And I totally agree, she basically accused someone of rape and sexual assault based on the word of a woman who has actually been caught out in lies.
No, of course she didn't. I was watching. She told the court what Heard had reported to her during treatment, detailed the parameters/variables/analytical practices she consulted to carry out the evaluations on Heard and what research she was basing these on, and reported on her apparent psychological condition at the times she'd reported the various events to her as her therapist.
She was a godawful witness, IMO, and seemed to be far too invested in what should be a detached, matter-of-fact, professional relationship, but she isn't as stupid as all that.
I was formerly of the view that Depp would almost certainly lose this case. Libel trials are notoriously difficult to win, and a UK court found decisively in favour of the Sun, accepting 12 serious counts of domestic abuse against Heard. The Judgement is considered and persuasive (thanks to the PP who posted that on the last thread).
But right now, Depp's team have scored at least one major hit, which is to cast doubt on her credibility on the stand. She's proven to have lied about the donations and that could be very damning. Also, based on today's performance neither her first witness nor her legal team have done her any favours whatsoever.
The bias playing out in people's responses to this case seems to be very firmly weighted on the sex of the perpetrator. I remain just as firmly convinced that both parties in this case are abusive horrors. But what was said on that stand today was harrowing. If Depp is really guilty of even a fraction of what was detailed there, he's a psychopathic sadist. If Heard is lying about any of it, she's a monster and a serious impediment to vulnerable women needing to seek justice for their abuse.
Me? I don't know which is the case. But the reputation of both seems pretty firmly secured in the gutter for posterity. What an ugly, ugly spectacle.