This does not help the State/TA if the jurors have no knowledge of all of JAs acts!
I think you are seeing the emergent doctrine of a single assumption butressed by lots of dogma and confirmation bias over the years:
Women = Abused, Male = Abuser.
The gender pronoun for victim is always "she".
That it absolutely doesn't work in this case would be about as alien to this sort of expert as telling a Catholic that the reason they give women can't be priests -- because they can't change the eucharist into the body of Christ -- makes no sense because, in reality, no one can do it, regardless of gender.
*blank stare*
What happened to "anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law?"
Hearing every single day for years how inadequate and useless you are - whether its that you aren't pretty enough, smart enough, thin enough, or a good enough parent - can be a very painful and destructive thing to go through. Even the mere implication that there's something 'wrong' with you takes a great toll over the course of time.Honey does these pants make my butt look big? OH you brute you're abusing me.
Does anyone think Juan won't be as tough or harsh on cross examining this witness as he was on Samuels?
She will get a new trial for an inadequate defense based on LaViolette's testimony alone. They are not serving their client with this witness. Who knows, maybe that's their intention? Very strange...