It's one thing to be an expert witness and testify in generalities - especially regarding an Olympic Gold Medal liar. That's what she's paid to do and what she did the first day or so. However, the public's ire gets up when she tries to specify that this case is "abuse" based on any information she has from the defendant. It's like repeating a rumor only she should know better because her authority gives it more weight.
It reminds me of the hijinks that almost went on in the Anthony trial when they tried to sneak psychiatric experts to testify based on her allegations (particularly when some didn't interview her or were simply basing their opinion on her story). That didn't fly - I can't remember if the expert witnesses recused themselves or if the judge just didn't allow it. I'd hate to stake my reputation as an expert on something as specious as this. I remember the blowback Andrea Lyon got for taking the DP on and she did the same thing - it's one thing to have a legitimate agenda and another to muck it up by using a courtroom as a forum and making it specific by associating with really, really questionable company. I'll bet ALV will be wishing pretty soon - if she isn't already - that she had picked a smarter venue for her campaign against domestic abuse. Nurmi too. He's taken the field of "sex crimes" back years by trying to put Victim Lipstick on this abusive and deviant little piglet.