Richard Gilbert — Direct/Cross/Redirect
229 linesCOURT BAILIFF: All rise. — Please be seated and come to order.
THE COURT: Good morning.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Good morning, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Do we have any preliminary matters at this time?
MR. ROTTENBORN: Very brief. —
THE COURT: Sure. Want to come
MR. ROTTENBORN: Good morning.
THE COURT: Good morning, sir.
MR. ROTTENBORN: This is just very briefly about Dr. Gilbert. We're not trying to get him excluded, but I think -- it's early. But I do want to be clear, based on Your Honor's rulings yesterday. So this is -- he issued a fairly -- this was in rebuttal. So fair game, you know, fairly wholesome opinion. But they say he is going to testify about the finger injury sustained, as well as Dr. Jordan and Dr. Moore's opinions relating to it. So since this is in rebuttal and they didn't call him in case-in-chief, Dr. Jordan's out, she never testified.
THE COURT: I agree with you.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Dr. Moore, here's the issue: Doctor -- in his deposition, Dr. Gilbert seemed to believe that Amber had said the phone took the finger off, smashing the phone against the wall, which Amber never said. She said, I don't know how it happened:
THE COURT: That sounds like it's for
MR. ROTTENBORN: No, I know, but just want to -- this is part of the rebuttal. issue that we talked-about yesterday. So Dr. Moore, in his testimony, never mentioned the phone. He never said -- basically what Dr. Gilbert wants to do is say, given the competing potential causes that I've heard, there's a phone and there's a bottle, and there's, you know, whatever Dr. Moore and there's, you know, whatever Dr. Moore testified to. It's fair for him to rebut what Dr. Moore testified to, but if he's testifying about saying, well, it didn't happen with the phone, that's, first of all, that's not what Amber testified to, but that would be rebutting lay witness testimony, which isn't appropriate. I want to make sure we're on the same page that he can't testify about a phone as a possible cause or not.
THE COURT: But that's his opinion, right?
MS. VASQUEZ: Yeah.
MR. ROTTENBORN: But it's in rebuttal, so has to be rebutting something from our case, and there's been no testimony on that.
THE COURT: But when he's rebutting, he can have an opinion, a different opinion, right?
MR. ROTTENBORN: Correct.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. ROTTENBORN: But I'm saying there's been no evidence put forward by an expert witness in our case that the slamming a phone against the wall took the finger off. Amber said I saw him slam the phone against the wall, I don't know how his finger came off, but if he's saying Ms. Heard said it happened when the phone slammed against the wall, that's him improperly setting up a strawman rebuttal argument on a lay witness, because Dr. Moore did not testify to that.
MR. MURPHY: Dr. Moore testified about all sorts of things that could have caused this injury. This is the witness that's rebutting it. We're entitled to say --
MR. ROTTENBORN: He didn't testify about a phone.
THE COURT: I'm going to overrule the objection on that. Anything else?
MR. ROTTENBORN: No, thank you.
THE COURT: Okay. Good.
THE COURT: All right, Then, are we ready for the jury?
MS. BREDEHOFT: Yes, Your Honor.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
THE COURT: Allright. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. All right. Have your seat. Allright. Your next witness.
MR. MONIZ: We call Dr. Richard Gilbert, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Dr. Gilbert. RICHARD GILBERT, M.D. a witness called on behalf of the Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant, having been first duly sworn by the Clerk, testified as follows: Good morning, sir.
THE WITNESS: Good morning.
MR. MONIZ: Good morning, Dr. Gilbert,
DR. GILBERT: Good morning.
MR. MONIZ: Would you please state * your name for the record.
DR. GILBERT: Richard Stephen Gilbert.
MR. MONIZ: And what is your occupation?
DR. GILBERT: I am an orthopedic surgeon, and I have a subspecialty training in surgery of the hand and upper extremity. Q. Dr. Gilbert, where do you work, currently? A. I currently work in New York, in Long Island at Northwell Health. Q. And you mentioned you have a specialty. Can you tell us a little bit more about what your specialty is?
DR. GILBERT: So, after medical school, I trained in orthopedic surgery, and I did an orthopedic surgery residency. And for a year thereafter, I did a hand and upper extremity surgery - fellowship, so my practice for the past 22 years has been limited to surgery of the hand, wrist, and elbow. and elbow.
MR. MONIZ: And I think you may have gotten ahead of me there. But how long have you been practicing?
DR. GILBERT: 22 years.
MR. MONIZ: Okay. What percentage of your practice ‘over the past 22 years has involved surgery?
DR. GILBERT: Approximately, one-third of my practice.
MR. MONIZ: Okay. And other than that one-third that involves surgery, what does the rest of your practice.entail?
DR. GILBERT: The rest of my practice entails some academic work, but, mostly, seeing patients in the office, seeing them either pre or postoperatively, a large portion of hand surgeons treat patients nonoperatively. Q. In terms of the surgeries that you do, can you describe for us the types of surgeries that you will perform?
DR. GILBERT: So, again, I limit my practice to hand, wrist, and elbow. I would say, approximately, 2275 percent or so of my practice is limited to the PLANE 1) May 26, 2022 hand itself. And this really varies from anything from conditions like carpal tunnel syndrome. to tendonitis to injuries such as amputations, fractures, sharp lacerations, et cetera.
MR. MONIZ: Over the course of your 22 years of. practice, how many surgeries would you estimate you've performed?
DR. GILBERT: I performed about 3- to 400 surgeries a year, so a rough estimate would be, approximately, 10,000, maybe a little less. 1] Q_ Where are you currently licensed?
DR. GILBERT: In New York.
MR. MONIZ: And how long have you been licensed in New York? 15. A_ I've been licensed in New York since 1994, so that would be 28 years. And do you have any certifications?
DR. GILBERT: Yes.
MR. MONIZ: And can you tellus about those?
DR. GILBERT: I am board certified by the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery, and I have a certificate of added qualifications in surgery of the hand from the American Society for Surgery of the Hand.
MR. MONIZ: When did you receive your board certification?
MR. MONIZ: And can you describe for us what current positions you hold?
DR. GILBERT: I am currently an assistant professor of orthopedic surgery at Northwell Health, and I'm also the president elect of the New York Society for Surgery of the Hand. 12, Q In what professional organizations are you a member? 14. A I'm a member of multiple orthopedic organizations, including the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery, the American Association of Orthopedic Surgery and the American Society for Surgery of the Hand, as well as the New York Society for Surgery of the Hand.
MR. MONIZ: Have you published any articles in your field?
DR. GILBERT: Yes, I have. T _DEPOS Have you testified as an expert before? Yes, I have. Can you ballpark for us how many times? Certainly less than ten, over the past 22 years. OY 0
MR. MONIZ: Your Honor, at this time, we'd like to offer Dr. Gilbert as ‘an expert in the field of orthopedic surgery, specializing. in the hand.
THE COURT: Allright. Any objection?
MR. ROTTENBORN: No objection, Your Honor
THE COURT: So moved.
MR. MONIZ: So, Dr. Gilbert, what work were you asked to do in connection with this case? <A _ So, I was asked to review medical records, radiographs, pictures, as well testimonies and depositions related to Mr. Depp's finger injury.
MR. MONIZ: Okay. And to your understanding, what is Mr. Depp's explanation of how his finger-was injured? injured?
DR. GILBERT: He-describes that he was in Australia and his right hand was over the side of a bar when a vodka bottle was thrown at his hand, injuring his right middle finger. And he describes that that vodka bottle exploded.
MR. MONIZ: Are you aware of other explanations for that injury?
DR. GILBERT: There have been multiple other explanations, but I think the one that was brought out was by Ms. Heard, who believed that Mr. Depp was holding a landline and anger -- was punching it against the wall,.and this resulted in his right middle finger injury.
MR. MONIZ: Based on your review of the medical records and other documents in connection with Mr. Depp's finger injury, how would you describe the nature of the injury to Mr. Depp's finger?
DR. GILBERT: Well, the nature of the injury was, he had what we described as a comminuted fracture of the distal phalanx, meaning there was a fracture of the tip of the finger, and comminuted meaning that there were multiple pieces. So this is some type of blunt force with a high mechanism of injury. He also sustained loss of the tissue along what's called the ulnar side of the finger, towards the little finger, and this appears, based upon my review of the pictures, to be some type of sharp laceration because it represented a clean edges of the wound.
MR. MONIZ: Can you take a look at Plaintiff's Exhibit 60.
MR. MONIZ: And pull up to -- go to page 3.
MR. MONIZ: And, Dr. Gilbert, are you familiar with this document?
DR. GILBERT: Yes.
MR. MONIZ: And what.is it?
DR. GILBERT: So these are two radiographs, X-rays, of Mr. Depp's fingers — finger, his middle finger.
MR. MONIZ: Okay.
DR. GILBERT: And—
MR. MONIZ: Sorry, just to stop you.
MR. MONIZ: Your Honor, may we publish Your Honor, may we publish this to the jury as a demonstrative?
THE COURT: Any objection?
MR. ROTTENBORN: No objection. THE.COURT: Allright. We'll identify it as 60, page 3, and publish to the jury.
MR. MONIZ: And, Dr. Gilbert, sorry to cut you off there.
DR. GILBERT: No, that's okay.
MR. MONIZ: Can you just tell the jury what we're looking at here in this X-ray?
DR. GILBERT: We're looking at two X-rays of Mr. Depp's right middle finger after the injury, and towards the tip of the finger, there's a fracture, again, what I describe as a comminuted fracture, meaning there are multiple pieces at the tip. There's also a transverse component to the fracture, closer to the joint.
MR. MONIZ: In your view, what types of mechanisms can cause this sort of injury?
DR. GILBERT: So this is a mechanism of injury that has high velocity or force, generally a crush-type injury. A simple fall would not result in a comminuted fracture, such as seen in these X-rays.
MR. MONIZ: And we're using the term "comminuted fracture," can we just define that quickly for us?
DR. GILBERT: So, again, comminuted, and it's not particular to a finger, is a medical term for a fracture that has multiple fragments.
MR. MONIZ: In your opinion, could this injury have been sustained in the manner Mr. Depp described?
DR. GILBERT: I do believe so.
MR. MONIZ: And how might that work? How might a thrown vodka bottle produce an injury like this?
DR. GILBERT: So,a vodka bottle, which is a hard object, would have crushed the tip of the finger, resulting in the comminuted fracture, and in addition, as the vodka bottle broke, the glass would have lacerated the finger, resulting in the soft tissue loss that was also seen with this injury.
MR. MONIZ: What's your assessment of the description of the cause of the injury offered by Ms. Heard? +A I think that's highly unlikely.
DR. GILBERT: I think that's highly unlikely.
MR. MONIZ: And why is that?
DR. GILBERT: Because, one, in general, when an injury is caused by punching against a wall or a hard object, it is extremely rare to see an injury to the tips of the fingers, which is seen with Mr. Depp's injury. Generally, you're holding something with a fist; and that, in general, leads to injuries, most commonly, of the knuckles here or fractures of the metacarpal. We call these boxer fractures. Second most common, after those, would be injuries to these.
DR. GILBERT: But as you can see, if you're holding something and make -- hitting against something, it is very unlikely that the tips on the fingers will be injured. In addition, Just taking into account the radiographs and the picture of the injury, I would not believe that a blunt force, solely a blunt force against a wall would result in the soft tissue loss.
MR. MONIZ: What other injuries, if any, would you expect to see on Mr. Depp's hand if the injury had occurred as Ms. Heard described?
DR. GILBERT: So, if you would have - if that were May 26, 2022 the cause of the injury, you would certainly -- that would be a dorsally directed -- so this is a dorsum, the back of hand, as.opposed to the palmar side. So if you're punching against something, you should certainly expect an injury to the nailbed, and those are always seen in those type of injuries, if there is an injury to the tip of the finger, which, again, I said is rare. So you'd see either loss of the nail or blood underneath the nail called a subungual hematoma. ll Q_ In your review of the medical records, did you see any sign of anything like that?
DR. GILBERT: None, whatsoever.
MR. MONIZ: In your view, is the injury -- can you explain to us exactly why you think the injury is consistent with Mr. Depp's-description?
DR. GILBERT: Well, again, his hand -- he describes his hand being held over a marble bar, which is a firm - something firm, unyielding, and the bottle hit against the finger. So basically, the finger was crushed, resulting in, again, what I described as a comminuted fracture, And as Mr. Depp as a comminuted fracture. And as Mr. Depp described, the bottle exploded, so it's certainly reasonable that the glass that exploded, as well, led to the soft tissue loss along the ulnar aspect of his finger.
MR. MONIZ: Now, did you observe the testimony of Dr. Richard Moore? -
DR. GILBERT: Yes, I did.
MR. MONIZ: And he testified about Mr. Depp's finger injury as well, right?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. MONIZ: Did you agree with Dr. Moore's testimony? 13. A _ Certain parts of his testimony, I did, Okay.
DR. GILBERT: But not all of it.
MR. MONIZ: Focusing on the parts that you -- well, first of all, why don't you tell us what you agree on.
MR. MONIZ: Okay. What.did you disagree with?
DR. GILBERT: Well, I disagreed with several things that he said. He first said that he does not believe that the mechanism of injury could be as described by Mr. Depp, holding the hand on the side of a marble bar because he said it was a palmar injury. And there was a palmar component to the injury, when I'm talking about the soft tissue loss, but there's also a dorsal, meaning the back of the finger. So the soft tissue loss was actually, if you looked at the pictures which were shown when Dr.
DR. GILBERT: Moore testified, the injury goes like this (indicating), so it's an angle or an oblique-type injury, and there's no way that anybody could determine whether or not it was a palmar-directed force, meaning from the palm side or dorsally directed force. But certainly either are plausible.
MR. MONIZ: Okay. Anything else come to mind that you disagreed with.
DR. GILBERT: Well, he also described that this was definite - well, he thought that this was a pinching or what he described as an avulsion-type injury, and that's referring to the soft tissue loss. That's certainly possible, but if you look at the pictures that were shown when he testified, the laceration looked fairly clean. There were clean edges, they were not jagged.
DR. GILBERT: Generally, when an avulsion or a pinch-type injury, you see a very irregular border to the skin that's pinched off, you could imagine, as opposed to something cleaner that would be lacerated by, let's say, a piece of glass, knife, or whatever. And that's more consistent with the pictures of Mr. Depp's injury.
MR. MONIZ: And we're using the term "soft tissue loss," and just to make sure we're on the same page, can you just tell the jury quickly what you're referring to there?
DR. GILBERT: So he-there were two components to his injury, one, the fracture of the bone, and two, he had loss of the soft tissue so that the bone was exposed; so that amputated part that was found at the bar.
MR. MONIZ: Now, you were saying that Dr. Moore 3. testified that this was an avulsion and said -- meaning a pinching injury, right?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. MONIZ: Why do you believe it's more likely that it was a laceration?
DR. GILBERT: Well, again, in general, a pinch-type injury results in one much more damaged, the remaining tissue, but the remaining tissue is usually very irregular, the borders are jagged, and that's not what was depicted in the pictures.
MR. MONIZ: Dr. Moore also testified that he thought a vodka bottle might not have sufficient: force to cause the injury here. Is that your understanding of his testimony? <A Correct.
MR. MONIZ: What's your response to that?
DR. GILBERT: I certainly believe that a vodka bottle that was thrown from a distance against a hand that was resting on a marble bar is more than sufficient force to result in this fracture and soft tissue loss.
MR. MONIZ: Now, in looking at the medical records and the pictures of Mr. Depp's hand, what was the condition of his nail?
DR. GILBERT: There was no injury to the nail.
MR. MONIZ: And other than what you've already told us, how does that factor into your analysis, if at all, the fact that there was no injury to the nail? JJ A Well, it makes it highly unlikely that the mechanism of injury described by Ms. Heard resulted in this injury because you really would always see an injury to the nail and/or nailbed.
MR. MONIZ: Do you have any opinion regarding the direction of the injury?
DR. GILBERT: Well, it's certainly, based upon the soft tissue loss, it's an angled injury or what we call, medically, an oblique injury, because the soft tissue is at angle. He lost some of the tissue on the back of the finger, as well as the palm side, primarily along the palm side. But other than that, you can't make any assumptions, unless you saw a videotape of this injury, nobody could tell you definitively what the direction of the injury was.
MR. MONIZ: Dr. Moore also commented on the absence of fragments of broken glass in Mr. Depp's injury. Do you remember that?
DR. GILBERT: Yes, I do.
MR. MONIZ: And how does the absence of glass fragments factor into your analysis?
DR. GILBERT: It really doesn't. I've seen hundreds, if not probably, at least, 500 or more of glass injuries, and I would say probably the majority, you don't see glass in these injuries. It is much more common to see glass embedded in the wounds when you're talking about very fine glass. So if - to say a wine glass would explode or something of that nature, where you get little tiny shards. But in general, when you have thick glass, such as you see in a bottle, or a pane of glass, you generally don't see because they break into bigger pieces, and you generally don't see the glass. But you certainly can, but it's not surprising that you don't.
MR. MONIZ: Can you definitively state how this injury occurred?
DR. GILBERT: No. Nobody can definitively state.
MR. MONIZ: I have no further questions, Your Honor,
THE COURT: Allright. Cross-examination.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Thank you, Your Honor.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Good morning, Dr. Gilbert.
DR. GILBERT: Good morning.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Now you're being paid a thousand dollars an hour for your work on this case, correct?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: And you agree, just to sum up how Mr. Moniz finished, you agree that the finger injury could have been caused by any number of things, right?
DR. GILBERT: Yes.
MR. ROTTENBORN: And you're not offering an expert opinion on what you believe caused the injury, correct?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: And you're aware, you said a few times, Ms. Heard's account or Ms. Heard's explanation, right, do you remember saying that?
DR. GILBERT: Yes.
MR. ROTTENBORN: You're actually aware that Amber has said she didn't -- doesn't know how he lost his finger. You're aware of that, right?
DR. GILBERT: Yes. QQ So, when you were just talking about Ms. Heard's account or Ms. Heard's explanation, you're aware she's never actually given an explanation for how she thinks he lost his finger, correct?” No. QO You're aware Ms. Heard testified. and
MR. ROTTENBORN: You're aware Ms. Heard testified, and this is from your deposition, you're aware that she testified she doesn't know how he got his fingertip chopped off. You're aware of that, right?
MR. MONIZ: Asked and answered, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
DR. GILBERT: No, I'm not. I reviewed the records and in one of the testimonies that I — depositions that I reviewed, it was ascribed that potentially it was lost when he was punching against the wall with a phone.
MR. ROTTENBORN: And on that -- the last point there, I think we agree. Ms. Heard's testified in this trial, and previously, that she saw him smash a phone to smithereens, a wall phone, you'd agree with that, correct?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: But she doesn't know if that was what caused him to lose his finger, you agree with that, correct?
DR. GILBERT: I agree, but I cannot speak for her.
MR. ROTTENBORN: May I approach, Your
THE COURT: Yes, sir. Thank you.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Dr. Gilbert, you gave a deposition in this case on March 17th, correct?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: You were under oath in that deposition, you swore to tell the truth, correct?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Okay. If you could turn to page 61, please. You see there are four pages per page of paper. It's on page 16 of the document.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Okay. Line 9, you're asked a question, “And then Amber's response to that question, that's the line 9, can you read that, please." "Answer: ‘I do not know. I did not see his finger go off.' "Question: And, Dr. Gilbert, are you aware of Amber did not see Mr. Depp's finger go off? off? "Answer: Well, I'm aware that -- well, I'm aware -- I am from reading this. I'm aware of the mechanic that she claimed would cause the finger injury. "Question: But have you read anything so far that indicates she doesn't know how the finger injury happened? "Answer: So far, from what I'm reading here, yes." , Did I read that right?
DR. GILBERT: Yes. 12. Q . And you've heard no testimony in this trial from Ms. Heard that the finger injury was definitively caused by the phone, that she doesn't know, correct?
DR. GILBERT: Correct. 17. Q _ And you'd agree that the fingernail is uninjured, you said that, right? <A Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: And the nailbed was uninjured?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Correct? May 26, 2022 But the area under the fingernail, in the pulp of the finger, that's where the injury took place, right?
DR. GILBERT: It was not isolated to the pulp, no.
MR. ROTTENBORN: But it didn't injure the fingernail, that's my question?
DR. GILBERT: Correct, yes.
MR. ROTTENBORN: And under Mr. Depp's alleged theory, Amber threw a vodka bottle at him from ten feet away or so, right?
DR. GILBERT: Correct. 12. Q = And you've testified you have no way to determine the angle that the bottle was coming from — 145 A Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Right? But she threw it on a downward trajectory, correct, there's no allegation, you've never read anything that she somehow underhanded it so it came up to his finger, right?
DR. GILBERT: Correct. QO There's no way to tell, as you
MR. ROTTENBORN: There's no way to tell, as you testified, what exact direction it came from, right?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: And the glass exploded, but you've already testified there was no glass in the wound, right?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: You haven't read any record of that in the medical records, correct?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: You also haven't read anything about there being cuts on the rest of his hand, right? 13. A Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: And there was no glass found anywhere on the rest of his hand, correct?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: No bruising or injury on any other part of his hand, other than the tip of his middle finger?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: And somehow, under Mr. Depp's theory, that bottle hit the bar and his fingers, but didn't damage the fingernail while it amputated the area under the nail, correct?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: And your explanation of that is that you believe that his hand must have moved at some point during the force of the injury; isn't that correct?
DR. GILBERT: No, I said it could have, I did not say that it did,
MR. ROTTENBORN: No, you believe that it did, don't you? 41. =A_ ‘I said that it likely did, but I was not there, and I don't have videotape of the injury, so I can't determine that definitively.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Okay. Well, let's turn to page 25 of your deposition, please, on page 7.
DR. GILBERT: Sorry, page?
MR. ROTTENBORN: Page 25 and 26. So it's page 7 of the document.
DR. GILBERT: Okay.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Sorry if I was unclear on that.
DR. GILBERT: No problem. I'm there. Okay. Line 18. "Question: And to be clear, by 'sitting in that position,' you mean hand down, palmar side down? "Answer: That's what he claimed. I mean, according to the history, yes. "Question: And would it matter if Mr. Depp's hand was palmar side down? "Answer: Not really because it really -- and I discussed this. It really just depends upon the angle at which the injury occurred, and, as well, you can't determine if his hand had moved at some point during the force of the injury, which I believe it probably did, which I didn't get into in my note here, but...
DR. GILBERT: "Question: And why do you believe that? Have you read anything in any of the materials to suggest that? _ "Answer: No. Just that if it completely hit on the back of the finger, then he would have had a nailbed injury, which he did not." Did I read that right?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: That was testimony you gave under oath | a month or two ago, right? 3. A Correct.
MR. ROTTENBORN: So even though you have never read anything that suggests Mr. Depp’s hand moved, his hand moving is the only way that you can fit your testimony into what Mr. Depp wants you to testify to.about how the injury occurred, isn't it? 9. A No, that's incorrect.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Okay. That's what you testified to, that if his hand hadn't moved, there would be a nailbed injury, correct? 13. A that is incorrect. That's not what I testified.
MR. ROTTENBORN: In fact, Dr. Gilbert, there's another explanation for how Mr. Depp somehow suffered an injury that didn't injure his nail one bit but injured underneath the-nail, and that explanation is it didn't happen how Mr, Depp says it did, correct? 21. A I cannot make that assumption, nor can 322 you. T4715
MR. ROTTENBORN: No further questions. Thank you.
THE COURT: Allright. Redirect.
MR. MONIZ: Dr. Gilbert, just very briefly. The absence of other cuts on Mr. Depp's hand, how do you factor that into your analysis?
DR. GILBERT: You certainly can see an isolated finger injury. with any type of injury, and I would say any other host of mechanism of.injuries, you'd more likely see other— so, again, if you're — 14-I'm just using this as an example, if you're punching against a wall, you would more likely see multiple injuries to multiple fingers. It really just depends upon how the bottle, or how the mechanism of the injury impacted the hand at that point in time.
MR. MONIZ: Ms. Heard’s counsel made a point of emphasizing that there were no bruises or other injuries on the hand, right?
DR. GILBERT: Correct.
MR. MONIZ: And how does that fact affect your analysis, if at all?
DR. GILBERT: Well, it doesn't discount anything, but it certainly makes other potential causes of injury more unlikely, meaning punching against the wall or getting the hand slammed in a door or something like that.
MR. MONIZ: Okay. And your discussion of Ms. Heard's explanation of the alternative cause of the injury, was that based: on anything other than Ms. Heard's statements? 13. A No
MR. MONIZ: No further questions, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Allright. Thank you. Doctor, you-can have a seat in the courtroom or you're free to go. Thank you.
DR. GILBERT: Thank you:
THE COURT: You can just leave it there, that's fine. Thank you, ‘sir.
DR. GILBERT: Thank you.