable interpretation haha
The lawyer just knows Amber is guilty, but she just wants to win for the money😂😂💀💀
This doctor is great. She's succinct with her words. She doesn't leave room for misinterpretation.
Docs a pro. Lawyer is amateur hour
Well first she stated Bipolar is not caused by trauma, which is incorrect, it definitely can be and usually is. Then she started confusing BPD with Bipolar. But other than that the psychologist was great.
@@shaunross2995 I think she made it clear by saying that it is not a cause but it triggers the neurological/genetic areas which cause it. Although she phrased it more neatly than I did
@@shaunross2995 stating it is caused by vs can be caused by are two grossly differing statements. One requires trauma where the secone does not. See the difference? Words are important, especially when a lawyer is trying to use them against you.
@@shaunross2995 she did not say that, she said that there has not been a definitive cause as there's 2 groups with said illness, those who have gone through trauma and those who haven't. But according to her opinion and evidence out there, it could be genetic meaning that childhood trauma could be a trigger and not a cause.
This lawyer is a perfect example of why people loathe lawyers.
!!!!! 1 hunna
Not exactly, it's not inept lawyers that cause problems, it's the expert lawyers that fight for bad things to happen.
And she's getting paid no matter how bad she fails.
The problems people have with lawyers are a modern thing that in my opinion is caused by the way the legal system has changed, it used to be that you hade to prove your legal point with evidence and witness testamony, however now its just easier to destroy the character of the other party as well as any witnesses they bring forward, lawyers come off as combative constantly try to play word games and have "Gotcha moments"
@@DelgueAdventures Doesn’t matter if she’s getting paid, lawyers go off reputation and losing a case like ambers is bad for their rep. Amber hired the shittiest lawyers anyway so who cares 💀💀
Only like 4% of psychologist are board certified. It’s like expecting every teacher to have their PhD
I thought board certification applied to any medication management profession like PSYCHIATRISTS 😂
it depends, where i study, everyone of my teachers have a phd
@@zxl6518 you act like the whole country studies in the same school
@@PhongPham-lt7rr thats why i specified "where i study", a lot of universitys in my country have teachers/researchers so they all have phds
What frigging board? A cutting board? Board has so many different meanings. Is this some American inside-thing?
Very good witness. refused to be led, considered every question thoroughly, wasn't embarrassed or intimidated into agreeing to something she didn't understand and shut down every attempt to allow misinterpretation...all whilst remaining approachable and helpful. 10/10
couldn't agree more!
Heard's Lawyer: Isn't it true that you are testifying in exchange for receiving dinner and drinks because you are a cheap prostitute who will lie on the witness stand for food?
Dr. Curry: No, that's not true.
Heard's Lawyer: Isn't it true that you personally knew Johnny Depp before you testified and would lie for him but Amber Heard's friends and other doctors don't lie in exchange for food?
Dr. Curry: No, that's not true.
Heard's Lawyer: I just want to be clear that I am accusing you of being a prostitute who is lying on the stand for drinks and food. Amber's friends and doctors who ate with her and knew her before testifying would never do what you are doing you cheap prostitute.
Agreed!
Agree, she’s a psychologist- she’s ahead of her !
And remained calm and collected throughout entire Circus of a cross exam by that AliExpress lawyer! Truly applauds to her!
I think she gained an insane amount of credibility and relatability with the jury the moment she talked about not being a lawyer and not necessarily understanding some of the terms.
@u know what i did SHUT UP!!!!!!
@u know what i did that is a recipe video 🙄
Yes, I would have said the same TRUTH , IM NOT A LAWYER ! 🤣🤣🤣
Definately. Makes her look more believable and experienced as a psychologist.
@Tonya Harmon Why's every word in both your comments capitalized?
Retired attorney here. Appalling examination. A cardinal rule in conducting an examination is to never ask a question to which you don’t already know the answer. Also, in attempting to call into question the credibility or expertise of an expert witness, you never want to hear the words “no that’s not correct”. Counsel here not only got key facts wrong, but also gave the witness the opportunity to underscore her credentials. Example: “I am a registered clinical psychologist.” The “but not board certified” will still be in the jury’s mind, but this can easily be addressed if needed on re-examination. The attempt to suggest some form of relationship with Depp in an attempt to cast doubt on the witness’s objectivity, was also clumsy and was again handled meticulously by the witness. Counsel, in my view, came off badly. Her attempts to diminish the evidence and expert opinion of the witness ending up looking like a botched hatchet job. This and the calm, precise and respectful responses from the witness only served to embellish her credibility at the cost of counsel’s own.
I always thought the questioning was more more for the jury and court. Any legal persons worth their salt would already know the answer they are getting. It's not like witnesses are unknown. Isn't that stuff shared specifically so each side can build questions?
Is there any penalty for the lawyers if they deliberately try to present their facts wrong multiple times like this? I mean I know it's their way to discredit her but even a normal guy could see they're purposely doing that, and it should be pretty annoying for the jury to see this happened more than just a few times.
Yeah they were trying to make out that she was a great friend doing a freebie on the side.
But she explained that she had an interview that happened to have a dinner in the or part of the interview.
Much like going to an cafe to have an interview, then saying the interviewer paid for everything, because it wasn't an interview after all.
Clutching at straws to try get the expert thrown out of court
@@zagan1 I didn’t think about it that way, is that also why they were so hung up on the muffins too?
I've only got a basic law qualification, and even I can tell this is a legal shitshow xD
This lawyer thinks she’s going to OUTSMART a fucking Psychologist. Oh baby no that ain’t gone work
She as well won't be able to outsmart a law student even 😂
@@itsi4778 Let's be honest, she won't be able to outsmart even a 10 year old.
@@KevinOsterkilde even I feel embarrassed for her 😂
@@KevinOsterkilde probably wouldn't even be able to outsmart a fetus
Indeed... Very accurate
"That is not correct " should just be the default response to every question that idiotic lawyer asked.
"Objection, heresay"
"That is not correct"
Attorneys: never forget that psychologists know how to spot manipulation and deceit, and are trained in deflecting it.
underrated comment lol
Yep! The Good Dr. knows that the lawyer is a narc, and knows how to correct it. With words so precise, the narc can't manipulate her with "trick" questions and lies.
@@wascawywabbit0987 Bro y’all really call any sleezy person a narc… way to stigmatize another mental illness and act like an armchair psychologist
Like Watching a Polar Bear and Grizzly Fight "I know your ways".
But to be fair No lawyer worth their
Weight won't have a heigh level of Psychology Studies in their educational Background.
Law School definitely requires it
This doctor is what we need more of in our courts and government.
Plain, clear, straight forward answers and obvious understanding of the material.
And a babe
@@SharkWithFreakinLaserBeam thank you for speaking our minds
If only our government could give such clear answers
And smoking hot 🔥 lol
@@SharkWithFreakinLaserBeam hahaha i was about to say that
She was wrong with the years but saying “you have ‘only’ been practicing 8 years” like it’s nothing ? 💀
I know right that was foolish.
It's probably to further dig into the fact that she's not board certified.
Lawyer has probably been a Karen for most of her life so feels superior to her 🤷♂️
@@dbs1013 too many people are personally attacking the lawyers for what they ‘believe’ without understanding that whatever a lawyer says IS NOT THEIR OPINION. They choose what they think is the best wording to sway the jury. She might think that it’s greatly impressive that the psychologist had been practicing for 8 years, obviously she’s not gonna say that because it doesn’t support her point.
@@SlR- Yeah, lawyers are not to be blamed. it’s literally in the job description
Also the lady is so well spoken. Kudos to her being so professional when facing a 🤡
She was amazing at shutting them down.
I'd simp for her tbh
@@GeneralKenobi69420 lol ok
@@GeneralKenobi69420 Yeah because your last one got killed by Maul
@@GeneralKenobi69420 man’s desperate even during a court session 🤣
Such a contrast between a great doctor and a horrible attorny.
THIS ATTORNEY IS SO LAME SHE IS RUDE ALWAYS MISPRONOUNCES WORDS AND JUST PLAIN NASTY SHE ISN'T GAINING POINTS SHE LOOKS SO BAD SO DESPERATE!!!!!!!
@@sandrasteward3920 She’s just plain awful 😣
@@donnarupert4926 And so rude.
@@sandrasteward3920 Amica Muffin 🤣
objection
They don't call them expert witness's for no reason. She did a fantastic job in giving clear information and not fumbling under the pressures of cross-examination.
She was super confident in her knowledge and not afraid this is what you get when you don’t order your attorneys from wish like amber did
Not only was she smart in her field and honestly very pretty, she had charisma and engaged with the jury - talking towards them, using inviting and friendly hand gestures, willingly explaining something to better inform them, etc. she never talked _down_ to them and made them feel stupid about the topics she is an expertise in. If anything, she made it feel like a friendly chat. Even as a viewer, I walked away more informed.
People don’t want to admit it, but charisma plays a big part in cases like this (notably when they’re this high profile) with the jury. Yes, evidence is everything, but an expert witness that is very thorough, gives detailed explanations in an easy to follow manner, and engages with those who are the deciding factors in this case outside of a lawyer asking a questions….it goes a long way.
You can tell who supports Amber through all of this with just today’s trial alone without them even having to outright say it, especially when it’s coming from the “believe and support all women” crew. I’ve seen so many comments today make backhanded remarks about how “ugly” she is, focusing on how she looks and speaks, ignoring everything she said and all that she has accomplished to imply she was _only_ hired for her looks.
It’s a massive cope for this major W this woman brought for Depp.
She was fantastic! 👏👏👏👏👏
@Slidin Expert witness means "a witness that is also an expert in a relevant field," not "someone who is an expert at being a witness." But yes, the doctor handles the witness position like a pro.
@@anhnhvn Well obviously lol I'm not calling her an expert witness because she was good at being a witness 🤦🤦🤦.
An Expert Witness can be anyone with knowledge or experience of a particular field or discipline beyond that to be expected of a layman.
In this case, Dr.Curry is a psychologist so that would be her expertise and she is testifying so that makes her a witness..
I love this woman. When anyone answers with "No, but", the lawyers won't let them continue talking. This woman simply says their statements are incorrect, forcing them to ask her what IS correct.
Nice, this actually makes sense to why I enjoyed this particular witness questioning.
I love Dr Curry, so wise, pretty, polite, etc. A real class act!
"no, that's not quite right" was brilliant.
What was funny was Amber then tried to adopt that style of answering and it backfired because Camille had proof that when Amber said "that's incorrect", Amber had said the exact opposite, usually on more than one occasion.
I’m weak. The amount of times she’s had to say “that is not correct, no.” is pretty much just cementing this ladies future career failure. Nobody is going to hire Amber’s people after this. Yikes.
I disagree
Even though their case has absolutely no grounds, they're trying their best to come up with something ,, it's not easy defending a loosing side
@@AmirAbuleil92 it's a good thing they're losing 👍👍 do u agree?
@@AmirAbuleil92 There less trying to come up with something and are more just re-using what they've already gone over but keep wording it in a different way. They get payed more if the case lasts longer and if it looks like they put in alot of effort, i honestly dont think theyre trying their best since they prob dgaf and know they can trick amber turd into thinking what they did was impressive.
@@AmirAbuleil92 I would think a lawyer that was actually trying would have consulted a psychologist before writing "gotcha" questions to ask a psychologist.
This seems like the legal equivalent of "I've been paid millions to make this star wars thing but I've never seen star wars and don't plan to"
@@st4rlightr4v3n4 you mean like the people who made the new Halo show said they didn’t play/look at the games before entering production?
"ive been licensed for 10 years, and ive been practicing for 15 years" gets me every time. amber's lawyer needs to do a fact check and get her facts straight ngl.
They do this on purpose to try and discredit the witness if they answer wrong.
And I love how she says ONLY 8 years as if 8 years isnt a long time lol she was really trying to attack her credibility and failed miserably
She's trying to confuse her but it ain't working.
Getting their facts from Amber lol 😂 who knows it all and copying everyone else’s styles and stares at them during this trail. She needs mental help, hope she gets it after this trail and Johnny finds healing ❤️🩹 Team Johnny (( Captain Jack Sparrow))
@@MsBabygurl4646 she needs jail. it's what she deserved
Yikes. Deliberately getting info wrong about how long she’s practiced, with the goal of diminishing her credentials? Pretty dumb strategy, and definitely not gonna get the jury on your side 🤦♂️
Dude, you're everywhere. :|
reply if ur not a bot
Is he a bot.
I don't think they deliberately got the info wrong, I think they are honestly and genuinely incompetent.
Report this for spam, it's a like farm
“And trauma can cause borderline personality disorder cant it?”
“No”
LMAOOO she really thought she was gonna pop off there
IT’s bizarre how these defence team lack research that their questions are easily disputed by the witness.
They should've researched what personality disorder is
She thought she could prove that her disorder came from him. Don’t argue established science that was proven if you don’t know what it is on a basic level
Licensed psychologists know their stuff. This is a licensed psychologist. She knows what she's talking about.
"Never?" 😮
the way she thinks that she is manipulating the witness and making everything confusing, when in reality it is complete opposite. Amber's team is a total clown show.
Not defending her attorneys, BUT they HAVE to grasp at the shortest and thinnest of straws, because Heard has no real platform to stand on, nor do her lawyers.
Just look at the Depp testimony involving the tabloid hit-articles, what relevance does Hollywood lying and speculation have in a court case, when literally anyone off the street can publish a fake article.
Rottenborn in particular is very quick to call speculation and hearsay, but in reality, it’s the only thing his team has to attack Depp’s defense.
It’s a pathetic attempt, but it is what they are getting paid to attempt.
Clown show? I think they're the entire circus at this point
@@darkhound34 lmao 🤣
Yea. Amber's frmale lawyer can barely speak coherently. She is stumbling over damn near every other word which is distracting from the context of the question 🙄
@@darkhound34 bring in the dancing lobsters
I love how clear and assured this doctor is. It’s clear that she is educated and confident enough in herself to admit she doesn’t understand and still hold herself in a place that deserves respect
Yeah her confidence was her strength. It’s funny bc after a while, you could see she was trying to hide a smirk every time the lawyer asked a question. Her expression read “Oh this is gonna be fun.” Lol
I love this comment
@silicone unicorn you understand the person testifying is not amber heard right? she’s not guilty of anything, she’s just testifying.
@silicone unicorn Guilty of what?
@silicone unicorn What are you talking about? We’re talking about the psychologist. What is the psychologist guilty of?
Im glad she cleared that she did not just go to Mr Depp's house for "dinner and drinks". The lawyer was trying to make it sound as if they were being very irresponsible and like they were best pals in which case it would sound that she was biased. "I went to his house for an interview, dinner was served." Plain and clear.
also addressing that it wasn't johnny conducting the interview, it was johnny's legal team
Also, she was not interviewed by Johnny himself, but by his team. Turdy's lawyers are embarrassing themselves once again because they have no evidence on their side, must be exhausting. This isn't the UK and there won't be a biased judge (with connections to The Sun, by the way) to save them here.
And she kept saying "Mr. Depp conducted the interview" which was not how it went at all. She sounded absurd...
... how to twist what actually took place... dinner and drinks??? No... an interview ... dinner was served! Trying to make the jurors think that Mr Depp had her around for a social get together. If I was a juror I would be thinking about just how manipulative the attorney was, trying her utmost to trip up someone who was far brighter than she herself was.
That’s why lawyers who try to mask information insist on yes/no answers. Much easier to mislead jurors.
As someone who is going for a PhD in psychology, I look up to this woman. My hero
I just graduated my Bachelors of Psychology and I feel the same! Good luck in your studies ☺️
@@BeckMulhall congratulations! super proud of you two! getting a degree is exhausting and a serious commitment so I commend you both for your efforts! I hope you're able to help a lot of people in your fields
I was just thinking that same thing! She'll be an example to all women forever! To all psychologists and therapists and doctors ever!
You shouldn't, considering how much she got wrong. She even mixed up terms of bipolar and borderline.
jealous much ?@@RoganBits
I'm not a lawyer. But the first I learned about being a lawyer was: "Don't ask a question that you don't already know the answer to."
I'm amazed at how much AH legal team is just throwing shots in the dark.
Her first question is trying to make connections between Johnny and the doctor, it is pretty obvious they don't have any good evidence that the doctor's word isn't true.
I mean, what else can you do if you've got so little? My guess is that they're hoping to catch someone saying something in words that they can pull a technicality out of. Like "I don't murder children" and pulling "Now, they didn't say that _never_ murdered children."
I just can't fathom the number of questions that they aren't correct for any other reason. If it's a serious attempt, it's embarrassing
The are probably not board certified... and presumably just practicing for only eight years?
It seems the strategy was for them to hopefully lure the jury into doubting the legitimacy of the claims and evidence presented by depp’s side.
The team of lawyers are on retainer. They don't care about the outcome. They care about putting up enough of a show so they can keep the retainer.
As a current law student and a former collegiate mock trial competitor, I must say this doctor is an EXCELLENT expert witness. She is clearly listening to the questions thoroughly and answering each component with clarity and in a compelling manner (even clearer than the questions themselves were posed). On cross-examination, a witness must answer "yes" or "no" to the attorney's questions and cannot give too much context/pushback/explanation or else they risk an objection - she is able to say yes/no, but is still able to tear apart the questions by clarifying where the attorney was wrong or grossly mischaracterized a situation or statements. The sign of an excellent expert witness is that she is able to advocate for her side (Depp's legal time) whilst maintaining legitimacy and respect, and that she probably captivated the jury's attention much more than the attorney (who came across looking very unprepared and foolish). Props to this doctor - I hope they paid her the big bucks.
Well said !
Pretty simple way of putting it, I’ve always been interested in psychology and law so this was a fascinating way of think about it
Isn't her side just straight fact? Her obligation is to the court, not to support Depp
@Schoo Good question! What people might not know about court procedure is that both sides are obligated to stick to facts that are supported by evidence - but "facts" can be characterized VERY differently - and a legal team's job is to be very selective about what facts to present, how to present them, in what context. E.g. the doctor's meeting at Depp's home is a "fact" but Heard's legal team was attempting to characterize it as some casual, sleazy drunken party (though they didn't do a very good job at it). The doctor's obligation is to be honest but, as much as possible, communicate her opinion/research in a way that is favorable to Depp - which she does very well.
@@hannahtuboston3793 Thought the Heards-team was going for 'not a reliable expert because she was bribed with a dinner and drinks and therefore would never ever say something bad about John Depp'.
To be fair, representing someone 100% in the wrong can’t be easy
No but I've never seen lawyers look like such fools ever
@@Jin-lx7or Rittenhouse prosecution?
@@Jin-lx7or it's easy to make them look like fools when they have nothing and the defense have a LOT to back them up. It's easier to tell the truth than to prove a lie.
@@lckyphx17 didn't follow it
I was thinking the same thing😂 the Rittenhouse prosecution was just as bad if not worse
Amber lawyer: "Is it true that..."
Savage psychologist: "No"
Johnny Depp's attorney's are living by the phrase, "Don't interrupt your enemies when they are making a mistake".
It's just good strategy in really any sense. Why bother wasting energy, time, or resources when you can let your opponents mistakes accomplish your own goals.
In this case, all Depp's legal team needs to do, is object appropriately, and maintain good characterization. After that, Heard's legal team is doing all the actual damage to themselves by constantly taking unprepared shots in the dark.
This is going to become a textbook case to study for future law students, since it EXPERTLY showcases that sometimes, the best solution is to let someone talk themselves into the dirt.
Idgaf really about the specifics of this case, I'm glad to see Depp is a great dude, but I'm way more interested in the... what's the right word here... I want to see how deeply Heard's lawyers are gonna dig their own hole
@@darkember9429 Absolutely, especially with there being so much footage to use and so many examples. I believe the word you're looking for is fallout?
They're still digging it as we speak...
literally the lawyer and Johnny are just drawing doodles while these idiot lawyers are getting destroyed by a witness, who needs to object to stupidity lol?
What a fantastic witness. She was not intimidated, kept her cool and respectfully offered correction when needed. She spoke with authority when talking about things pertaining to her expertise.
@@serenitysmith352 if she's a psychologist it's pretty much self explanatory
Man she threw in the Glasses and instantly became the most beautiful woman in the room..
Amber has to be hating that ..
@@serenitysmith352 hmm that's a factor for sure
and very beautiful. i may have to unleash the dragon later.
She's a psychologist. She deals with problematic questions and problematic people on a day to day basis. Dealing with a lawyer is pretty tame :D Also helps that she immediately identified the lawyer as someone who has absolutely no idea what she's talking about. Her massive confidence was very much merited in this case.
Also, damn.. She so good lookin'...
Lmao. But honestly gotta give major props to the Doctor, This shows that she’s paying attention, and is actually smart, and also fearless in a way, she wasn’t afraid to give the corrections nor was she avoiding saying that she didn’t understand, I also admire that she didn’t lose her cool, especially when the Lawyer kept trying to imply that she inappropriately had drinks and knew Johnny and then asking her Questions with terminology that the doctor didn’t understand cus she’s not a lawyer.
This Doctor didn’t get flustered and she actually followed the documents through. And didn’t pretend to read.
Comp agree with you! Very smart woman! 👏
Psychologists that practice in a clinical setting are used to tracking discussions of great depth for long periods and understanding them. A few questions aren't going to throw her off lol.
She isn’t a doctor.Psychiatrists are doctors not psychologist,since they dont have an MD
@@Heroic11 psychologists are doctors of philosophy or doctors of psychology with clinical focus, not medical doctors. easy google search lmao
@@Heroic11 Uhm, no. She is most definitely a doctor. She isn't a /physician/, but she's a doctor. Doctor does not equate to only physician (MD or DO), it is anyone that has pursued and acquired a doctorate degree in their area of expertise.
Imagine if these proceedings weren’t filmed. There’s a reason idiots like this lawyer represent people- there’s no eyes on them outside the courtroom.
That, and there’s an old saying that pretty much says you can’t argue with an idiot- hence stupidity literally works sometimes in court.
That doctor was WONDERFUL. 🏆 She held her own and did it with class and intelligence.
She's a psychologist, who knows her stuff, not a lawyer. Amber's lawyer is so desperate she's throwing legal terms at the doctor. 😅🤣
well its their job, feel bad for amber's lawyer trying to defend her ig.
Agree😆
It’s still not nice and actually I think it was a little annoying of her to confuse her. But sadly it is what it is. And the jury are normal people and they will definitely pick up on that.
Edit- grammar
What I really admire about her is she straight up tells the lawyer I'm not an attorney so stop throwing terms at me I don't understand lool shit is annoying
the lawyer isnt actually being a fool , its just what lawyers do to create narratives, same with politicians
I watched this yesterday and was stunned by this lawyer and how she perfomed so poorly here. I am not a lawyer but it is clear she screwed this up and the psychologist did an excellent job.
Yeah we don't need to be lawyers to understand that she probably should have fact checked
Actually, the psychologist incorrectly spoke the term bipolar disorder instead of borderline personality disorder. Also, when she says that environment can cause borderline personality disorder in conjunction with genetics, well that environment is often “trauma“. Therefore she is just wrong. Please contact me for further information, can be directly on this comment or on my TH-cam channel. I will be charging at most $1500 per hour. Thanks.
@@CJDcow easy doctor phil
Yah no you should be fined for spouting nonsense at least 1.5 k. Mental health is very complex in your comment environment doesn't mean only trauma it can be trauma but other factors are there as well. Go do your own research.
The Lawyers have the ability to talk to all the witnesses beforehand, so really when you're questioning someone you should know the answer before they say it. I never ask a witness a question I don't know the answer to.
Coming back to this it’s still impressive. She’s such a good listener and very articulate. She’s so precise in her speech, while the lawyer can’t even say characterologically.
Yes, the Dr was incredible maintaining clarity in facts, words and representations. The defense attorney was horrible. At least half of her statements were incorrect assumptions. Or, she was doing that intentionally to confuse the jury. Who can keep all those statements and technical assessments straight in your head when most of what was said by the attorney were wrong or misleading?
It sounded like she was trying to get into a battle of wits with the doctor but came in unarmed.
she probably got her incorrect assumptions from amber..
No doubt it was a combination of incompetence and attempts to ruffle the doctor with her answers to make Depp look bad. I'm not a pro Johnny supporter here, and refuse to rule out any wrong doing by him in this relationship, as nothing is black and white in relationships, and as a substance abuser, it's hard to believe he didn't bring his m his own issues to it, which may have provoked her in certain ways, but the defence and Amber seem to be clutching at straws here. It generally seems a desperate attempt to make him look bad enough to say, "hey look, he couldn't have suffered in his career as result of defamation, as we have already shown everyone thought he was piece of shit"
while true too my knowledge that would mean you can be convicted because of that for instance while in school for marketing yes marketing. We had to take something akin to a law class on how to provide a agreement, well i was on the is the true or not team, we where down one person but the other team could not provide the facts to back up the statement and so we actually said that and we passed because we where able to provide a clear reason why.
why do you call her "Dr", that's like calling someone "bachelor", weirdos
The confidence this woman emits is incredible...
She exposes everything so that everyone can understand, she's firm in her statements and knows how to defuse the ridicolous traps that are being thrown in her way like it's child play (like only a real professional can do). Yet they tried to discredit her expertise and poke holes in the quality of her work towards the whole situation and failed miserably. Add the ragtag lawyer team on the side of Scamber Turd into the mix and the job is done. Bullying witnesses, objecting their own questions, bringing ridicolous evidence to the table...
Still, how the case is still not closed after her testimony is beyond me!
I somewhat agree, but if you really look at it, she is just being honest, nothing more. Right?
@@timm8998 yes! Exactly, she is just being honest.
Although, keep in mind, she is an expert witness, both by the literal and legal term
She has gone through many trials as a clinical psychologist. Practice makes perfect for keeping calm and collected.
@@timm8998 honest, yes. But the key is: she isn't someone you mess with as an attorney. She has her facts straight, she isn't intimidated in the slightest by twisted questions. I mean this in the most positive way: she's a master at mindgames.
Like, it takes a movie character with plot armor, to even unsettle her.
A solid 10/10
she is well fit innit fam
“I didn’t provide that. That’s a lawyer thing” good god almighty this trial is the gift that keeps on giving 😂🤣🤣🤣
😂😂🤣
Fr fr it is 😂
Literally "what? ask me something that matters you gd coot"
It really is
@what now no one cares... be gone freaking bot.
Asking her if she's board certified is just as ridiculous as asking if she had passed the board. In that backwards accusatory way of asking the lawyer does. "And you haven't passed the bar exam have you?"
That's not quite the same. You cannot practice law without passing the bar but you can be a practicing clinical psychologist without being board certified. Asking questions about he credentials and time in practice is just an attempt to make the jury feel that she isn't qualified and to not give her testimony much weight.
@@rhoonah5849 exactly they were asking questions that had nothing to do with her profession. Again its like asking a construction worker if he certified to scuba dive. Its ridiculous and that was my point.
@@oldschoolgamer-w4u It is an accepted legal tactic but I find it to be a low ball tactic. One thing that I have learned is that having a degree, letters after your name or some arbitrary time in service does not make a person competent at their job.
@@Flexyourmemes Again, I understand what point you are trying to make but being a construction worker has nothing to do with being a scuba diver... you are comparing apples and oranges. Being board certified is indeed a higher level of credentialing for a doctor.
@@rhoonah5849 I don't really care. I made my point. Why are you arguing the comparison instead of the actual point of my argument.
Wow, I’m actually embarrassed for the lawyer. She truly isn’t prepared at all.
Ikr. I can't watch the video. I'm feeling second hand embarrassment.
I don't feel sorry for her legal team. Rats boarded a sinking ship. What does that say about the legal team? 🤔
@silkart1......I'm not embarrassed for them at all. They've had a ton of time to prepare and they weren't. That's on them.
It actually gets worse in another video. One of her lawyers tried to object to his own question. Lol
There’s a difference between lack of preparation and lack of skill
Maybe cus she secretly wanted Amber lose. I mean she's probably the most hated person on earth rn
She got absolutely WRECKED. If a student of mine gave as many wrong answers in five minutes as this attorney asked wrong questions in five minutes, I'd have them doing drills for HOURS on end.
Do a kickflip
Hahahaahahhahha...Amber Heard
It’s insane that the lawyer appeared to be getting genuinely annoyed that the psychologist didn’t understand all the legal terms and proceedings.
And also consistently gets things wrong when talking about the field of psychology.
I don’t think that the lawyer was so much annoyed because she didn’t understand legalese, i think it was more because the psychologist didn’t allow the lawyer to manipulate her into assumptions. People tend to think they understand terms because of all these tv shows, however, the psychologist (maybe because of so many medical shows) knows that on such shows terminology is often misrepresented. Of course, now I’m making assumptions.
She didn't understand complex words, so the psychologist forced the lawyer to speak in a manner she can understand, wich is annoying for the lawyer, because can't make her trip in her answers
Man after watching this if those two can pass the California BAR then anyone can, thinking about a career change lol
@@fatemelton8108 I laughed out loud when Amber Heard's other attorney objected during his own cross-examination of the witness.
Just so people are aware, some lawyers aren’t skilled as court lawyers and instead are expert research lawyers. These people may be extremely skilled research lawyers who happened to know AH or be recommended to her. They also may be skilled court lawyers normally but you have to remember, AH is their client. I wouldn’t put it passed her to have lied to them about everything consistently and had them thinking “we can win this!” Only to be absolutely shocked by JDs lawyers who had actual evidence so now instead of trying to win the case that way they’re trying to come up with shit on the fly to try and make the witnesses that JD calls look incompetent, though it’s only serving to make them look even worse since they seem to be bad at improvisation.
They could also just be outright horrible lawyers, like “objection: hearsay” guy. Who knows though.🤷🏻♂️
Just another example of why you should never lie to your lawyers, even if you’re guilty. Unless you’re AH, in which case lie to them all you want so you’ll lose the case
the lawyer isnt actually being a fool , its just what lawyers do to create narratives, same with politicians
It was my understanding that a lot of permissible evidence planned to be presented in court has to be shown to opposing council. I could be wrong though
@@RR-et6zp Exactly and her bank account is happy for it.
@@stephaniem895 You do I believe but even still you can admit new evidence literally the day before the trial if you so wanted to just to throw them off, though there are ways around it and to delay the trial and everything, but that also speaks to being an excellent trial lawyer or not.
It's funny how the psychiatrist is actually explaining really complex topics but i can understand it way more clearly than the lawyer who's explaining common stuff and still not making sense
psychologist..... big difference
It takes a genuine expert to explain complex topics in simple and lay terms
psychologist. Google is your friend!
@@rebeccalindsay5795 true, they're the true smart people and I have huge respect for them
@@illslegal Yeah psychiatrists are trash
“Trauma NEVER causes BPD?”
This attorney clearly doesn’t understand that neurological-behavioral issues are not black-and-white issues that we completely understand by human science. Like, that’s like asking if a torn ACL is always sports-related. There are a myriad of unknown, unmeasurable circumstances that contribute to the human psyche in every individual, and the incompetence of this lawyer showing they have no understanding of mental health and are trying to beat a clinical psychologist in such an area is ridiculous and points to them clearly having nothing.
Well put
I’m now currently bed ridden with a post-op ACL reconstruction. Take care of your knees fellas. Stretch properly. The recovery process is hell.
and what the lawyer doesn't get is that what they are realizing with BPD is that there is a more apt to be a genetic marker that is brought forth by trauma rather than just trauma bringing forth BPD
I think that was the point. The lawyer was fishing, trying to get the Doctor to say that, yes, "sometimes" it can cause it. Even if that chance is super low, if she could get her to say that it COULD cause it, then she'd probably instantly drop that line of questioning and leave it there so she can't clarify, for the jury to think about: "well, she said it could cause the issue, so maybe it did this time?"
@@naughtyskywalker9292 Dealt with it 5 years ago my Junior year of high school. Hyperextended my left knee in a basketball game, tore both my ACL and MCL. Had reconstructive surgery for them and was in PT for almost a full year. Shortly after started having even more problems with a tendon that became stronger than my joint so it would forcefully dislocate my knee with the smallest of sudden movements, so I had to have another surgery to thin the tendon out. Here we are almost 6 years later and I still have dislocations (Not as frequent as before the surgery, but still happens from time to time) and a weak joint that’s diminishing with every dislocation. There’s a reason why many sport career’s end even with a sprained ACL let alone a full tear.
"I'm a licensed psychologist"
"bUt YoU'rE nOt bOaRd-cErTifiEd"
I love how the attorney tries so hard to discredit her, when this psychologist probably knows more about why she's stammering and incoherent than she does.
that psichologist is prolly a better lawyer than she is. lol
the is beyond the scope of the question, objection hearsay ,drinks and muffins
@@Venom5260 Can I explain what that means so we can stop talking about muffins?
No
What’s the difference between board certified and licensed?
@@nicolezhang8116 all board certified are licensed, you get a certification when you choose to get it you have to prove dominion of your field or some aspect of your field, it’s like a club basically you don’t need to get board certified, many people choose to because it gives an extra bonus to what you have under your belt, Board certification is not requiere to practice medicine or any other health field like psychology, after your license you can study an speciality like forensic psychology and you getting that degree it’s enough
You believed he was a good actor does not equates to thinking he is innocent...😂 I was fans of people whom I met and then found out were doing bad shit, ma'am is grasping for straws at this point and I LOVE IT
Who u supporting then? 💀
I agree with everyone that's saying: "Don't ask a question when you don't know the answer" and how that's the first basic rule of being a lawyer. I love how she was correcting the attorney, then saying: "I'm not a lawyer" and doing it respectfully to show the jury and judge that while she's being disrespected, she doesn't need to act that way to them.
Not only psychologist, but also a great educator
This psychologist is more Atticus Finch than this "lawyer" is.
This whole thing is weird. A lot of these questions were factual and should have been easy to establish in advance. How is this lawyer so poorly prepared?
The saying should be reworded for the lawyer: "Don't ask a question when you don't even know the question"
I'm a licensed professional counselor in Texas, and if I ever have to testify in court, I hope I do at least half as well as this psychologist. She did an amazing job of staying in her professional lane and not let the lawyer put words in her mouth or misconstrue mental health diagnoses.
Her and Dr. Demarte on the Jodi Arias case did a phenomenal job at staying professional and making the lawyers look like idiots.
Yes. I managed a psych office for 14 years. I so admire Dr Curry and how she handled herself. She's an Ace at what she does. Everyone is praising her testimony and how she handled that woman Elaine
Well if you do ever have to professionally testify in court you will have a good example of how to remain calm cool and collected.
I'm sure you might be all that. But nowadays, pre qualification on you tube actually disqualifies anyone that uses I'm this one that!
@@DramaMustRemainOnTheStageyou 2 with the pre-qualified need along with the fake moniker thing!
Wow! The doctor is a better lawyer! Great articulation.
@Lady Steele They were saying that the doctor was a better lawyer than the actual lawyer asking the questions lol
@Lady Steele your comment was so unnecessary in my opinion, I don’t think he said anything misogynistic.
implying that op was being mysoginistic when hes perfectly reasonable, getting mad when someone points it out that you are stupid… what a troll. bye 😬
@Lady Steele shhhhhhhh
@Lady Steele you may have to hold the L
The lawyer seems like one of those retail managers that eventually gets fired after trying to blame her employees for things she should've been doing herself lol
Objection! Hearsay! 😭😂
That lawyer did an absolutely horrible job-maybe the worst ever seen on a national stage case. Totally cringe, embarrassing, poor preparation, consistently wrong… yikes.
Such a contrast between the bumbling, ill prepared attorney and the well prepared, experienced psychologist.
Makes the Rittenhouse prosecution would positively amazing.
Tbf it’s hard to make something out of nothing. We all know Amber is guilty, just need to prove it. Whereas amber’s team have to find a way to flip it round on johnny when there is no good evidence whatsoever
@@musky5972 This is a defamation suit and Depp's case is not bullet-proof. Instead of going for this abrasive 'everything and the kitchen sink' approach the lawyers could (and IMO should) have focused only on the technical deficiencies with Depp's complaint.
Whether they win or lose the case, they are doing their client no favours by trying to smear witnesses, constantly interrupting testimony and in general acting as disagreeably as the court allows them to. It just reinforces the perception that their client must be just as unpleasant a person as the people she chose to represent her.
You can’t blame them though, Johnnys team has literally piles of evidence against Heard and it’s hard to argue the truth, all they can do now is prove biases and manipulate statements to discredit witnesses 😂
As a medical doctor its makes me furious how ambers lawyers are trying to tarnish the professional integrity of this psych expert. how they trying to say that women are disproportionately diagnosed with bpd more often. using words like a politician to a scientist will never work. i doubt this lawyer is doing this without a conscious intention to politicize the very science of psychology for the sake of one client.
Yes exactly. I was very annoyed that she was questioning the Doctor's credibility, but at the same time the Doctor held her own and she has probably now got a following of admirers or people she's inspired to work in her field, has probably now increased her credibility a whole lot more in presenting the testimony today which has probably sealed the case for Depp.
You mean pyschology not psychiatry? You do make the distinction that the former is not a medical discipline or did you miss that?
@@st1ngray284 that's her job you dickhead. It's called DUE PROCESS
just remember she is doing absolutely everything she can to try to serve and protect Amber, though. she's simply attempting a difficult job which inhibits the act of defending someone who is completely in the wrong (AH)
Agree completely 👌
This lawyer made me feel stupid with how much she kept stumbling over things. And I find it hilarious that she’s saying these “facts” with such confidence and then the person who actually knows these things, “uh no b*tch you’re wrong. Let me educate you”
Objection, hearsay
@one day nope. We’re done with that.
@one day no it's not
I agree, her attitude is terrible.
Its their job. Amber pay them for doing this. Dont blame lawyer. Blame amber for her fake
She's over generalizing and stretching facts on purpose in an attempt to confuse the psychologist. Such are the antics of a sly manipulative lawyer tho.
Except this lawyer isn't sly at all. :)
This is just your basic lawyer who watches too much TV and thinks shows like suits are real.
I've never seen a lawyer struggle so much with asking questions. It comes across as just being really unprepared. I really thought the judge would've stepped in and asked the lawyer why she's constantly having a hard time with her cross examination. The lawyer getting so many things factually wrong, really damages any credibility of her ability at being a lawyer. It's going to be a lot harder for her to get clients with her terrible performance recorded and put on the internet.
Maybe Amber’s attorney is sipping some of the goofy juice Amber is sipping to calm her down so she can sit still and not embarrass herself.
The worse attorney I've ever seen! If I was on that jury I would feel some type of way about her lawyer trying to intimidate the witnesses.
I was lead to believe that is even harder to sustain a lie, so maybe that could be the issue haha
Didn't think I would see lawyers like that since the Rosenbaum case. lol, those district attorneys came unprepared making stuff up as they go and my guy legit took a rifle and aimed it at the jury, how dumb can a person possibly get. And I see a resemblance here the Heard's lawyers. Some people aren't cut out for this kind of job.
And I see resemblance to Heards lawyers*
Feels like she’s just as smart as JD was on the stand. Paying close attention to the PRECISE question they’re being asked and not falling into the trap of reeling off a bunch of unnecessary sentences that could lead them into trouble. 👌
I'm not trying to be an ass to JD. But she is much better during cross-examination then any other person that has been cross examined. She will be a huge part in winning this case for JD.
the lawyer isnt actually being a fool , its just what lawyers do to create narratives, same with politicians
But why hasn't she been board certified after 15 years
@@micahroberts3564 because it’s not necessary to practice medicine professionally. It’s a voluntary thing.
@@leebauer2750 she has been the best yes, but the comment didnt say anything about that so your whole point is just useless
She’s not board certified but damn she speaks better than a lawyer that gets million dollar checks
That doesnt mean anything
Board certification for clinical psychologists is not a requirement. Less than 5% are actually certified.
She's not board certified but neither is this lawyer
I don’t understand how she can be licensed but not board certified. Where did she get her license and what is the board that certifies?
@@manlyman29 board certification is a process by which a physician or other medical professional (like a nurse) is tested in order to confirm that they have adequate knowledge of their specialty (eg cardiology). While this is a requirement for medical doctors, it is not a requirement for psychologists with a PhD.
This doctor is exactly how I'd like to appear under pressure. Inquisitive, unashamed to admit ignorance and professional in both knowledge, facts and patience.
She's an inspiration.
"Dinner was served."
BEAUTIFUL. JUST Beautiful.
She made that lawyer look like a reaching idiot I'm the most awe-inspiring calm self-assurance. People who were debate dipshits in college, myself included, can see rhetorical genius at work. Even if it was just an instance, truly something to behold.
"Dinner and drinks" just remember drinks always bad
@@mundy7020 Just remember its ok at the end of the day.
I thought the same !!!!
Everythime Ambers lawyer was wrong, the „emotional damage“ meme sounds in my ears😂
Haha, I also thought it was actually brilliant !
The lawyer really ran herself into the ground with these classic manipulative questions.
She’s speaking to a DOCTOR OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY.
Edit: added the word clinical
"But you're not board certified, right? Tell me, ms psychologist, what are your LSAT scores?"
A doctor of Clinical Psychology.
"Doctor" means nothing about the person or his\her consistency or any other quality you fool
Yes. Manipulative. It always blows my mind how in a place where facts matter, so much manipulation is involved in phrasing and questioning.
To be more specific she is able to act a forensic clinical psychologist which is a psychologist that can be asked to speak in court which is what happened here
She's such a good witness she makes the lawyers look dumb, oh wait they are 😅😭😅
They do that themselves, the doc is just icing on the cake... Extremely flavour enriching icing.
@@scottmeager5919 😅👏💯
they're not dumb they're lying and it's difficult for them to keep up with everything all they know is targeting the other person's character they have no proof all they know is to target and talk shit about the other person oh wait they are dumb though!
😂😂😂😂
@scale Are you a bot or just desperate for views on a smoothie video?
"You had heard of Johnny Depp before and thought he was a good actor correct?" Yep, case dismissed. I watched Willy Wonka I admit it.
This woman has NO idea what she's talking about. Kudos to the doctor for firmly correcting all her mistakes and this woman trying to poorly word things in Amber's favor. This doctor sounds like she has a lot of pride in her profession (I hope she does!) and I appreciate the confidence she speaks with when correcting all the nonsense from this woman. While I understand she's trying to say things in Amber's favor specifically as a lawyer and that it's in part her job, trying to use false information or wording things poorly about such a sensitive topic (mental health and disorders), and to a professional in that field nonetheless, does her no favors.
Idk what Amber was thinking or trying to do with this legal team she has. While I don't know them enough to straight up say they're terrible at their jobs (i.e. this is the only case I've seen them in so I'm trying not to judge them in their entire profession), this entire case was handled by them in such a pathetic way. I mean that's great for Depp lol you can even tell during the whole trial that he seems to thinks a lot of this is nonsense, but for real; this whole legal team is a disaster. All they seem to be able to do is read what's on paper/the internet and repeat it back to someone and ask if they read it correctly, and present useless or incorrect information. The fact is they really don't have enough evidence to defend Amber so they're grasping at straws and trying to get away with dumb things that they /hope/ will help their side of the case. At this point Amber's team just feels like a lost cause and it's kinda pitiful to me watching them in this case. I've seen plenty of lawyers in plenty of cases (albeit on TH-cam mainly) and this is by far the worst legal team I've seen.
She's also the one who lied about and misrepresented MILANI correcting concealer as "AMICA" cream...
@Fury nice video lol
Can we've the -
*Dislike-Button* Back? Yet
@Fury th-cam.com/video/fK5zX2dEgiA/w-d-xo.html
Beautifully said
It’s baffling to me how the lawyers object everything as heresay and get present articles gossiping as evidence 😂😂😂😂😂😂
I’m pretty sure they weren’t arguing for the articles’ truthfulness, but using them as evidence that JD got bad press before the Amber Heard incident. Unless they used articles another time that I didn’t see.
Right, they object to everything then ask "what do you think Miss Heard was thinking'...or 'what were her intentions' or something like that....
@@TheRealSweetcherryo right like that’s heresay too is it not?
*_John 10.9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly._*
_Jesus Christ loves you. Only Jesus Christ saves. Repent and be saved. God bless you, and the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all._
-
@@michaelh9649 It was after their one fight that made it to the news. A few of those publishers were, in a sense, on AH’s side. Depp mentions it before he’s interrupted by her lawyers.
This psychologist is clearly a very experienced trial witness and worth WAY more to Johnny’s case than whatever she’s charging him. She knows what lines of questioning to expect and how to counter them. She considers the wording of every question. She’s got all the information you’d expect an expert to have and always answers calmly and clearly. This case is great for her portfolio and she’ll raising her fee for sure!💰💵🤑
And let's not overlook her great smile. It goes a long way with the jury.
also she is stunning! so beautiful and smart
Yes! She answered and explained directly looking at the jury. As soon as I saw that it was obvious she’s had trial experience
You need to see the full exchange not this selective edit. The lawyer destroyed her.
Don’t forget that Amber is a joke as well. Felt sorry for her evaluating Amber but it helped Johnny in the long run. Definitely
That moment you realize the psychologist has a step ahead of the lawyer given her understanding of manipulative behaviors.
How unprofessional and downright aggressive line of questioning. Her composure at the things the lawyer is implying is further proof of how qualified she is for the work she was asked to do as a psychologist.
She fits with her client 😂😂😂
In my limited court experience, (im a paralegal only so I dont go to court all the time)
its usually the lawyers who have to defend shit case who are aggressive and rude like this. its a tactic to trip up the person being questioned into getting angry and saying something they don't mean, or make them say it in a bad light.
They tend to do this because the attorney can't rely on the strength of thier clients story, so they have to attempt to bring down the other side.
Its kinda like talking louder to sound smarter, but on purpose.
Its all tactics, some lawyers default to this combative style, and some attorneys choose a more quiet style, some switch up depending on the case.
@Elon and depp. improve TH-cam and report this as spam
This doesn’t even cover the worst moments. The lawyer was SO rude at one point, cutting her off and harshly saying “I asked you a question, I’d like you to try to answer it” all while the psychologist was in the middle of giving her an explanation.
It’s hard to explain, just watch the full footage. It was so rude that people in courtroom were taken aback. This lawyer really harmed Amber’s case, seriously. She was unbelievably unlikable.
Her lawyers have been aggressive all around
Dr. Curry is a magnificent witness. She commands respect in her mastery of her field, but also conveys humility, and isn't afraid to ask for clarification when she doesn't fully understand something. This is a woman who is secure in who she is, and doesn't feel the need to brag or pretend to know everything.
@Fury You send out a link without explaining what it contains or what you are on about. And the only thing you say is a very obscure "Finally it's here". I don't think a lot of people will click that.
@@genkotone7979 He does it on many videos...
Yes.. She is..
The only times she asked for clarification is because the question is unnecessarily convoluted
This is professionalism.
I'm also a psychologist and this was just all the way *chef's kiss*. This was the difference between along questions to make a point vs asking questions to get the answer on full display, and the witness handled that lawyer like an absolute pro
Absolutely 👏👏
Yes. This is the perfect example of “don’t ask a question you don’t know the answer to” when questioning someone. Even if the answers aren’t damning, it makes you look really dumb when the witness continually tells you that you’re wrong.
The Board should just certify her and make her a representative for Excellence in Psychiatry.
Her lawyers have zero professionalism. They're behaving like playground bullies. Multiple times they had it made clear to them that they have their facts wrong and they've just continued to persist, to the entire court's bewilderment. Hopefully the lawyers representing her are severely reprimanded for their inappropriate conduct once this case is concluded.
When they have nothing on their side. What else can they do 😂
Yes. I’ve seen several occasions where the attorney asks a question, gets corrected by the witness, then asks their next question as though the assumptions which they had previously made were correct. Astonishing conduct really. Johnny is lucky that his witnesses have all stood up to this behaviour pretty well.
Her "team" have, practically, ZERO moral and/or professional competence.
She is *unequivocally* stupid enough, to try word games with a PhD psychologist - in order to blatantly misrepresent said psychologist's own behavior; That woman needs to be disbarred and be forced to wear a helmet indoors - jfc.
That wasn't just *_the dumbest thing_* that I've seen happen in a courtroom, it's in the top 10 dumbest things - *on this site.*
Your English is better than my English Teacher 😂
they are just trying to flood the juries mind with irrelevant info. The point of contention is the abuse allegation and the other day, Heards, laywers spent like an hour going over negative news stories about Depp prior to Heard's Op Ed. I guess to "prove" there were negative stories before her. BUT none of them were accusing Depp of abuse....
I love how she simply answers “that is not correct” with no elaboration, forcing the attorney to back peddle. she’s been prepped as a witness really well.
That's pretty clever. To not help them by offering them something to grab onto.
Just answer the question asked don't elaborate or give any extra information.
That's how you are supposed to answer on direct. Only answer the question asked. If the opposing attorney asks you "Do you know what time it is?", you answer "Yes". Nothing more.
@@trucid2 Yes, she’s been prepped well. A lot of witnesses can’t help it and start going off. She shows a lot of restraint especially with those stupid questions!!
100%, I noticed that as well. Silence without elaboration is a very useful skill and very difficult for most to do.
The way the lawyer casually interchanges Bipolar Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder tells you everything you need to know about how informed she is on whatever she's talking about.
When she read Arnica cream as Amica cream 😅
All she had to do was literally listen to what the doctor said just minutes before I think
This lawyer knows absolutely nothing about psychology and got dunked on when trying to pretend she did
I'm glad someone said something. I thought I was being gaslit with how confidently wrong she was.
@@HurtsEnd lmao yeah, but of course she's not listening. she's fishing for a w and the courtroom is a war zone. not really the time to brush up on the psychology class you often dozed off in 30+ years ago in undergrad
the psychologist getting to explain in peace the actual facts felt so refreshing
Sharp as a tack, this witness!!! Really up on her game, and takes no nonsense.
She's educated in talking to people with problems, and that lawyer have, surely, a problem
@@astralydial7533 ahahah
I had never seen that expression before, and I have a mild eyesight problem.
I read that as "sharp as a track", did a double take, "sharp as a truck", was thorughly confused, and finally, 3rd time I got it right, lol
SHE HOT AFF
@@zdeenda8584 Uh, that was really inappropriate, uncalled for and gross.
I respect this witness. She wasn’t being fooled by some of these questions like ”you knew Johnny Depp.” I like that she right away shut that down and said that she didn’t know him. Had I been in this situation my answer would’ve most likely been yes because I would think that I was asked if I knew who he was and that I knew of him but not that I knew him personally which is what the laywer was trying to fool her in to answering.
Yes, in fact Amber's lawyers are extremely cunning and trying to entrap Depp's team into accidentally saying 'Yes'. This is actually a very subtle form of psychological war tactics. We might be doing a video about this soon.
She was an incredibly savvy witness, but that instant seems like it was good coaching on the part of Johnny's council. They knew that question was coming and she knew perfectly how to handle it.
@scale improve TH-cam and report this as spam
I did my part
I find it really clutching at straws when she asked "you had heard of him correct?" as if Johnny Depp is some unknown person. Quite literally one of the most well known actors in the last 10 years alone. It'd be more surprising if someone *hadn't* heard of him
This trial must be giving law students immense confidence.
And a case study material
Dead lol
I’d be willing to be some professors are already using this as teaching aids.
Well except for the interns working for the firm Heard hired......
@@LoneStarStinger on how not to lawyer lmao
Felt like I was watching a kid present a school project while the teacher corrected their every detail lmfaooooo
First rule of being a lawyer
Don’t ask a question you don’t know the answer to!
Fist rule of anything or anyone is not to play mind games with an expert psychologist 😵💫😵💫😵💫😵💫
Yes exactly thats their job to know your mind better than theirs and thats why they get paid highly more than any other non medical care provider. Their job is either to fix you or break you, I think you want to fall on the side of fix
First rule of being a lawyer: don't ask a question you don't know
Second rule of being a lawyer: Don't speak if you can't.
Bo Co* You mean in Amber HEARTLESS legal team it would be a lie not a honest answer. They know full well she a liar and they hopped a board the sinking ship.
seems amber is getting the legal representation she deserves.
isn't life funny?
I wonder if maybe the good ones just refused...
💯💯💯💯
@@feyindecay912 98% of attorneys not gonna willing take a losing case lmao unless the defendant has a lot of money bc then it doesn't matter lol
objection lol
@@bryancole4022 she probably paid their firm way more than any other client have. And they definitely asked for payment upfront cause I doubt anyone working under contingency will represent a case destined to lose.
I am loving that the witness offers no help when the lawyer assumes, mispronounces, or in any other way botches her cross examination! That’s a court experience move, most people instinctively try to explain; this lady knows how to make lawyers earn their salary.
Dr. Curry is very well studied, her whole testimony was great as well, leaving no room for objections
There was a part (not in this video) where the doctor asks if she can explain and the lawyer says no lol
I love this lady. She knows how to teach, she's smart, she's beautiful, and she's so charming. If she was a teacher, I bet we would have a ton of graduates that enjoy their degree.
4:21 shows how much the intelligent and calm lady knocked the attorney off her feet. I’m watching every video in this case and every time I can’t stop smirking when I see such incompetent people doing their job.
Loving this therapist and how she defended the field of psychology. This lawyer was moronic!
@one day Objection, unrelated to the case
@@miragespl I will sustain that
Clinical psychologist
Dr Curry was an impressive witness. I really appreciate the way she engaged the jury, rather than speaking only to the questioning attorney. I think this will have a very positive impact on them because they'll feel included and respected. Great work on her part.
@Christian Torres You really gotta hit on a woman in any context huh?
I agree! Dr. Curry handled herself like a pro! Everything she said, described Amber to a tee! Muffingate was hilarious! Sounds like she has a very supportive husband! And, she’s very attractive! I bet Amber hates her with a passion!! 😅
@@DeathnoteBB Lol, I mean he ain't wrong 🤷🏾♀️🤣
The jury are the most important people in the room in this case and she knows that. 👍🏼
@@Ilive_420 Still weird and kind of dismissive of her as a person and psychologist…
I want her "That's not correct" to be my alarm. Such aplomb, poise and professionalism!