DOJ-OGR-00005799.jpg
714 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
7
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
714 KB
Summary
This document is a legal filing that refutes the defense's arguments against the admissibility of expert testimony from Dr. Rocchio. The author argues that the defense misinterprets legal precedent, specifically the Raymond case, and that Dr. Rocchio's testimony, based on qualitative social science, is valid under the standards established by cases like Daubert and United States v. Ferguson. The filing defends the expert's methodology against claims that it is unreliable, uncorroborated, and lacks statistical precision.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Dr. Rocchio | Expert |
An expert whose opinion and testimony are being criticized by the defense.
|
| Joseph |
Named in the case citation 'United States v. Joseph'.
|
|
| Ferguson |
Named in the case citation 'United States v. Ferguson'.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Court | Judicial body |
Mentioned in reference to legal holdings and decisions, such as in the footnote regarding the Raymond case.
|
| Government | Government agency |
Mentioned in a footnote as a party that could potentially call an expert in rebuttal.
|
| 2d Cir. | Judicial body |
Referenced in case citations (e.g., 2d Cir. 2008), indicating the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
|
Timeline (1 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in a footnote when comparing the Raymond case to other cases within the current court's jurisdiction.
|
Relationships (1)
The document states that 'the defense criticizes Dr. Rocchio for opining...' and details the 'defendant’s remaining critiques of Dr. Rocchio’s opinion'.
Key Quotes (7)
"what testing was involved, what data she considered, or how her conclusions can be verified."Source
— Defense (quoting Raymond)
(The defense's argument for why expert testimony is unreliable, based on the Raymond case.)
DOJ-OGR-00005799.jpg
Quote #1
"frequently,"Source
— Dr. Rocchio
(Dr. Rocchio's opinion on the occurrence of sexual abuse of minors, which the defense criticizes for being non-specific.)
DOJ-OGR-00005799.jpg
Quote #2
"half the time"Source
— Defense
(Used by the defense to criticize Dr. Rocchio's testimony for lacking specificity.)
DOJ-OGR-00005799.jpg
Quote #3
"two-thirds of the time."Source
— Defense
(Used by the defense to criticize Dr. Rocchio's testimony for lacking specificity.)
DOJ-OGR-00005799.jpg
Quote #4
"cannot have the exactness of hard science methodologies, and expert testimony need not be based on statistical analysis in order to be probative"Source
— Court (in United States v. Ferguson)
(A legal principle recognizing the nature of social science research, used to argue that Dr. Rocchio's testimony is admissible.)
DOJ-OGR-00005799.jpg
Quote #5
"simply assumes her"Source
— Defendant
(The defendant's assertion that Dr. Rocchio's patients are uncorroborated.)
DOJ-OGR-00005799.jpg
Quote #6
"counter a defense case that victim testimony in this case should not be believed because the victim delayed in reporting the abuse or did not report it consistently."Source
— Court (in Raymond)
(A possibility left open by the Raymond court for the Government to call an expert in rebuttal, which is being used to argue for permitting Dr. Rocchio's testimony.)
DOJ-OGR-00005799.jpg
Quote #7
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document