Notice
Thread ordered by most liked posts - View normal thread.

annanuttall

VIP Member
You know what I was thinking yesterday when we were talking about it, that Whitney probably would put her baby (or babies) in a safe area - out of Amber's reach and then declare that she lied and wanted to stand up to her sister.
 

cee-bee

VIP Member
No it's not.... and well you know it.
what are talking about? I’m genuinely confused.

she had a rebutal testimony to Dr Curry
A direct examination
A cross examination and redirect

that isn’t correct? And is it especially relevant to my point either way? I was trying to establish what you were talking about
 

cee-bee

VIP Member
Is it bad that JDs team have gone first? X
it means that Amber’s team will have the last word and that will be the lasting (potential) impact on the jury.
Defendents in criminal trials usually go last for this reason because generally, the court proceedings allow for it to be more favourable to them in that way. I’m not sure if it’s the same with litigations.
 

Just William

VIP Member
Did JD hug or thank Camille? Body language from both is a bit off following such a powerful closing argument.
Both sitting apart with space between them.
Still looking at them both. Camille half turned away from him. JD leaning away from her in his chair. Not their usual body language.
 

Ray_of_Sunshine

VIP Member
In layman’s terms, please can one of you lovely lot tell me what the instructions are? What are they for? Why do they need them? Any info at all would be great 🙏🏼
 

cee-bee

VIP Member
What like when Dr Hughes testified twice, during the case in chief, that she didn't perform the test (the one allegedly not carried out correctly) after Dr Curry had submitted her results: and then admitted that she had.

And then in the rebuttal agreed that she had performed the test ten days after receiving Dr Curry's results.

That sort of thing?
im not sure what you’re referencing: Dr Hughes was on the stand four times is that correct?irstly During her testimony, for direct examination and the cross examination and redirect on May 4th? You’re talking about her rebuttal testimony?

she used multiple tests which she mentioned on her testimony, including a personality assessment inventory, trauma symptom inventory, Beck’s depression inventory and Beck’s anxiety Inventory. She also used the forensic assessment symptom test to detect if AH was faking anything.

I was referencing her being quizzed over the CAPS-5 test - which she completed after a diagnosis of PTSD and in which she left a blank box. She explained how this was basically dotting the Is and crossing the Ta (to paraphrase) as she felt AH had already presented enough symptoms for a diagnosis of PTSD. The CAPS-5 is the gold standard test for PTSD.

so I’m not sure what your point was exactly but I refer back to my original point; lawyers as a general rule, will work to undermine expert witnesses. By providing an alternative expert witness and by attacking the processes - in this case, the way in which Dr Hughes filled in a form and the timing surrounding that form.