the Perry the Platypus reference was spot on... that guy looked exactly like Dr Doofenshmirtz

Linor’s voice is so grating…

Oh no, a cheating, maliously lying, abusive, AH faced the consequence of her own actions… don't get duped by Amber

My gramps was so amazing and helped me asachild asmymomanddad beat peoples butnothim iteasmy

My grandfather died but he had grandma really hurt him and had bruises and headed so ya men can also get bruises and violent and me my gramps ihad do help my gramps imisshimalways

What if a lawyer intentionally files fraudulent documents in court that contains material misrepresentation of facts, doesn’t follow a judge’s order, take’s a higher court’s ruling, altered and manipulated it to try to actually steal money from another probate case

40:32 Camille said when Elaine got up there w/ 1 unorganized notepad she felt a little bad for her because no one on her team was helping her. Not once.

Karen seems a lot more respectful toward a jury than Robert. She is looking for juries she would respect. Robert seems to be looking for the most gullible.

Thanks so much for this awesome video!

I don't know how I missed this in the last two years but I really enjoyed it. I hadn't heard of Ms Limor before but I found the other three through this trial. Thank you for doing this!

Thank you for this very important

Heating and air, how long is that covered for, I cannot find a consistent answer, some say its 4 years, some 1 year, some according to the useful life, how long is the builder supposed to warranty this for.

Just saw this now. Great stuff Chris.

Thank you for sharing! Very informative!

MCLE means Minimum Continuing Legal Education

This video is a goldmine of information for anyone new to crypto.

This was a very informative video.

Very well done 🎉🎉🎉🎉

Bruce!!!

Litigators corner I have the distinct pleasure of being with Allen Talman who they say was a homicide detective, now he is an attorney, which is better? And, who pays more? So, he is making an impression in the field of law...Check it out.Taplin v. Lumpkin, No. W-21-CV-192-ADA, 2022 WL 447571 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 14, 2022)

Underrated

nine:zerozero/\m

Matthew I commend you!!! Im a new subscriber to you! Cause hey we NEEDED THIS!! These panelists and yourself are great!! I knew it would be great to watch despite the Audi bumps in the beginning, but who cares you are definitely made up for it and kept my interest all the way through the video very very entertaining and you all deserve millions of handclaps dollars, and views. I just want to say thank you for this. I am very infatuated with the Johnny and Amber defamation case I watch Camille crush Amber over and over again, but I seen a lot of clips in here that I had not seen yet. Although I watch the trial, sometimes it gets boring and you skip through 👀 a lot or walk away from the screen so it was pretty interesting to see a lot of differentthings from my perspective and new things!!! Thanks y’all!! Good bless you all and your future cases, endeavors, & KZbin contents🙏🏼

1:05:28 well damn Peter is seems. It’s either the organized and read off of paper or be disorganized and don’t read off a paper I mean unless of course your name is Juan Martinez. Hahaha he ripped Jody apart the whole Trial no notes. Well, hardly any notes at least.

59:08 I never saw limor or Emily before but I love love love limors uppity hyper and active input she has a wonderful sense of humor, and Emily balances her out with the more calm, comedic smooth type of the input. I love that those two are great just as much as I enjoyed Peter and Bruce channels

36:43 Camille like who put these got damn bottles here?!?! 😡 it’s been enough going on about damn bottles in this case😂

The freaking pop corn omggggggg I died came back & died over again!!!! I’m not coming back this time 36:15

Hey Peter!!! Hey Bruce!!!!!! ❤

thanks for posting!

Fascinating stuff!!

Why did she cough😂🎉🎉🎉

Isaacs Baruch and the amica cream!

I came to this after watching the Karen read because I'm very nervous about this jury

How did I miss this panel of lawyers talking about this case !!?! This was incredible. Thank you all for taking the time to do this !

No jailtime for greedy and corrupt lawyers?? Are they above the law??

I want to know how Elaine is not on trouble for lying. She lied about evidence and Amber not donating due to legal bills etc.

They will be talking about this guy after Donald Von Schitzenpantz gets convicted.

I love bruce. I found his programme very fair and constructive. Thank you

I watched through Emily’s channel and if it weren’t for her I don’t think I could have stomached AMBER on the stand or the way Elaine and Rottenborn behaved while questioning Johnny Depp. They came across to me as abusive and unprofessional in their treatment of JD. Also, Elaine TESTIFIED on behalf of ALH both at opening then during and in her unethical interviews and documentary appearances. It was unsettling and very annoying to see professionals behave the way BR and EB behaved as lawyers.

the clippers are the sorriest group of mondays. everyone hates mondays so that is what i call DEI folks or n words.

fennies?

this guy?

Thank you for this video and great work. Awesome!

This is an absolutely impressive and informative presentation. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and experience.

You need to pay attention the knowledge being expressed. Great stuff.

This would be better with an interviewer who didn’t speak so fast and didn’t stutter and stammer all over the place🤷🏼‍♀️. Content is very informative 👍

07:55 True. Sometimes there’s such an overwhelming amount of physical, chronological, photographic and audio evidence etc it can be tricky deciding what evidence to adduce and what to omit.

Smug

Embarrassing!

Bruce Rivers and Peter Tragos were definitely not as knowledgeable about the case as Andrea Burkhart and Nick Rekieta (who knew a considerably amount more because of That Umbrella Guy). They were engaging and able to comment on what was going on at the time, but didn't know key facts, which made a huge difference. Example: Tragos didn't know there was no pre- or post- nup when he was commenting on Heard's direct and cross, & that lack of info affected the quality of his commentary.