Addiction Specialist Reacts to Dr. Spiegel's testimony about Johnny Depp

Oh, my gosh. The testimony of Dr. Spiegel today in the Johnny Depp Ember case. That was crazy. That was by far the most exciting, dramatic testimony yet. I mean, honest to goodness, I feel like this is the first witness for the Amber Heard side that could hold their ground. Like this. This guy, man, he was a tough cookie. I have a lot to say about this testimony, and if you've seen it, I bet you do, too. So let's dig into it. For those of you who are new here, I'm Amber Hollingsworth. I am a master addiction Counselor, and this YouTube channel is all about helping you understand the science and psychology of addiction so you can get your life and your family back on track. And today we're. We're gonna react to Dr. Spiegel, who came on. Came into the trial today to sort of testify about Johnny Depp's substance use disorder diagnosis and how that put him at risk for IPV and whether or not he was a perpetrator of intimate partner violence. How many of you have seen this? If you haven't seen this, you have to go back and watch it and after you watch this video. Because this guy, I mean, he was, like, argumentative. He was, like, back talking the lawyers, and he was getting Johnny Depp's lawyers totally discombobulated. Okay? And the lawyer's like, but that's just about trauma. You didn't have intimate partner violence. That was in the title. And the reason I'm telling you, you got to come back to that, because near the end of his testimony, he just, like, throws that back in the lawyer's faces. Like, I mean, I seriously about fell out of my chair. Like, I was listening to this, my headphones, and every now and then, I just, like, burst out laughing or just, like, burst out with like, oh, my God. My kid was like, what is wrong? I'm like, this is. This is, like, crazy, this testimony. So anyways, he's. He's going back and forth with him. And let me tell you the truth of it. I can relate a little bit to this guy because I've worked in an impatient setting. Like, what he's talking about. He works at, like, acute care psych hospital. I worked in one of these places for, like, 10 years where they do inpatient treatment. They do mental health, they do substance abuse, they do chronic mental health issues. They have outpatient programs. Let me tell you what. When you work in a place like this, you see it all. All of it. I mean, and you see the. The most extreme of everything. So the guy was definitely qualified and he really was trying to sort of split hairs with him about the trauma versus the ipv. And are you IPV specialist? And the thing of it is, to me, when he's like going around, around with him about it, it'd be like saying, let's say you have a back specialist up there testifying because trial, somebody hurt their back or something. And then the lawyer's like, but you're not a car accident specialist. And the doctor's like, yeah, but I'm a back specialist. And we see a lot of car accidents. Probably like 50, 60% of our patients have car accidents. So, you know, we deal with that. Yes, but you're not board certified in car accidents. And it's just like, are you kidding me? It's like, it's just crazy. So when I'm watching these lawyers go back and forth for what felt like ever about this man's credentials, it was just making me crazy. And let me tell you what it reminds me of. It reminds me, I love forensic stuff. I love diagnostic stuff. I love true crime. But you know why I'm not one of these, as they call them, paid witnesses, these experts that go testify? Because I freaking hate what these lawyers do to these experts. They, they grind it down to some minuscule something and they take something out of context and they make you answer a yes or no on something that does not have a yes or no answer. Things in mental health, nothing in mental health has a yes or no answer to it, but they sort of drill it down and they make it look that way. Like when the lawyer says, yes, but have you written an article called Intimate Partner Violence or something like that? It's like, no, but I wrote this article which includes all that. And that's what just makes me crazy. I just can't stand it. It makes me crazy. I've had limited experience having to testify. And every time it's just like, you just get so frustrated because they don't really let you tell the big picture. So they don't really let you tell what's going on. They just ask you questions that. To pull out little tiny pieces that go to this side or go to this side. And it's just crazy making, if you ask me now. So they definitely did that with this guy, but this guy wasn't having none of it. Dr. Spiegel, he was like, like, I don't know why you keep asking me the same question 10 times. He's like, do I have to answer this judge? Like, what this? They don't ask me this question. And he's like, I'm. I'm. I. I don't really like the way you splitting hairs with me over here. I mean, he's like, arguing with these lawyers. And I'm like, like, seriously, if you can see my face, I've been like, oh, my God, I couldn't believe it. This guy is ballsy. Now we're going to talk about. He goes into narcissistic traits. We're going to get there in the end. And I'm like, got a few narcissistic traits, although I thought they were kind of funny in this draw. Anyways, I felt like watching this whole thing was like watching a boxing match. No, not just watching a boxing match. It was like watching one of them Rocky movies where you think, okay, someone's totally won, and then somebody comes back from being pummeled to pull, like, Rocky. And then he's, like, back to winning and he's back down. Oh, my God. That's the way this whole thing was between this doctor and Johnny's lawyer. What is the male lawyer's name? I cannot remember the male lawyer's name now. Camille. I know her name. She was a total badass. And you know what? They should have had Camille up there, because I think she's such a badass and she's so attractive. I think it would have threw off Dr. Spiegel. I think Camilla, Camille could have done a better job with it. But anyways, I think the. The guy lawyer is a good lawyer, and trust me, he got some good punches in there. It wasn't like a total loss or anything, but I think Camille could have thrown him off because this. This doctor, he was like, bring it. He wasn't having none of it. Okay, so let's move on to Dr. Spiegel's diagnosis. He says that according to all the things he reviewed, which was a lot of stuff, like all the stuff we've all reviewed, those of you that have been, like, watching the trial, that Johnny Depp has substance use disorder, which I'm going to tell you exactly what that means, and I'm going to let you guys diagnose that in just a second. And in his opinion, did commit intimate partner violence. And a lot of his sort of substantiating that claim had to do with some of the things he witnessed. And then also, like, statistical stuff about if you have this and this and this, the likelihood that you might be a perpetrator for IPV is, like, really high. So we're going to get into that now, because Johnny Depp's lawyer might be watching this. I'm not going to diagnose him. Because there was this whole back and forth thing about being able to. There's just kind of this rule in the mental health world that you're not supposed to diagnose anybody that you've never treated before, which is a fair rule. And apparently I never even heard of it. I got it written down. The Goldwater rule, which became this big old argument near the end, says not only can you not diagnose, but you can't render a clinical opinion about a client you'd never seen. And there was this whole back and forth thing about how Johnny Depp's team didn't want him to have to be evaluated, which was such a smart move. And so he wasn't evaluated. So that means Even though this Dr. Spiegel wanted to evaluate Johnny Depp, Johnny Depp, the law, the judge said he didn't have to submit to that if they didn't want to. So I didn't want him to. So he didn't. So in some kind, one of these boards that this doctor belongs to, in their code of ethics, it says this Gold Water rule, which is you can't diagnose someone you haven't treated before or met with before. And not only that, but you can't render a clinical opinion. And so the lawyer was trying to get him to say, so what you're saying here is by standing up on the stand and rendering a clinical opinion, that you're. That you're acting unethically, that you're violating the guidelines or the rules of the board that you are a member of. You're a fellow on this board, right? And. And it's kind of like trying to narrow him down, to make him say, yeah, I did that, and I probably shouldn't have, because I've never met with Johnny Depp. This doctor just starts arguing with him and he's like. He's like, no, I'm not gonna say that. Because if you're gonna say that about me, like that, that this is unethical, then you guys said about every expert, either side, all y' all don't try up here. He's like, and you're gonna have to say that by every doctor who works for the insurance company who gets to decide who gets treatment and who doesn't, because that's doing the same thing. He was just like, yeah, it says in there. But I'm not gonna say I acted unethically, because here are about 4, 000 examples of where that's done every single day. And I was like, dude, I thought the lawyer done had him like cornered up. He came back punching. I was like, you got you. And it reminded me of when I was a baby counselor. That's what I call it when I was. When I was a little baby counselor. One of the things you have to do is you have to do something called supervision. And it's where you have to meet with a professional who's been in the field a lot longer than you. And you talk about your case. It's like therapy for therapists, like counseling for counselors. But you don't talk about your personal life. You talk about your cases or your client load or whatever. And they make sure you got your head on straight. Anyways, one of the things that my supervisor used to always say to me was, you've got the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. Like for example, this is the example I can remember. He gave me the letter of the law for. Counselor says counselors cannot accept gifts. If there's some backstory, all that. Like if client brings you gifts, you can't accept it. He's like, that is the letter law. The spirit of the law is that if you ask 9 out of 10 counselors and their client brought them some Christmas cookies, would they accept the Christmas cookies and share with stuff? They would probably do that. Spirit of the law. Now, if the client brought you a Rolex watch and tried to hand it to you, that's different. And so that's where he would call the letter of the law and the spirit of law. And that's what it made me think of when he's going around and around with this Dr. Spiegeler about whether or not he can offer this professional diagnosis or even professional opinion, which I think he kind of nailed him on. That's what it says in the rule book. But I think Dr. Spiegler like clocked him right back by saying, okay, well, if you gonna call me up for that, then every expert that you done had up here, son, done it. So all of them are need to be rendered invalid too. And I was like, like telling me it's like a boxing match. All right, so, because I don't want that lawyer back me into no corner, I'm not going to diagnose Johnny Depp when that substitutes disorder. But here's what I'm gonna do. I'm gonna read you the criteria. I'm gonna tell you exactly how this diagnosis is Made. I'm gonna let y' all diagnose Johnny Depp. Y' all ready? I'm gonna read them to you and you count. There are 11 criteria for having a substance use disorder. And that's what Dr. Spiegel meant when he kept saying, I'm not talking about somebody who goes out and drinks and maybe gets a DUI one time. I'm talking about somebody who chronically, over and over and over, is abusing the substance or whatever. That's what he meant because there are these 11 criteria. So I'm gonna read them to you and y' all can diagnose and let. Let the law you come after you. Okay? All right, so let me get. I got my notes up here, so I know them, but I'll forget one or two of them if I try to do them off the top of my head. Let's see. Let me get to my notes. I'm a little mouse here. Well, here we go. Here we go. All right. Now, I'm going to paraphrase some of these things just so they're understandable. And the way this works is this. To get a substance use disorder, you have to have. You have to count how many of these criteria that you have. And these criteria have to have happened within the last year. So if it happened. But it didn't happen, but it happened like 10 years ago and it happened. Hasn't happened last year, you don't count it. So I'm going to read you guys these, and I want you all to count those of you that are following this. How many does Johnny Depp have of these? I'm going to give you a hint. A lot of them. Okay. All right, number one, taking a substance in larger amounts and over a longer period of time than you meant to. What that means is I told myself, I'm going to go to the party, I'm just going to have a couple drinks, and then I'm going to stop and I'm going to be done. But that's not what ends up happening. Do y' all think he meant that one? Number two, wanting to cut down control, stop using or manage the substance. So there's efforts, and sometimes those efforts can be successful. So it's like somebody who wants to drink less or use less drugs, and they may quit for short periods of time, but they keep going back. Or they may cut it back, but it doesn't last very long and it keeps going back. So they. It's. It's these ongoing efforts to get it under control that aren't successful long term. So does he have that one? And I will remind y' all about the whole whole day of testimony about when he tried to detox himself. Just remember that when you decide whether to count this one. Number three. Spending a lot of time getting, using, or recovering from the effects of the substance. What do y' all think? Did Johnny spend a lot of time obtaining, using and recovering from the effects? I'll let y' all answer. Number four. Cravings or urges to use the substance. Y' all think Johnny's got that one? Number five, not managing to do what you should do at work, home or school because of your substance use. So that means you're not bringing your A game. Things are falling through the cracks. You're not taking care of your business. Do you think Johnny had some stuff falling through the cracks here? All right, the next one is continuing to use even when it causes problems in relationships. Do I need to say more? I don't think so. Number seven. Giving up important social, occupational or recreational activities because of substance use. So that could mean. What that means is, like, if used to, you loved baseball. It's like all you care about. You're a big baseball fan, and now you don't even go play baseball anymore because unless there's, like, drinking involved, you don't go. So maybe it's like a hobby someone has, but they don't do it unless it involves the substance. Y' all think Johnny met that one. Number eight, Using substances again and again, even when it puts you in danger. Number nine, continue to use even when you know it's causing or worsening a physical or psychological problem. So that means continuing to use even though you know it's making your anxiety worse, even though you know it's damaging your liver, even though you know it's causing you blood pressure problems, is it causing some kind of medical or psychological problem to happen or to get worse? And you keep doing it, then count that one. Number 10, needing more of a substance to get the same effect or the desired effect. That's just tolerance means used to I could drink four beers and now it takes 10 beers. Tolerance. Number 11. Last one is the presence of withdrawal symptoms. And you have to define withdrawal symptoms based on different substances. Different substances have different withdrawal. But I don't want y' all to worry about it because we had the whole episode on withdrawal where Johnny Depp talked about withdrawal. So we're just going to count it, okay? All right. That's 11. How many do y' all think you had out of 11? How many? Did you count? Let me give you a second. Let me see it in the chat. It's okay, you're not gonna get it wrong. If he has the presence of two or three, that would be called a mild substance use disorder. If he has the presence of four or five, that's called a moderate substance use disorder. If he has six or more of these, it's called a severe substance use disorder. So for those of you watching the testimony near the end when the lawyer's going back and forth with Dr. Spiegel and he's saying, like, okay, so he uses substances. And he's like, no, I didn't say you substance. I said he has substance use disorder. And I said he had, like, a severe substance use disorder. It's like, no, let me tell you what I'm trying to say here. And that's why he's saying that he says, no, he has severe. So severe would mean he made six or more of those criteria. Now, y' all know I can't. I can't be diagnosing because that'd be unethical. But here's what I'm gonna tell you, just based on what I've seen. He meets all 11 of them times a hundred. Okay? All of them. Every single one of them. There's no doubt in my mind that he meets them all. And there's really no doubt in anyone's mind that he meets them all. So what does all this have to do with anything? Because there's really not up for debate, right? Whether or not he has a substance use disorder. He definitely has a substance use disorder. No one's arguing that he doesn't. The reason why that's so important is because it's such a risk factor involved with intimate partner violence. Abusing substances greatly increases the risk that someone might engage in intimate partner violence. Now, I'm gonna move over to a little different page since. Since y' all are diagnosing. I'm not diagnosing. Right. Because I'm not gonna get in trouble. I'll let y' all do that. Let's see. Let me tell you what the risk factors for the substance abuse were. And this is as revealed by Dr. Spiegel. Ready? Number one, a tendency to be jealous and suspicious. Number two, above average violent ideations. So I know that sounds fancy, but this means that the person sort of accepts and normalize above average amount of violence or aggressive behavior. Number three, rapid move shifts. Number four, limited self control. Those are the four risk factors that Dr. Spiegel talks about when he is mentioning these are the risk factors for someone to perpetrate intimate partner violence. So what he's saying is Johnny Depp, he has all these, which is possible. But you know what, when I look at all of them, I think Amber Heard had all of them too. And so I think as we get back into this case, that's the thing. Was like, was Johnny Depp abusive? But. But what hurt, what his side is trying to show is like, was she abusive too? And it's like, does he meet these? Probably most of them. Does she meet them? Probably most of them. Right. Which will come in even more in this testimony because one of the things that Johnny's lawyer tries to do is he tries to get him tricked up. First of all, he's trying to get him tricked up to say that he said Johnny Depp was narcissistic. And the doctor says, no, I say you had narcissistic personality. So I said, he probably has some narcissistic traits. And then the lawyer's like, okay, but you agree that someone with narcissistic traits would be more likely to be an abuser, Right? And then he's like, no, that's not what I said. I said somebody who has personality disorder traits in general, particularly cluster B personality traits, is more likely to commit ipv. And he gets them going down this road. And you, you think he's trying to pin the doctor up to say that Johnny Depp has narcissism. You could tell that's where the doctor's kind of like resisting. But what he's really doing is he's setting them up to say Amber Heard is the one diagnosed with personality disorder. Because if you remember, Dr. Curry got up there and said Amber Heard had borderline personality disorder and histrionic personality disorder, which are cluster B. Just so you don't know, Cluster B is kind of like three of the personality disorders fall into. It's what they call cluster B, and that's borderline personality disorder, Narcissistic personality disorder, histrionic, maybe it's four and antisocial, personal, sore. So you got all those in the, in the cluster B range. So people that have those type personality diagnosis are more likely to commit apd. It's just funny because it. You, you thought he was trying to pin him up, trying to get the doctor to say something about Johnny, but what he was really trying to do is pin him up and get, get the doctor to say something about people that have personality sort are more likely to commit ipv. But then he switched it and he says, but isn't Amber heard the one that got diagnosed with these? It was just like, I'm telling you, it was like boxing. It was like, you think the doctor gets a hit in and then the lawyer gets the head in. It was crazy. Now let's, let's move on to this. One of the things Dr. Spiegel talked about was a mini mental status exam. And I want to tell you guys what they are because in all my videos I want you to learn something. Like today we're having a little fun because we're talking about this, because it's like drama. But I want you to learn something. Most of my videos are all learning, but even in these, I want you to learn something. So mini mental statics exam is like a quick little assessment that you can do with a patient, client, whatever to assess, like where's their cognitive functioning level at? And there was some back and forth about why it's used and said, yeah, originally it was for like Alzheimer's patients, but actually they use it for all different kinds of things, which is true, seeing them use it. But I want to tell you some of what's on the mini mental statics exam. Now the, the One thing that Dr. Spiegeler brings out, the whole assessment, which is really just like a little one page assessment, the whole thing is designed as a tool. You kind of, you, you do all these, all these questions and then you add up the score to show cognitive impairment. But Dr. Spiegel wasn't really saying the overall results of the mini mental status exam. He just kept saying that part of the mini mental status exam was that you have to remember these three words. And I'll tell you how that works in just a second. And that Johnny Depp wasn't able to remember any of the words, which is not, not right for someone his age. Basically he said it more professional than that. And this comes back into debate a little later too. But, but I found it interesting. He didn't give the results of the whole mini mental status. He just sort of focused in on the fact that Johnny Depp couldn't remember any of the three words. So let me tell you a little bit about what's, what's on there. Moving my screen around so I can see my notes here. All right, so one of the questions on there is you ask the person to name three objects. So just pretend I'm asking it to you name three objects. For example, apple, table, penny. I'm, I'm gonna pretend those are the objects you told me so Put these words in your brain. Ready? Apple, table, penny. Apple, table, Penny. I'm gonna ask you again in a minute and I want you to tell me if you remember them, okay? Now the first thing you do is you ask them, what is the year? What season is it? What's the date? What's the month? Do you know? Do you know the day? You know and you know, like, sometimes it's like the 24th or it's 25th, but you think it's 24th. That's not really. I mean, that's kind of normal. It's just like if someone oriented. The time is what you're looking for. Where are we? What state are we in? What country are we in? What city are we in? Like, if you're in the hospital, you say, what hospital are you in? What floor are you in? Place. You're saying, is someone oriented? Time. Is someone oriented to place. Then you have them name the three objects. Y' all remember what y' alls were. I'm not gonna tell you again. And then you have them repeat back the three objects. I remember they were. Y' all can say them back to me right now. And then this one is hard. Then you ask the person to spell the word world backwards. See if you can do that. Spell world backwards. All right, now what's the three words? Y' all got the three words. If you know the three words, I want you to put a thumbs up in the chat or in the comments if you still remember them three words which it hasn't even been three minutes, which is supposed to be like three minutes. The three words were apple, table, penny. Did you remember them? If you got them, give me the thumbs up. If you didn't get them, give me the thumbs down. And you'll be like, Johnny. Now the way you score this test is they only get the points for that if they can't remember any of them. Then you don't give them the points for that because each one of these things I'm asking you do has points. Then you ask the person to repeat this phrase. No ifs, ands, or buts. And all they have to do is repeat it back to you. Then you give the person a three step command. For example, take this piece of paper, fold it in half, put it on the floor, and you see if they can follow all three of those steps. Then you ask them to sort of like write a sentence, close your eyes. You're seeing if they can follow command. And then you ask them to draw a diagram. The mini mental statics exam I'm looking at here has two six sided shapes. That's not a hexagon, that's five. What's the six sided shape anyways? It's two of them that overlap. And you, you let the person look at it and you ask them to draw it. I've seen another one too that has to do with a clock. They have to draw a clock or whatever. So basically that's the mini Mental Status exam. You get points for each thing, you add up all the points at the end and that's the total score. But he didn't tell us Johnny Depp's total score. He just told us that he couldn't remember the three words. See, some of y' all are not remembering the three words. Y' all getting. I see a thumbs down on there already. Right, right. So that's, that's what he was saying when he couldn't remember the three words. And a man of his age, 50 something years old, should be able to do that. Then later the lawyer comes in and says, well, let me, let me say this first. So he uses this, the Dr. Spiegel uses this, the fact he couldn't remember the three words as part of an assessment of cognitive functioning of Johnny Depp. Other things that he used were things like how slow his processing speed was. And this came under like a lot of argument in the end between him and the lawyer because he says, well, how did you, how did you come up with that? And he said, well, like I watched him in the depositions. He did, and his, and his processing was off. He's like, well, what's your baseline for office with the license? Well, how do you know what's off? Well, I'm just looking at him and I'm looking, I'm thinking that's not the normal processing for somebody that age. And then the lawyer says, lawyer says, okay, yeah, but wouldn't you agree, don't you like when Larry says, wouldn't you agree that when you're given testimony you really want to go like, take your time because you want to be very accurate so your processing speed will be low. And then the doctor's like, well, yeah, I guess, but it was still off even for that. He didn't say it like that. That's basically what he says. And then he says, and wouldn't you say that substance use would slow down your processing speed? And the doctor's like, yeah, probably barring like being all high on substances and having Alzheimer's or something, you should be able to remember them three words. And then the lawyer's like, well, how do you know it wasn't high on the stand? And it's like, why are we even going back and forth about this? It's just silly. And it's just like the lawyers try to, like, just poke holes in the expert on anything, even if it doesn't matter. They're just trying to make the expert look bad. So one size trying to make expert look good. One size trying to make the expert look bad, poke these holes, some of which it don't even matter. It's just like, what does that have to do with anything? Could he been high? Could have been high. Like, yeah, probably so. All right, now let's see. I gotta look at my notes for a second. All right. Next thing, I try to kind of keep some bullet points of, like, the big punches that I saw thrown on either side. The other thing that the doctor said was that early stage patients that are diagnosed with substance use disorder often lack insight and they often feel like the substances, the substance, the drug, whatever, actually helps them. Because I think the lawyer says sometimes the people feel like the subs helps them. And he says, yeah, particularly like early stage people, they sometimes feel like the substance helps them. And when the doctor said that, I was like, I feel like anyone who's actively using early stage or not tells themselves that the substance helps them. And there is some truth in the fact that substance helps them. Even if it's helping to. To reduce the withdrawal they go through if they don't take the substance is still helping them. So I feel like the doctor was trying to say, yeah, like somebody who lacks insight, they may think this. And then he said, well, wasn't there times when Johnny was sober and. And doctor said, yeah, there apparently were times when Johnny was sober and he knew that the substances were the cause of all his problems and he knew they weren't helping him. So. But I want you guys to know that's pretty common when people go through periods of sobriety, their insight and judgment really is more intact, and they will know that. But even if someone knew that and they told you that for 10 years and they realized back and they're back to an active using, they probably are going to fall back into, well, this substance is helping me. Right? And so I guess what I'm saying is you can see that not just in early substance use disorder patients, like, early on, you see that throughout, or at least I do. That's a very common thing. And it's. It's kind of bizarre when you see it the doctor also said people substance use disorder lack insight and judgment, which, y' all know, I'm about helping people, substance use disorders. But I can't lie. That's 100% true. Parts of the brain that allow you to even see what's happening really are shut down. And I think all of this argument about cognitive impairment, what Amber Heard's side is trying to say is that that, number one, the cognitive impairment probably led him to have less impulse control, which makes him more likely to have done the ipv. And also, I think they're trying to show and maybe that he doesn't remember it and that's why he won't, like, admit to it, is that he doesn't remember it. Because there was a whole lot of conversation about. About blackouts. Um, and the doctor sort of testified, yeah, if you use alcohol and. Or cocaine, you can have blackouts. I will tell you this. One of the things that the doctor said when he was talking about blackouts, he said, you know, like, it's not uncommon to see people passed out. But I want you guys to know there's a difference in pass out and blackout. Two totally different things. Pass out means go to sleep. Like, you drink too much, you fell asleep. Okay? That's called pass out. Blackout is you're still functioning. Walking around, doing things, driving the car. Hopefully not, but it happens. Going to work, making phone calls, texting people. You're a lot. You're a. I won't say alive. You're awake, but you're not really driving the car. And you don't. You're kind of in this weird autopilot zone, and you. And you don't remember it, or you. Or you remember only little pieces of it the next day. That's what a blackout is. Alcohol is very likely to cause a blackout. Alcohol or benzodiazepines. He said cocaine will cause it. And the example he gave was somebody that had used a lot of drugs together, and they caused brain lesions. And the brain lesions caused a person not to be able to remember as an example of how that cocaine can cause it. And, yeah, I guess that could happen. Like, if you use so much drugs and you cause big, giant brain damage like that, you have blackout. But cocaine itself typically isn't necessarily going to cause someone to have a blackout, but something like a benzodiazepine or alcohol will cause someone to have a blackout and not be able to remember what they did or how it happened. That is a fair statement. And most of the people that I see that have not just Substance use disorders. But alcohol and. Or benzodiazepine use disorders really don't know how bad they are when they're using. And so. And I've got videos about this where I talk about the kind of denial that people with, like, that are alcoholic have is different than the kind of denial that let's say someone's cocaine or pain pills have because they literally don't remember how they were. That's a true statement. Y' all know I'm on the Johnny side, but I gotta tell you what's true. That's true, dude. Like, I cannot even deny. If they had me up there, I'd be like, you got that one? That's. That's totally, 100% true. Definitely there. Now, you think. You guys know, if y' all saw when this trial first started, the first video I did about this, I even mentioned, I'm like, oh, my God. Like, he talks so slow. It's making me crazy. I felt kind of bad because I said that, but, oh, my God, can Johnny Depp talk faster? So it's kind of hard because it's like anybody that's watching him speak, it does seem like his processing speed is slower. And I don't think you have to be like, this big, fancy psychiatrist to see that. I think anybody could see that. But then I think the lawyer makes a good example, too, is that he is testifying. And we probably are more likely to. To think more clearly and really take our time to answer and make sure we're answering correctly when we're on trial. And. And he could have been high. I don't really see how that helped that lawyer. And he could have been high. Like, maybe it doesn't have brain damage. He was high or whatever. I don't really know how that helps the case, but the lawyer somehow wanted that to come out. Let's see, the. Dr. Spiegler also said that another reason why he thinks Johnny Depp committed the IPV was because he was so disinhibited, meaning he was so intoxicated so many times. And when you're intoxicated, you have decreased impulse control, which is true. And also you have a decreased ability to read social cues appropriately. So things that would happen, like when you are normally sober, you might not even react to or think that much about, or you might interpret a different way. But when you're intoxicated, your impulse control is down and you're not reading social cues the same way. And that increases your risk, which I totally agree with. All the things he's saying about here are the risk factors and why everything he was saying is really dead on, I think, where it gets kind of gray. And this is literally, like, the very last thing that comes out in the boxing match between the lawyer and Dr. Stegall was, okay, yeah. Like, just because you have all of these risk factors doesn't mean you did it. Which I would have to agree with. You can have every risk factor there is for ipv, but still, just because you have all the risk factors doesn't mean that you. You know, it's the whole, like, correlation doesn't equal causation. And the doctor, like, yeah, well, like, 90% of people who commit IPV have all these risk factors. And. And I did have kind of an issue with that when he said that. I'm like, okay, I could see that, like, people that commit domestic violence, 90% of them, like, have all these things that Johnny Depp has. That's correct. But the people who have all the things that Johnny Depp has, do 90% of them commit IPV? It's in reverse. I don't know if you guys are following me, but, yes, 90% of people who beat up their spouse probably did it under the influence. They had impulse control. They had all these things. But just because you're under the influence, 90% of people under the influence do not commit IPV. So the statistic does not work the same way going in both directions. So that's definitely one issue I have overall. This doctor held his own. Like, nobody on her side has held their own, I think, like, and. And I got some questions for y'. All. I'm just, like, the mental health person. I'm explaining to y' all substance use. And y' all know I'm, like, a true crime junkie. But. And I follow, like, several, like, lawyer YouTubers. Like, I follow Natalie, lawyer chick, and the law nerds. I follow all them because I just love watching them. But there are a couple things about the rules, about I don't understand. So I'm gonna ask you because I'm like, what's with this? Hold on. I got them written down because I was gonna ask y'. All. I don't get it or understand it, okay? My number one question is, why did it take so doggone long for the judge to call out Dr. Spiegler and say, just answer the question. Because he would just go on these rants and tirades. You just stop and take breaks and say, let me tell you what, I want y' all jewelry to know about all this. I Mean, he would just, like, go on and on. And in criminal trials, I've seen in the past, like, if they say something more than yes or no, that judge is like, just answer the question. I mean, just, like, gets on him. But this whole trial, I feel like everybody's just allowed to sort of go off and elaborate and go on all these tangents. And this is the first time I have seen this judge come in and say, just answer the question. And, I mean, this was way far into this guy testifying, and his testimony was argument. I mean, it was all over the place. Is it, like, different and criminal than civil? Is that what it is? Like, I don't understand. Why is it just the difference in judges? Like, some judges are stricter and some judges aren't as strict. Like, why is that the rule? Because any of these other criminal trials, like, just answer the question, they don't let you elaborate. But all these witnesses, all of them, they just go on and on. This one just especially did it. That's one of my questions. The other question I have, this is a law question, is I don't. I just do not understand this whole hearsay thing. Like, you're not allowed to say what you said or what you heard. I just don't. I don't really get that. I could kind of get, like, you're not allowed to say, like, if your best friend told you that your other friend did xyz, like, okay, that's just, like, rumor. You didn't see him do it. Like, you shouldn't be able to say that. But not to be able to say what you said, what you said. I don't understand that. So I just don't understand why that's a rule. Like, I understand that it is a rule. I just don't understand why it's a rule. So y' all gonna have to explain it to me. I'm gonna have to. I'm gonna have to ask one of my lawyer youtuber people, because I don't get that. And this is my last question. Why in the world is the jury not allowed to take notes this trial? Not just this trial, but in trial. It's been going on for weeks and weeks. I watched this one guy's testimony, and I had a stop. I made all these notes just to remember my points, to talk to y'. All. Like, front, back, all of them scribbling everywhere. I'm trying to remember all these things that this guy says. I'm like, how can this jury possibly remember all of this information for weeks and weeks? I was just trying to, like, listen to this one guy's testimony. Like, why is that a rule? I'm sure there's a reason. That's why I'm asking y'. All. I just don't understand, like, why these are, like, the rules. And I need to know, because I'll get less frustrated when I watch these trials if I know why these are the rules. All right, let's see who's with us now that I've gone on my big tirade and see what you guys think. If you have any questions or if you have any answers for me about why the rules are the rules, I just don't get it. Doesn't make sense to me. Let's see here. Diggler TC Says, hey, I haven't seen your name in a while. Diggler. I can't see a jury in the Depth case taking these discrediting techniques too seriously. Just my opinion. Yeah, I'm with you. I. I mean, hopefully. I mean, I know they're not, like, mental health specialists, which I am in. And so when I see that, I'm like, this is ridiculous. Like, both sides going to all these experts. I mean, it's just. It's just. It's just splinting hairs. It's kind of silly. So I'm kind of with you. I'm hoping that the jury can be like, okay, people, come on. Like, we got it. Let's see. Amy says only a bit. Okay. The only bit of this I've heard of is from you. I haven't seen much of that, but pics of Johnny Depp are all the same. Face being sad and distressed, it creeps me out. Okay, you're talking about, like, the evidence. Every picture you see of him, he looks. That's true. He does look sad and stressed out more in the pictures. He does look more sad and stressed out than her. Agreed. Alexandra says she remembered two of the words. A lot of you said you didn't remember the words I say. AJ Says Amber is abusive, but Johnny Depp is a serious addict, and addicts have violent psychotic episodes. I would say not all addicts get violent, but if you're in a relationship with someone who's addicted, you probably are being mistreated in some kind of way. Just having a partner, struggling with an addiction, there's some. It's. It's not great. I'm not blaming him. Just saying. Lacey says so mad, stupid work calls made me hop off the chat, which is clearly more important. I know, right? Yeah. We got. We're trying to Watch this trial work. You gotta leave us long way to try to watch this. I'm with you. Let's see here. Amy says study on rat shows cocaine speeds up their perception of time and MJ slows it down. Yes, I saw that study. I did a video about that. And it's super interesting. You can go on YouTube and like watch the actual. Like, you can tell it's old, like when they did the study. And it is interesting about the time they, they take these rats, they put some of. Well, they take these rats, they put them in the box, they teach them that they can press this lever and get food, but. But only every so many seconds or minutes. And they, they almost like let the rats do it long enough that they know exactly. Like, they start learning exactly when to push it because they figure out the time, the timing. And then they put the rats on cocaine and. And then they put the other rats on marijuana to see if they could then still push the lever at the right time. And the. The rats on cocaine start pushing it too soon because they think it's time already, as you might imagine. And the rats that are on marijuana, they miss it. It's like 10 minutes later. Then they press it and they like, miss their window because, like, they can only get the food if they press it in the right time window. And that's what Amy's talking about. Super interesting. Amy must be kind of a nerd about these things. Like I am. Ellen says, oh, o yeah, the not remembering thing is nasty. She could have recorded a blackout moving thing. Yeah. Sarah says, will you do a video that talks about alcoholic denial? I actually have several videos on that. Sarah, if you go to the main page of my channel, there is. There's a whole playlist just on alcohol. And I bet it is somewhere in that playlist if you want to see that. But alcoholic now is different. Let's see here. Alexandra says, I took a public speaking course and they explained that when people go, it's a vocal way of thinking about what you want to say. They taught us to refrain from stuttering, be silent and answer. Of course it is right. It's just. It's like you're kind of buying your brain time because you're. You're trying to get the next thing you want out. Like, makes perfect sense. Of course. We all do that. Ellen says, land lumber YouTube guy is in the court and comments on what the jury is doing. Yes, I, I heard some. One of these lawyer ones. I channel lawyer YouTube channels that I watch. Somebody said they had a person that was in the. They were what? They had another lawyer that was in the courtroom, and they were just watching the jury, and. And that lawyer was reporting that several of these jurors are just looking at Amber Heard with, like, the skeptical. I like. Like, you can see it on their faces that they're just like, I'm just not even believing this. I thought that was super interesting. I would totally love to be there and, like, watch their facial expressions and body language, because you could just get so much from it. Especially when Amber heard. She keeps looking at them, because I think the same YouTuber said that there were other people in jewelry. They're just trying to, like, not look at her. Like, quit looking at me. It would just be super interesting to. To get to see all that. All right, everybody, thank you for hanging out with me. It's kind of fun. Get to talk about all this. Weigh in, as usual. Tell me what you think. Are you team Amber or team Johnny? Let's be nice to each other about it. It's just a mess of a situation. I'll see you next time.