Perhaps an invasion of privacy was the wrong choice of phrase. Depp allowed his therapist to be subpoenaed and his therapy notes to be read to the court under cross. Possibly because he had more control over it and possibly to avoid diagnosis.

I suspect that Amber Heard’s team didn’t submit those texts to her mother into evidence as it would’ve allowed any and all texts between Depp and Paige Heard to be used in rebuttal - and as she died in 2020 she wouldn’t have been able to have crossed or been redirected. It likely would’ve damaged Heard’s case.

Likewise Rochelle, she could’ve been subpoenaed but unless it was of material benefit to Heard’s team there was little point. What benefit would it have been to have someone on the stand who a) doesn’t say Depp is violent and b) can back up his view. Unlike in the U.K., this was a trial between Depp and Heard, not between Depp and a newsgroup. All these things would’ve been discoverable but I suspect Heard’s lawyers advised against it. Have a look at Elaine Brethodf’s reaction when Heard mentions Kate Moss on the stand.

However, I suspect this isn’t an argument that will persuade you. If you’ve decided this is a miscarriage of justice, and you don’t believe the trial was fairly handled… then there isn’t much I can do to convince you. I think the trial was fair, I think the jury overreached on two of the three verdicts for Depp and the award to Heard was a little confusing. I hope Depp stops short of taking her money and I hope they both find some closure from this.