Psychologist Takes the Stand in Cardi B’s Civil Assault Trial, Revealing Shocking Details From Victim’s Case
Los Angeles, CA – August 28, 2025 – On the second day of Cardi B’s civil assault trial, psychologist Nichole McKenzie took the stand to testify about her treatment of plaintiff Emani Ellis. McKenzie, who evaluated Ellis following a workers’ compensation claim, provided insights into Ellis’s reported emotional distress but noted no physical injuries in her records. The testimony, delivered on Tuesday, August 26, in Los Angeles County Superior Court, included direct examination by Ellis’s lawyer Rob Rosen and cross-examination by Cardi B’s attorney Peter Anderson. In a rare move, jurors and Judge Ian Fusselman posed their own questions, underscoring the case’s complexity.
Trial Background
The lawsuit stems from a February 24, 2018, incident at a Beverly Hills medical building where Cardi B, then pregnant, alleges Ellis harassed her by recording her without consent. Ellis claims Cardi assaulted her, causing a 2 cm scar on her face that required plastic surgery and led to her firing as a security guard. Ellis seeks damages for assault, battery, and emotional distress. Cardi denies any physical contact, describing the encounter as a brief verbal altercation.
McKenzie was called by the plaintiff to discuss Ellis’s psychological state post-incident. Her reports, dated April 26, 2018, and August 10, 2018, form key evidence.
Key Testimony Highlights
Direct Examination by Rob Rosen
Rosen focused on McKenzie’s background, reports, and billing. McKenzie confirmed she is a licensed psychologist specializing in emotional injuries, primarily through workers’ compensation cases. She treated Ellis at Management Inc., billing $5,087 across seven visits from April 2018 to January 2019, including an MMPI psychological test.
McKenzie explained including profanities in reports to capture patients’ exact words: “Just to capture the client’s report in their own words.” Ellis reported Cardi saying, “F*** you, you fat a**, that’s why you do security, that’s why I’m going to get you fired, that’s why I’m rich and you’re poor.” McKenzie used this for diagnosis but couldn’t recall if it directly influenced her findings.
Rosen pressed on physical injuries. McKenzie stated she focuses on psychological issues but would note physical symptoms if reported. Her reports mentioned headaches and trouble sleeping but no scars or cuts. “I do not recall,” she said when asked if she saw marks on Ellis’s nose or cheek.
Billing was scrutinized: McKenzie billed on a lien basis, waiting for payment post-treatment, which is standard for workers’ comp cases.
Jury and Judge Questions
In an unusual step, Judge Fusselman allowed juror questions and posed his own. Jurors inquired about forms for reporting injuries and whether McKenzie would note unreported physical issues. McKenzie explained patients fill out intake forms listing symptoms, and she includes them if relevant.
The judge asked if McKenzie recalled seeing marks on Ellis’s nose or cheek. “I do not recall,” she repeated.
Cross-Examination by Peter Anderson
Anderson challenged the reports’ basis, emphasizing they rely on Ellis’s self-reports: “Everything that we’ve been talking about on page two, that’s just what plaintiff told you, right?” McKenzie agreed she doesn’t verify truthfulness.
Anderson highlighted the absence of physical injury mentions, suggesting Ellis didn’t report them initially. McKenzie confirmed she would note reported physical issues but couldn’t recall specifics.
On the MMPI test, Anderson noted it took several hours, billed at $600, underscoring McKenzie’s focus on psychological evaluation.
Implications for the Trial
McKenzie’s testimony bolsters Ellis’s emotional distress claims but weakens physical injury assertions due to no mentions in reports. Cardi’s team used this to question Ellis’s consistency, implying physical claims emerged later.
The judge’s involvement signals interest in clarifying inconsistencies. Upcoming witnesses, including Cardi (who testified as a hostile witness on Day 3) and medical experts, may address these gaps.
Cardi, denying assault, emphasized her pregnancy’s vulnerability. The trial tests credibility, with potential impacts on Cardi’s career and Ellis’s pursuit of justice.
As proceedings continue, the case highlights workplace dynamics, celebrity interactions, and psychological trauma’s complexities.
