Johnny Depp v Amber Heard #4 - (Psychologist Cross) - Therapist Reaction
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 кві 2022
- Dr. Kirk Honda reacts to the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard trial.
Become a patron: / psychologyinseattle
Email: www.psychologyinseattle.com/c...
Get merch: teespring.com/stores/psycholo...
Dr. Kirk’s Cameo: www.cameo.com/kirkhonda
Instagram: / psychologyinseattle
Reddit: / psychologyinseattle
Twitter: / psychinseattle
Facebook Official Page: / psychologyinseattle
Facebook Fan Page (run by fans): / 112633189213033
The Psychology In Seattle Podcast ®
Trigger Warning: This episode may include topics such as assault, trauma, and discrimination. If necessary, listeners are encouraged to refrain from listening and care for their safety and well-being.
Disclaimer: The content provided is for educational, informational, and entertainment purposes only. Nothing here constitutes personal or professional consultation, therapy, diagnosis, or creates a counselor-client relationship. Topics discussed may generate differing points of view. If you participate (by being a guest, submitting a question, or commenting) you must do so with the knowledge that we cannot control reactions or responses from others, which may not agree with you or feel unfair. Your participation on this site is at your own risk, accepting full responsibility for any liability or harm that may result. Anything you write here may be used for discussion or endorsement of the podcast. Opinions and views expressed by the host and guest hosts are personal views. Although, we take precautions and fact check, they should not be considered facts and the opinions may change. Opinions posted by participants (such as comments) are not those of the hosts. Readers should not rely on any information found here and should perform due diligence before taking any action. For a more extensive description of factors for you to consider, please see www.psychologyinseattle.com - Наука та технологія
Ironically, muffingate sort of reinforces what Dr. Curry was testifying to about Amber's tendency to make things all about herself that just....aren't.
It's incredibly poetic
"Not only did you tell your husband, but you told Ms. Heard you told your husband." In what world would this sharp, competent, buttoned up professional (psychologist) ever stoop to gossiping with Ms. Heard even if she HAD told her husband. Ludicrous.
I love that we have baptised this “muffingate,” it’s well-deserved 😂
I'm convinced Depp's legal team strategy is to just let them keep providing examples of just that.
Muffingate 😂. Love it.
Everytime I eat a muffin I'll think about this? And Dr Curry's brilliant answers
“He picked up the muffins , yes”
I REST MY CASE
But why did he get Amber muffins if you didn't tell him she was going to be there?
Muffins are routine. Nothing to do with Miss Heard.
@@Lynsey17 she told her husband a high profile client is coming in. Like me, he had no idea who she was but was doing his hot doctor wife a solid
@@aandreya Seriously. My office used to get us doughnuts all the time. There must have been a secret celebrity in our midst.
@@emilyincasper4434 I know, sarcasm doesn't translate well in UA-cam comments 🤷🏼♀️
I hate when lawyers refuse to give someone their report or notes when asking questions. These trials usually happen YEARS after whatever event happened and I think it's ridiculous to try to force people to memorize things. If I'm on a jury, I want to know the facts. I want to hear them talk about their report or their opinion based on what they said then. I don't care if someone can memorize a 25 page report or not because I know I couldn't. I just want the facts. I'm hoping Johnny's team plans on bringing her back as a rebuttal witness to actually go over her report.
I could not agree more with your statement. Also, I disdain these kind of lawyers who have no respect to truth and facts
The report has been admitted as evidence. The jury has access to it.
@@jakestroll6518 Yes but it's really important for them to hear the psychologist explain it. Of course, I'd like to hear it too.
@@jakestroll6518 that may be, but without knowing the terminology or anything about assessments/testing you wouldn't understand whay is being said necessarily.
They’re supposed to go over their notes before taking the stand to refresh their memory
The muffin thing has become a “thing” online. There are muffin gangs, talk about her husband being the muffin man etc. the lawyer made a fool of herself
How dare the that man buy muffins?! I mean, donuts would be legally more appropriated, shame on him 🤣🤣
Muffin gang… lmao
It was the muffin man on dreary lane 🤣🤣🤣🤣
amica muffins
This isn't the first time this lawyer has made a fool of herself either.
I think we can all agree that Elaine Bredehoft has a style of questioning that any ordinary layperson can best describe a 'cringe' and highly off putting
She’s doing the job for which she is paid ....and doing it well
@@equatorialjourney4478 I made no statements regarding her professional skill. I was merely expressing my honest belief that the average layperson would find her style highly off putting and cringe. Her overly smarmy aggressive style certainly is not the only style that exists. Other highly skilled lawyers have vastly different styles and also remain very good at their job. Cringe lawyer can be cringe and still be good at her job. The two are not mutually exclusive. In the case of Elaine Bredehoft though, if Amber loses, it will also be mostly her fault since virtually every unforced error that the defence has made so far in this case has been made by her. So an argument for this particular case can also be made that Elaine Bredehoft is doing a terrible job. We will see how it turns out
@@equatorialjourney4478 She doesn't do the job well though... she comes across as unlikeable and even though the trial is not about the lawyers, this will probably impact the jury even only on a subconscious level. She also has a very long-winded way of asking questions which actially has a negative effect. She's really really bad at this.
I feel that she is aggressive and rude to be frank when questioning anyone who is not familiar with law. If you watch the pre-recorded testimony involving the divorce lawyer, you will see Elaine at the utmost respect addressing the other lawyer (I am assuming the lawyer will put her in her place if she ever crossed her line). One interesting aspect not involving Elaine but her fellow lawyer when questioning Mr. Debb's accountant, the lawyer got derailed at one point when he asked the accountant about liquidity.
@@superionmaximus9900 .... my thoughts exactly. I also think the jury won't like Elaine and that's not doing a good job for her client.
Given your commentary about the difference between therapy and forensics, I'm immensely looking forward to your reaction to the other psychologist.
I think what we can take from all of these videos is that Dr. Honda does not want to be a forensic psychologist.
This was fantastic!! Could you respond to the video depo of their couples therapist too?? That one I'd really like to know your opinion on since she had lengthy interactions with both.
That exists? Link please?
Especially in regards to JD bringing up PD and Amber cutting in to quickly changing the subject... I found it very disturbing that as a therapist she never circled back to this point with Johnny. Especially after noting the relationship dynamics. I also found her claiming a mutual Ab relationship when earlier in her testimony she states that Johnny had a tendency to retreat when confronted and that AH was the aggressor. The relationship dynamics that she described in her testimony did not fit with her claims of mutual Ab.
@@cenaro9591 nailed it! I don’t understand that either - or that when amber told her something she didn’t follow through and ask Johnny. Or why in fact she met with amber on her own and just took her word on the things Johnny supposedly did/said.
@@cyanl.2245 I think it was on Day 2 or 3 of the trial 🤷♀️
The whole line of questioning is "Amber told her therapist stuffs", do you recall?
🤣
I have to say, this is the most nuanced and unbiased reaction I’ve watched! Thank you, sir!
Dr Honda: “idk where the lawyer is going, maybe it’ll be a genius move” love that you give her the benefit of the doubt but no sir 😂
😂😂😂😂😂😂
Ya… just no
Doctor from Wish 😂😂
I watched a psychometrist react to this portion of the trial, and she mentioned that clinicians are protective of the MMPI-2 because explaining which questions/data points reveal deceptiveness etc. can reduce the effectiveness of the test. That is, if people know how it works, they can game it. This could be an explanation for the lack of specificity around specific data points, potentially? Just a thought.
Excellent point.
She had more then one test not just one and there were if I'm understanding correctly pointing at the same thing.
@@reinadeelsur yes, when any sort of diagnosis is being assessed more than one test is usually required. When I've looked at neurological/psychological results there is usually several tests done.
I think she also is just being incredibly ethical - she could be trying to protect some of Amber Heard's dignity and personal information, traumas, etc by only providing what is strictly necessary for the case. A hallmark of an incredibly professional woman who is very good at her job.
@@pourpeopledrinks Yup, which compares drastically to how Dr. Hughes began openly declaring all sorts of horrific traumas on the stand. And Amber's reaction to all that retelling? Staring straight at the camera. No tears, no zoning out, no self-soothing measures... Nothing. Hearing about all sorts of things relating to one's trauma typically causes at least some sort of flare-up of PTSD symptoms. Even something minor like her shoulders tightening. Surely, Dr. Hughes should've known that saying such vile things would be triggering, right? All those flamboyant accolades, yet Dr. Curry with her modest resumé is the one who refrains from spewing all that.
this lawyer repeatedly ignored the first rule of a trial attorney: never ask a question you don't already know the answer to. AND in this case don't believe what Amber Heard told you.
You hit the nail on the head. I wonder if she's starting to question the entire narrative.
That's ALL Amber's lawyers do! 😂
Exactly. So much of this seems to stem from Amber, at best, misinterpreting information (due to her disorders) or at worst, straight out lying to her attorneys.
Objection, hearsay.
You asked the question
As someone with a lot of litigators in the family, the defendant’s counsel wasn’t confused about anything. She’s not on a fact-finding mission, she’s trying to win by undermining this witness’ character and confuse the jury about what the report really says and means. Her sole purpose on cross is to impeach the witness’ testimony any way she can. Didn’t go terribly well bc there wasn’t a lot there.
Considering, I think the lawyer actually did a decent job. Her line of questioning introduced the opinions of other mental health professionals and Heard's reporting of DV to them into the record, offered an alternative interpretation of Heard's symptoms, suggested that Depp's hired expert may have read the test results and other assessment materials with bias, suggested that the expert had oddly selective memory of some of the materials that went into making her assessment, and emphasized to the jury that the expert was not an IPV expert and was not making any judgment on the truth of Heard's domestic abuse claim. Too bad about the muffins.
@@plutotlavie5845 Coming from a lay person's perspective, if I were on the jury, I'd be put off by the lawyer. I don't like her tone and apparent lack of understanding when it comes to what a diagnosis is, and I'd tune her out because of it. Dr. Curry is far more likeable and much more coherent. She did falter with some things but overall she had more structure and better answers to the lawyer. Just in general, the lawyer sounds like a bully and Dr. Curry sounds like she's defending herself when she shouldn't have to. The muffin thing REALLY hammered that home. She made stuff up that was loosely based on a casual comment. She acted like she caught Dr. Curry without any other pieces of evidence to back her up. People don't remember what happened all the time, they remember how they feel. I do believe Heard and Depp were mutually abusive, and while I was a bigger fan of Depp, I wouldn't make excuses for his alleged behavior. I could still be biased, but I did start watching the case wanting to give Heard a chance
Every time I hear her ask a cross-examination question that seems to be grasping at straws, I wonder what it must be like to have to do that job 😂
I concur. I definitely question the psychologists credibility when the team of attorneys who hired her wrote on a legal document that she would testify that Amber had a mental disorder, before the psychologist even analyzed Amber herself.
Well that's their entire strategy. They have trird to undermine every witness, even their own, because every witness has established that Johnny was passive and subdued and Amber was an absolute nightmare. It's been kind of cringeworthy to watch because of that.
this videos are fantastic. I was raised in a cult. I got out when I was 17. I'm 23. Now I am diagnosed with major depression and ptsd. watching you helps me understand the real world more ! thank you!
Wow, that's amazing. I applaud your bravery for realizing that you needed to get out and was able to do so, then seek out help for yourself to deal with everything. Good for you!! 👏🏻😁
I am so sorry! How awful. Have you heard the podcast "A little bit Culty"? it is run by two cult survivors and they interview other cult survivors, there are a few other podcasts like that but they are the best
@@sharonmattox thank you so much. It's been years bit I have fought to be here now. I used to not be able to get out of bed. Now I go for walks when the weather is nice. I still struggle with the emptiness inside and the memories. The worst part is that I dislike authority. I work as a cleaning lady because Ithe other jobs I had I stood up for injustice and got fired. I'm still leaning! I appreciate your kind words. I have learned to accept them. ♡
@@therabbithat wow. No never heard of them. I will definitely check them out!. I have a lot of struggles and would be great to hear from them.thank you so much.
I have no advice or words of wisdom, but I just wanted to say I wish you well and good luck :)
I've been extremely enjoying this limited analysis series. Super interesting to see the contrast and comparison between Forensic Psychology and Clinical Psychology, how the judicial system may understand/approach Psychology as a whole, and just fascinating as someone passionate about r*pe culture/IPV issues considering the case itself.
In regards to your "OJ moment", I think one of the moments that will go down in history in this case is the testimony of Alejandro Romero the day after Dr. Curry had this testimony.
That guy, ironically enough, got questioned by the same attorney that questioned Dr. Curry, but it was over a Zoom call, from his car, and at some point the witness got so annoyed at her line of questioning that at first he started vaping in front of the camera and then he just drove away without his seatbelt on while still answering questions.
Anyone that Is your client, Is truly blessed. 🙏 Sometimes my anxiety let's up just by watching your videos. You are a pure hearted wonderful Soul, Dr. Kirk!
that is why I was watching his videos today
His videos got me through the pandemic, highs and lows of anxiety and my depression. Im truly grateful for him and everyone behind PiS
Just to let you both know, I'm really struggling bad with anxiety, hopelessness, and confusion today. I want you to know that when that voice inside of your head tells you that your alone and nobody understands, it's a lie. I wish you both a calm day. 🙏✨️
@@nikkishaye1111 thank you Nikki for your kind words!! It means the world. I hope we all can weather this storm. You are not alone
@@Yoyo-gf1jc You are more than welcome, DearHeart. Thanks for responding 🌺
IVE BEEN WAITING FOR DR KIRK TO REACT TO THE MUFFINS AND HE DIDNT DISAPPOINT 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻🙌🏼
I just love how the camera sometimes pan from the attorney to the stand, and we get a glimpse of the judge just facepalming.
I know! She's going to have to learn to control that! Hilarious.
🤣 there was another moment where the judge said "oh yay" sarcastically and everyone laughed when the lawyers said they'd get a copy of some toxic texts or something to her 🤣🤣🤣
Drinking game: drink every time doctor Honda says "and this is another reason why i didn't study forensic psychology" 😂
I'm SO glad you showed/reacted to the muffin questions, I hadn't seen anyone else cover it yet. Fascinating how they almost ended up strengthening Dr. Curry's testimony (in a subtle way) by revealing an instance of Amber interpreting a "personal spin" on something that wasn't actually intended to be personal. (Of course, I also wondered if this was less "Amber's interpretation" and more "lawyer trying to poke holes anywhere they might fit," but still!)
Also, thank you for doing this series; I've been hoping to see a video about this case from someone who's VERY knowledgable about BPD *and* speaks about it in a respectful (but straightforward) way, and IMO you nailed it 👍
Ding ding, AH telling her lawyers about the muffins backs up the personality diagnosis.
Did AH purposely pick a therapist that does not believe in diagnosing? 😂
Apparently he’s a really famous guy. If you Google his name, you’ll see a TMZ (or TMZ-ish) story about Amber just being seen going into this guy’s office because he’s written books a la “Smart Women, Foolish Choices: Finding the Right Men, Avoiding the Wrong Ones.”
@@darter81 Sounds like a predator looking to prey on vunerable women for book sales. Makes sense since Amber Heard spent how much money on first edition books that JD had to settle the debt for?
Exactly! She interpreted it as these muffins were especially brought in for ME 😂 😂
Which therapist is this??
Really enjoying these, Dr. Honda. Thanks for commenting on them for us!
Me too! 👍🏻
Me three!
After yesterday's cliff hanger, I was so excited to see you take on the court's version of "Do you know the Muffin Man? She's married to the Muffin Man!"
The MufFiN mAN?!$ 🧑🍳
Lol
Me as well, I was watching the prior video to this one and was awaiting the muffins when the video ended. Luckily for me that was only a few hours ago and the next video got posted😁
Me too! And I really wanted to hear his views of whatever Amber Heard's therapist would have said and how relevant would have been
How awesome would it be if they lived on Drury Lane?!?!
Thinking the muffins were bought specially for her was kinda typical hahaha
"Maybe it’ll be a genius move" after Elaine says something silly really does crack me up 😂
Oh wow all this time I was thinking they had access to the documents if they needed it. You are at risk of lying if you happen to forget some details and don’t have your paperwork to double check.
That's why all lawyers prep their clients with the, 'I do not recall.' response.
Definitely not, because you want to be able to catch people with inconsistencies because that can sometimes indicate untruthfulness. There are rules about when you are allowed to show a witness an exhibit “to refresh her recollection,” but you don’t have to. But it does look shady if a witness asks to check a document for something like this and the attorney just ignores her and plows on.
@@darter81 that seems to be a part of the defense team's strategy in general. To deny those witnesses who deliver a report access to that same report for their testimony.
It is beyond shady in my opinion.
Dr Kirk laughing at Amber's lawyer at 5:17 😂
I screen-shotted it - I should probably make a GIF.
Really love your commentary on these things, hope you do more of these in this case!
Please keep these coming! I just can’t get enough of this!
Been waiting very impatiently for these videos everyday haha thank u for keeping them coming!
Its surprising that without even a prior interview or evaluation, Amber's treating therapist hold such strong opinions against Johhny. It was highly unethical. Glad someone pointed that out.
Dr Hughes came off as a bias Man hater and very unethical.
It must have been extremely difficult for the jury or the public to follow this part of the trial. Thank you for your clarifications, making this reveiw more understandable.
I love this! Thank you for covering this cross examination, I hope to see more of the trial! :)
Yesss! I literally just finished part 3. Thank you ☺️
I really wish they had gone more into depth about the muffins.
🤣
Underrated comment
😂😂😂 I actually felt like it would never end. it was just getting funny...and then it ended...
What kind of muffins were they? Gluten or sugar free? Did they have the muffins with coffee or tea? We're the muffins warm or room temperature? So many unanswered questions.
@@mostHumblePersonAlive blueberries? Bran muffin? Carrot? 🥕
Who else noticed that that lawyer kept confusing borderline and bipolar? Even Dr Curry looked kinda amused at that haha
And the lawyer tried to impeach her on it. She asked the question using bi-polor but read back a supposedly contradictory previous testament when the word borderline was used...
dr currry also accidentally said bipolar before that lol
CURRY did ait as well... first and then the lawyer said it after
I’m so glad you of all people made a response to this, you are always fair and balanced and very knowledgeable about disorders.
These reaction videos are absolutely excellent. Thank you Dr. Honda.
Not a psychologist but I've spent 20 years on and off in therapy (I'm only 33 for reference). I've been misdiagnosed multiple times and actually had a conversation with a psychologist who refused to diagnose me, and then went on a rant about the DSM and I must admit it made perfect sense. His argument was that a lot of disorders have been homogenized and it makes it difficult to separate some. So he tackles the individual issues one by one. I made the most progress with him in 6 months than any other in therapy and since then...never had to have it since!
i learn so much from watching your videos!! the love is blind ones, the ultimatum ones, and these!
Dr Honda this is one of your best videos yet. I got totally lost in the trial many times but you’ve explained it so well
I think when the Judge told Ambers lawyer that he couldn’t object to an answer to his own question is going to be the most memorable line of this trial 🤣🤣
OMG...YES! This trial has been mind-boggling!
Thank you for making this dumpster fire into an educational opportunities 😊 I really enjoy it
Your commentary is fascinating and balanced. Thank you
Somebody needs to get to the bottom of these muffins.--Lawyer
Thank you for clarifying and adding context for Dr Curry.
Dr. Honda should call these videos “All the reasons why I don’t want to be a forensic psychologist”.
Wow... i never thought i could watch 50m youtube video without skiping some parts of it.
Well done.. well deliver
This was great…in depth, watched all parts, very interesting. thank you
The muffin moment is already famous, check out the judge’s reaction after the lawyer says why did your husband get muffins for amber
This is so insightful! Thank you for your commentary and nuanced approach Dr Honda
IT is great that you break this down because channels, even lawyer channels who call out these things, obviously are very emotional, and not factual at all. Or just let the whole things run while they just talk over, and you cannot hear either. Very frustrating, and total sh.t, but I do love your content, which is much better and much more informative. Please keep up Dr. Kirk :)
Not factual? Can you elaborate more? I have watched whole testimonies of various witnesses and yet to see something that was proven to be fraud or lie
You should watch Emily D Baker and her coverage of this - she’s an ex-prosecutor now legal commentator who goes by the saying “facts not feelings” 👏
@@Youokhun again instead of general statement, please direct me to a specific point or points for discussion.
@@Youokhun I've tried hers and her live coverage is frustrating since she doesn't pause and will just talk over things. The summaries are pretty decent
@@mokc913 I think that’s a part of covering the case live in real time. It’s a lot different from Kirk who can play and pause when it fits.
When you talked about psychologist testifying about somebody whom they've never met I think that's what Amber and her team wanted to do when they submitted therapist notes that another therapist wrote based on what Amber told her (it's still disputed if these notes were in fact written by the therapist or the Amber herself) but fortunately these were rejected during the discovery as far as I know and couldn't have been brought up during the trial as it would have been hearsay.
And also as we know from the trial Amber's team brought that psychiatrist that did testify about Johnny without having met with Johnny before that.
Yeah, looks like I couldn’t work as a forensic psychologist either haha. I’d break down crying or taking it all very personal at some point!
Same, I'd bust out laughing over how she didn't know that symptoms mean a diagnosis and over the muffin thing
Based on all the commentary about not making definitive claims. I look forward to your review of amber’s forensic psychologist.
This series was very informative. I was hoping you would have wrapped up the video with your conclusion of Dr Curry’s testimony with your overall impression. I’m sure AH’s side will have their own expert so I hope you will cover that one as well.
I think he put that in the beginning of the first video (not sure but think he mentioned putting his overall thoughts there)
I am also hoping you cover AH’s own expert testimony. They changed the order of testimony to lead with that The expert supposedly will be on the stand tomorrow (Tuesday).
@@LindaCapra boy oh boy was AH forensic psychologist was a MESS!!!
My new favoruite YT series. I love your insight
I’m so invested on these videos
Thank you so much for these reactions!
Most videos are so biased, based on personal feelings of the parties. I had some strong feelings about this particular testimony and you're the one of the very few that provided objective and professional analysis.
Everyone needs to keep in mind that the perspective of this case is whether Amber defamed Johnny in a Washington Post article. I think that's getting lost as we get deeper into details. It is extremely hard to win a defamation case, especially since she didn't mention him by name. Appreciated this commentary on the psychologist though.
It needs to he proven to be untrue in order for Johnny to win. This case is primarily about proving the allegations were false, then that they caused him damages... I think that's what they're focusing on
the ACLU lawyer testimony did point that Johnny Depp was the intended person (Ms. Heard's lawyers requested redacting his name in the 1st first draft)
I think that's why he may not win. It all goes back to the article. The jury has to find that the allegations of abuse were false, that Amber wrote the Op-ed specifically to defame him, AND that it had a negative affect on his career.
I think the second point is gonna be impossible to prove, unless Amber has a Bond villain moment on the stand and confesses to writing that piece to hurt Johnny Depp.
@@melodyconte but she did name him in the article. She was annoyed that her lawyers and those of the ACLU removed them before it was published. She tried to have his name added back in.
Considering is EASIER to win a trial for defamation in the UK and Depp lost there, it's almost impossible for him to win here. He isn't doing this because he realistically thinks he can win. He just wants to win in the court of public opinion and that's why he wanted the trial live streamed.
Thank you for being thoughtful in your breakdown & interpretation of this testimony and clearly explaining diagnostic terms and processes to all of us who aren’t professionals. I’ve learned so much.
Also I like your photos of your office door when you share new stickers & art
Great videos man!
Rocky her friend since highschool, and lived in Johnny Depp's home for 3 years, was questioned in her Deposition if Amber ever hit her and she answered yes while shopping she hit her, Amber also hit her Dad on camera and screamed at her mom not to make eye contact at an award show. She admits to hitting Johnny several times on audio she recorded. Listen to the entire recording of Amber 7 hours exist on UA-cam. She was court ordered to see Miss Curry but was ordered to spend 15 hours with Curry .
I wasn't aware it was 15 hour and not 12. Yet you have commentators who think Dr. Curry is skewing the results in favour of Mr. Depp
How do I find that on you tube?
She also hit her Ex Gf, and her sister
She was clearly abusive but there is no way depp is innocent. These relationship are usually abusive on both ends with women Often being the instigator. A history of dv doesn't mean she wasn't abused herself. It's very typical of dv victims to abuse in response or to instigate a fight. A lot of dv victims that are women are rarely Just victims but have also been abusers at some point
@@taco5158 any yet only one person played the victim and only one person got canceled. So, no!!
I like what you have to say ,I have issues where I'm on disability,im65 but I've learned a lot about myself ,ive been in theraphy for yrs,has helped me a lot.
Dr Kirk I love your videos, I have some distrust in your field but I appreciate your thorough breakdown.
This one was missing from the Playlist. Glad I found it.
Really appreciate this. It answers so many questions. Too bad the jury does not get to clarify as we do.
Yes! The Muffin mystery is getting solved
Yea, people were pretty upset Dr. Honda didn’t cover this on episode 3 😂🤣.
Need Encyclopedia Brown to solve that one
loving theseeee!
Omg I'm so excited for this series! To find part 1 I go!
It’s some of Dr Kirk’s best content. Fair, balanced, educational and humane :)
Yes! Finally got to the muffin part. Amber’s team is absolutely losing this. 😅
Do you know the muffin man? 🤨 😂
@@poponachtschnecke Who lives on Drury Lane? 🤔
@@thebosshouse Shes married to the muffin man!!
(Not my gumdrop buttons!)
Muffingate!! Yesss so hyped for this installment.
EDIT: Really enjoyed the length of this video, love how the extra time gave you the opportunity to really get into the nitty gritty of how this works. Hope to see more long videos like this as the lawsuit develops. Thanks for the video!
Mega pint was another good one 😂
So in general, whatever the patient says within a therapy section, it’s all HEARSAY lol
I am thoroughly enjoying your reactions and opinions on Dr Curry's testimony from a professional standpoint. I do hope you will be back when Ms Heard's doctor gives her testimony. All the best to you, Dr Honda.
You and Logan (observe) should totally do a collab!! That would be sooooo insightful and informative 😁
LOVE his channel observe
I think Dr Honda has broadly mentioned that he doesn’t believe in body language interpretation or “lie detection”. So I don’t think he would do that. I love Logan’s channel though and his observation of the Amber heard deposition is showing so much relevant data now 😂 😂
@@eh1126 it could still be interesting/worthwhile if Dr. Honda could add context to Logan's interpretations as why he agreed or disagreed on what Logan is picking up from a psychology perspective. (I.e "ah, that shift of the jaw and the initial lift and drop of the eyebrows really indicates disdain here. " "actually, to me this seems less disdain and more x response due to history of y") maybe they could both expand knowledge
@@eh1126 ohhh that’s interesting! I’ve only been watching Dr. Honda since the love is blind series started so I didn’t know that. That’s fascinating that he doesn’t believe in it lol I think that would make it even more interesting actually 😂
I find it HILARIOUS that Amber’s lawyers would not let Dr. Curry have a copy of her notes for reference but let Dr. Hughes have her notes “for recollection.” I’m surprised Johnny’s lawyers didn’t call that BS out.
They did actually
Asked and answered. Muffingate and dinner and a mule at Depp's. Johnny repeatedly warned Ms Heard you don't want to go to court. I see why.
I almost wrote you to do an analysis on this! Thanks 🙏
I'd hate to be a jury on this because there is so muuch information and questions that I would be LOST
Can't wait until you do Dr. Hughes, who diagnosed Depp without even seeing him!
Hi Dr. Honda! Coming to you from the future - from 2024 👽 I’ve watched your videos for a long time and will now be indulging in all of your DvH videos 😍 Love seeing you laugh! I know this turned into a hard time for you and I’m glad to tell you that in the future, you seem to be doing very well ♥️
Yassssssssss you broke my heart when you stopped right before muffins 🤣🤣🤣
Worst forensic psychology reaction cliffhanger ever.
I’ve watched most of this trial live and, “I don’t know why we’re going down this road.”, has been my reaction to most of the Heard team’s questions.
I genuinely think Amber’s team is hurting themselves by being so abrasive and literal. They’ll need to bring some actual evidence when they present her case.
"I Don't Know Why We're Going Down This Road" should be the name of the movie they make based on this trial.
They r doing their job . Don’t underestimate their m o .....lots more to come .
The 129 page summary of UK case is worth a read . Shame Johnny didn’t read it 😉 He refuses to accept or own his part in this toxic mess . For everyone’s sake he needs to move on . But as Howard Stern notes , he’s too much of a narcissist to do that . Dragging all his witnesses along who are all clearly fed up w it all
The problem is that they don't have much evidence...
@@equatorialjourney4478 Amber Heard methodically and very deliberately attempted and to some degree succeeded in ruining his life. And she lied ruthlessly. The UK decision was about whether The Sun could be held liable for Amber's claims. Of course Depp lost that one. Almost none of the damning evidence we've seen now in this case could be submitted for the prior case.
@@equatorialjourney4478 Neither one of them owned up to anything, so your point is null and void. Until you can prove that he is not in fact a victim of domestic abuse, you don't get to tell anyone they should simply _move on_ . Also, Howard Stern to this day doesn't own a degree in psychology, and is not competent enough to diagnose anyone with anything.
Please watch the deposition of their marriage therapist!
I'm loving it. I'm enjoying 😌 when psychologist and lawyer's interacts. It's like challenging mathematicians to play math problems.
Loved this
I loved this doctor. Especially when the lawyer is trying to shake her and say that’s your testimony under oath!!?? And Cooley she says, yes, that is my testimony.
I just heard on Legal Bytes stream that Alyte reached out to you to come onto the stream! That's exciting. I hope you do show up and offer your insight
UA-cam ads did me dirty! Right when you were saying you ending tag line, before the 2nd "really", an ad 😒 that's my favorite part of the videos.
Your videos are the only ones I can watch on this, so many people are forgetting that Amber is a suffering person, that of course doesn't make the things she's accused of right or okay, but it's key to not forget her humanity, we all have seen what the stigma does
I agree. I hope she gets the help she clearly needs and I hope that all of her victims are also able to heal.
@@julieeileen7299 i really hope she does for her daughter’s sake
@@grasstastesbad Sigh. That poor baby. Yes, hopefully this is the wake up call Amber needs. Hopefully she'll reach out and take the help for both herself and that little baby.
Same. Most everyone on the internet is way too emotionally invested in these people--who are not only both actors, but total strangers--and this channel is a beacon of objectivity and compassion that is greatly appreciated.
That's right. But first things first. Which is: responsibility!
Thank you so, so much for breaking this down. The bit about the scales and not remembering if they were over 65 seemed like such a nothing burger when I first watched this, but with your context, it actually is a bit eyebrow-raising and should have been a point for AH's lawyer if she'd been making her case better. I think the jury completely missed it though.
Elaine is just terrible when it come's to cross examination. She doesn't listen to the witness' testimony at all, focusing only on her own agenda. And when the witness gives an opposite answer to what she was expecting, she completely loses her track of thought.
The question is why did not the lawyer follow up if she had prove that Dr. Curry was untruthful in her diagnosis and reporting? its for sure a damning finding if it were true (The MMPI-2 report is available for both sides to review). in addition, Dr. Curry stated that if she had the report in font of her, she would be happy to go through the the report (Elaine did not produce the report for review)
@@GaladrielOfLorien I agree. I remember when she asked a police officer (I think it was a lady officer) about a person who was using the gym across the penthouse "why did you not question that person". I would imagine Elaine would hammer the same officer if she did so in a different case stating "so now you stop anyone for questioning if they were just in the area"
@@faz7531 It's definitely suspicious. If the results were lower than required, she would've straight up told the jury that Curry was lying. Which makes me think that Elaine avoided clarifying on that because either: (1) she doesn't understand enough about psych testing, and didn't want to get into the argument of "yes, they're lower, BUT that's not the only criteria...", cause she probably wouldn't have a proper comeback. Or (2) she counted on Curry either giving the wrong answer so they could impeach her, or refusing to give one for fear of perjuring herself, in which case the defense team wouldn't have to prove anything. Their entire goal was to make the jury think that she's was lying in her assessment.
Which, again, confirms my theory that the results were definitely above the 65, and the defense team was trying to twist the narrative.
I've seen other cases where everyone was in agreement the person had borderline, but did not have elevated scales. The diagnosis came from analyzing the entire test and both sides came up with the same answer. So it's not necessary to have elevated scales. On another note, I'm really hoping Dr. Curry is being brought back as a rebuttal witness to actually go through her report. I'm guessing that's their plan after Amber's doctors give testimony because otherwise it makes no sense to not actually go through the report.
I think that this series of videos are the only really good and interesting about this trial that I had the chance to see. everyone are making really bad content about all of this, but this is a really good review.
1st time to your channel! Love! Please do defense psychologist breakdown ….thank you
I'm js ambers lawyers stand on "you can't say with 100% certainty that abuse did or did not occur" because they weren't in the room or saw it when it happened. Meanwhile, taking ambers therapist at their word. Kinda silly.
That's silly. There are other indications of someone being abused other than just what they verbally tell you.
I'll be honest, I was not interested in this case at all. However, your analysis made it very interesting, educational and fun. 🙂 Thanks Dr. Honda.
I had no interest in any of it until Dr. Kirk responded to the phone conversation of theirs a few years ago and since then I've been hooked
I cannot wait for your analysis of the Defense's Forensic Psychologist. Your mention of the need to prepare and practice for testimony so that you are very familiar with your report etc was demonstrated noticeably during that testimony . Their expert relied extensively on physical notes and couldn't remember significant amounts of her report and analysis
I was dating once a dutch man who would go to therapist; the whole relationship ended up with him calling me „borderline” because his therapist (a 50 year old woman; could be his mother) told him I have borderline based on what he was saying about me. She basically ‚diagnosed’ me from far. She also contributed or even caused the failure of this relationship; because the dynamic they had reminded me of unhealthy mother-son where mother (therapist) is controlling the thoughts of son (client).
I am glad that I ended it.
I agreed with you on the rocky pennington data point. I think the data point she wanted to include was that amber punched her ex-wife in the Tacoma airport unprovoked and was arrested for that, but it couldn’t be included because the ex-wife refused to bring charges, dismissed the arrest as homophobia, didn’t testify, and they dropped the charges because they’re not residents of Washington. But the arresting officer was a lesbian herself and recounts the punch was severe enough that she needed to get involved.
the airport incident involved Van Ree not Rocky Pennington
edit: the sentence was not constructed correctly
@@faz7531 right… that’s why I said ex-wife
Well I think JD team can introduce that scenario now because AH lawyers introduced tabloid articles about him. So now I don’t see why they can’t point to articles written about her arrest in 2009. Since they opened that door.
@@khure711 it would be a clincher if they did
@@ashleytownsend3622 it would at very least show a pattern of abuse.