Depp v. Heard — Trial Archive
Person Richard Shaw Depp v. Heard← All People
Expert Witness

Richard Shaw

Courtroom still of Richard Shaw.

Psychiatrist called to address the ethics of an opposing expert’s testimony

2022 Defamation Trial Apr 11 – Jun 1, 2022
Called by plaintiff
65 lines 3 proceedings 6 highlights

About

Richard Shaw, a Stanford psychiatry professor, testified for Depp in rebuttal to psychiatrist David Spiegel. Shaw argued that Spiegel violated the Goldwater Rule by offering opinions about Depp’s personality traits and cognitive functioning without examining him or obtaining his consent and, in Shaw’s view, without sufficient data. The court limited Shaw’s testimony to ethical issues, not an assessment of Depp’s mental condition. Shaw also said that general risk factors for intimate-partner violence could not establish what happened in this case.

On cross-examination, Shaw acknowledged that Spiegel had twice asked to examine Depp and that Depp had declined. He also agreed that the court had authorized Spiegel to testify. Shaw said he had not previously published or presented work on the Goldwater Rule or served on a committee addressing it.

Trial Record (3)

2022 Defamation Trial Apr 11, 2022 – Jun 1, 2022 3 proceedings

Day 21

Direct Direct Examination of Richard Shaw Richard Shaw Stephanie Calnan 4 52
Summary

Stanford psychiatrist Richard Shaw, called by Depp, testified that Heard's expert Dr. Spiegel violated the APA's Goldwater Rule by opining on Depp's personality and cognition without examination.

Highlights (4)
Quote

“about 2,000 psychiatrists responded, a thousand of whom expressed very negative opinions about Senator Goldwater, and made comments such as, for example, he was a megalomaniac, he was a paranoid schizophrenic, that he had narcissistic personality disorder.”

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“the main premise of the Goldwater Rule is that it was improper for a psychiatrist to render professional opinion about a public figure unless they had personally and closely evaluated them.”

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶
Quote

“my opinion is that he did not. He expressed a number of professional opinions about Mr. Depp that we heard about yesterday. And, again, he did so without an evaluation, without consent.”

Open in transcript → Watch this moment ▶

Evidence From Their Proceedings (6)

Documents Unclear

American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law (AAPL) forensic psychiatry practice guidelines (2015)

Catalog entry →
Documents Unclear

American Medical Association Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs 2017 Honolulu resolution

Catalog entry →
Documents Unclear

APA Goldwater Rule (Section 7.3) and its 2017 revision reasserting prohibition on psychiatric opinions without personal evaluation

Catalog entry →
Documents Unclear

Blaustein Deposition Transcript (Reviewed by Shaw)

The deposition transcript of Dr. Alan Blaustein, Depp's psychiatrist, reviewed by plaintiff's expert Dr. Richard Shaw in forming his opinion.

Catalog entry →
Documents Admitted

Defendant's Exhibit 1904 — Defendant's Exhibit 1904 — APA ethics committee opinions on

Defendant's Exhibit 1904 — APA ethics committee opinions on principles of medical ethics, containing language that psychiatrists have argued the Goldwater Rule is unsound for…

Catalog entry →
Documents Unclear

DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for narcissistic personality disorder (9 criteria, 5 required for diagnosis)

Catalog entry →