The Lawsuits Thread

[ForeverYoung]

So let me get this straight....She is trying to use domestic violence as a defense for writing the article but today there was a motion heard to strike his complaint on the grounds that she didn't write the article.

"Did I read that right"?
"Do you see that"?
"Is that correct"?

[Scout]

It seems to me that all the behavior AH's psychologist says about AH from PTSD can be ascribed to JD as a result of his PTSD from AH. I really cannot listen to her. Ben Chew and company do a wonderful job so far, but now the rubber will really hit the road.

[fireflydances]

Pretty good analysis of today's AH psychologist. Very thought provoking.

[ForeverYoung]

And now we have one of her lawyers passing notes to her new PR guy.

[ForeverYoung]

[Inquiring Minds]

Dr Dawn Hughes said she has appeared in about 50 trials. Her misandrist bigotry was on full display and I found her testimony quite offensive.

I found one murderer she defended in 2019.


It didn't go so well though:

Statistically speaking, history favored Addimando. Since the 1950s, at least nine other Dutchess County women killed their partners and said it was in self-defense. Not one had been convicted of murder.

Don't worry, her sentence was reduced. In February 2020 she was sentenced to 19 years to life for murder. In July 2021 that was reduced to 7.5 years because, well, the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act. The appeal wouldn't overturn the conviction, but figured because she shot him in his sleep, and therefore was a survivor, she qualified. Her victim never testified against her at her trial or opposed her appeal, so I guess 7.5 years was enough for murdering him. The testimony of Dr Hughes at the trial was no doubt a major contributor to this joke re-sentencing.


I'm not liking Hughes much atm. She has resting man-hater face and kept glaring across at Johnny. I hope she is eviscerated by TeamDepp.

[ForeverYoung]

I'm not liking Hughes much atm. She has resting man-hater face and kept glaring across at Johnny. I hope she is eviscerated by TeamDepp.

I can't wait to see what happens on cross exam today. She was about as bias as they come with that testimony.

[justintime]

The consensus (among the you tube networks) seems to be that the cross this am was too weak as well as too polite!! Also, that something pretty important was denied JD’s team (?). Today, so far, I only got to see a little bit in mid morning - Dr. appts - and am stressing out.

I absolutely hate to even ask, but is Kathleen Zellner still on call for JD’s team? If they need a woman who can ask the tough questions now is the time to bring her out. Now and for AH cross. No mercy, no pity for AH. What she has now set in motion for Johnny to bear is beyond the pale. I don’t know how he managed to keep his composure - much less stay seated - yesterday.

Oh - dear God - is this really happening???

[Jackslady]

Amber is on the stand now. Smiling at the jury, butter wouldn't melt. Complete fake. I'll have to watch this in short bursts, mind you it's probably the best acting she's ever done.

[Judymac]

The consensus (among the you tube networks) seems to be that the cross this am was too weak as well as too polite!! Also, that something pretty important was denied JD’s team (?). Today, so far, I only got to see a little bit in mid morning - Dr. appts - and am stressing out.

I absolutely hate to even ask, but is Kathleen Zellner still on call for JD’s team? If they need a woman who can ask the tough questions now is the time to bring her out. Now and for AH cross. No mercy, no pity for AH. What she has now set in motion for Johnny to bear is beyond the pale. I don’t know how he managed to keep his composure - much less stay seated - yesterday.

Oh - dear God - is this really happening???

Please let me give you some perspective on this. You Tubers opinions do not matter because the You Tubers are not making the decision in this case. There are some You Tubers who have legal knowledge but *many* do not. I can not even watch most of them. Many give their *opinion* and pass it off as legal knowledge, when they are giving out inaccurate/incorrect information. Also, *none* of the people on You Tube are part of Johnny's legal team. Even the actual lawyers on You Tube are not part of this case, therefore, they are only giving opinions. Nobody, but his legal team has all of his evidence and knows where they are going with their questioning. I am not critiquing the cross examination. I am saying that everyone who has a You Tube channel is not an expert and people need to keep perspective on what they hear on You Tube.

There is *no*reason for anybody to get panic stricken over the opinions of You Tube. They are just opinions.

[Judymac]

Amber is on the stand now. Smiling at the jury, butter wouldn't melt. Complete fake. I'll have to watch this in short bursts, mind you it's probably the best acting she's ever done.

Her lawyers are going to portray her that way. Just wait until cross examination . I usually do not listen to any commentary. I listened to a few minutes of commentary on Court TV this morning. They said a few things that I found interesting. One was that she has to own up to the things that she did in this relationship. If she does not own up to what she has done or tries to minimize it she will lose credibility with the jurors. I think Court TV is rather biased. But, they did say that Johnny owned up to the things that he did and AH needs to do the same. They also speculated about how AH was prepared for her testimony. The Court TV people said that AH and her lawyers probably spent many hours going over her depositions in preparation for her testimony. Remember, how Johnny testified? It was completely unrehearsed. AH should be able to get through her direct testimony without a problem. She most likely has been given the questions and answers to the direct testimony. They can try to rehearse for cross examination, but they do not know how and what Johnny's lawyers are going to ask her. I expect her story to fall completely apart.

*You do not have to have a good memory when you tell the truth" Judge Judy Sheindlin.

[bringmethathorizon]

Okay, I just am so confused now, I need a little help. AH is on the stand now and according to her testimony, she has been hit and abused by Johnny almost on a daily basis Does it seem like it is going to come down to the jury deciding he said she said ? Everything AH is saying is damaging to Johnny !! I don’t know how cross examination can get the truth out of her !! I hope someone can shed some light on this for me. Right now, I’m not liking how things are going

[HesterPrynne1328]

I don't like how this is going, either: I'm horrified to find AH seems to be quite coherent and I'm actually feeling conflicted when she cries. She's a horrible actor ~ how can she be doing this? Am I that much of a pushover? Ugh.

[Granna]

Relax. Just wait until cross. She has already lied her butt off.

[Judymac]

Okay, I just am so confused now, I need a little help. AH is on the stand now and according to her testimony, she has been hit and abused by Johnny almost on a daily basis Does it seem like it is going to come down to the jury deciding he said she said ? Everything AH is saying is damaging to Johnny !! I don’t know how cross examination can get the truth out of her !! I hope someone can shed some light on this for me. Right now, I’m not liking how things are going

I hope this helps:

Direct examination: the questioning of a witness by the party that has called that witness to give evidence, in order to support the case that is being made.

Cross examination: the formal interrogation of a witness called by the other party in a court of law to challenge or extend testimony already given.

Her lawyers are giving her a direct examination. They are being kind to her and portraying her as a victim. *They are supposed to portray her in the best light*. She will be cross examined, by Johnny's lawyers on her inconsistencies. It will not be a he said she said when they point out all of her inconsistencies. They will ask her a question, then direct her to previous sworn testimony that is inconsistent with the way she answered the question. She has told so many lies that it is impossible not to have her face her inconsistent statements.


Right now we have only seen her lawyers examining her, the way they are supposed to do a direct examination. Cross examination will be different. Please be patient and wait for the cross examination. There is no reason to panic.