Part 2 -AIBU to wonder why so many people assume Johnny Depp is the good guy and Amber Heard is the villain

[StormzyinaTCup]

Just thought I would start a follow on thread for anyone interested in the trial. I have kept it in AIBU so that it is easier for previous posters from Part 1 to find.
We are halfway through and have heard JD's testimony so next week we will hear from AH.

She is going to be terrible in cross examination.

Is anyone else thinking this expert is too emotionally invested?

She is going to get angry in cross

She is still reading post its (even though she closed her file of notes) it seems to me.

I can’t believe the awful stuff that’s being said. I want this woman to stop talking though.

I think she definitely is!

Completely agree. She's not giving an impartial testimony in my opinion.

I[d storm out of a session with her, quite frankly.

I'm watching it without sound so I'm probably not getting the full emotionality of it. I think she comes across as less professional in her manner than Dr Curry, but Dr Curry really annoyed me with her diagnosing personality disorders based on two meetings and dismissing Amber's PTSD symptoms as feigning. It seems like they both project too much certainty but Dr Curry came across as a bit of a (more attractive) Nurse Ratchet to me!

Can someone post a link for how to watch please

I wonder if she does a lot of this stuff and is used to just lecturing

It's too much...she goes on and on and on and she seems to be taking AHs words as gospel with no evidence to back any of this up.

It sounds shocking; if it's true every psychologist who has treated AH would appear to be somewhat negligent.

I don't understand why this psych is going on at such length when it's all just report. Surely AH will testify to it?

She really is something else! It's like she and AH are BFFs.
And I understand she works with abused women but she is sounding completely anti-men.

This witness is not coming across well. Very narky with comments like "like I said" after an objection. She's also starting to love the sound of her own voice.

I think JD's team are letting her get on with it as otherwise they'll look like they have something to hide if they keep objecting to everything.

But the gender bias in the beginning was so obvious. And I agree with others that she could have easily been describing the relationship from the other way around.

www.drdawnhughes.com/about-dawn-hughes

is this the same witness?

I literally just said this to DH! I said that they know each other (outside of the clinic) with how she's testifying.

It definitely feels she overstretched the role she is meant to be providing. The belief of her knowing exactly what happened is outstanding.

doctor.webmd.com/doctor/v16792950/dawn-hughes-ratings?pagenumber=2&sort=default

omg. All the reviews for 3rd May. Wtf.

She is almost at the point of making a claim of D.V a joke, she is discrediting it by not being professional at all. It is making me angry.

OMG, it is!

Completely agree. She's forgetting that there are always 2 sides to every story and also forgetting that she is simply going on what AH is saying...which no one knows whether it's the truth or not.

Oh my life I've just seen all the review from today on that site. Oops

😮

For someone with 25 years in forensic psychology, she is extremely unprofessional. Typically forensic psychologists have seen and heard every depraved and evil deed that is out there. They are often very non emotional and fact based. I have seen quite a few forensic assessment reports and none bare any resemblance to this testimony.

I aso thought it was interersting that when asked about expertise she referred a number of times to roles she had while in graduate school and as an intern versus speaking to experiences from the 25 years she has been practicing. It tells me her career is not as extensive as she makes it sound given her reliance on examples from school to show her expertise.

I also feel like she has watched the trial - the only example she could detail when asked about corroborating evidence was the plane - back kick story. One that has come up multiple times and been discussed in detail in the trial already.

She seems very emotionally and personally invested for a forensic psychologist and quite unprofessional in her witness accounts. The dramatizing is also completely unneccessary. She should be calm and factual and is neither.