The court didn't order therapy, but rather an evaluation. When he sees the shrink, it won't be for Russell's benefit, but rather so the court has an expert opinion on his mental state as part of official record.
The therapist he sees will already know that he's been convicted of electronic harassment against a woman, and that there were circumstances surrounding his case that warranted a psych eval order (because most first-time harassment convictions of somebody with no prior criminal record* will not require a psych eval).
The therapist will review court documents, and may reach some tentative conclusions prior to meeting with Russell in person. Thus, any questions they ask Russell won't be to encourage self-reflection, but to better understand his thought processes in light of the actions that got him convicted and ordered to undergo a psych eval in the first place. They'll know he's a fuckup with mental issues, but the goal is to determine what flavor his particular mental issues are, and whether he is likely to re-offend or escalate his behaviors.
*Yes, there's the "kill list" incident from high school, but IIRC that was sealed, due to being a first offense, his age, and extenuating circumstances. It wasn't showing up on background checks when he was still getting paralegal jobs, and the judge at the Ogden City court may not have known about it. I wonder if that is the "disturbing" piece of information Erika's attorney provided the court to get a psych eval ordered.