DOJ-OGR-00015011.jpg
547 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
547 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript showing the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio. The questioning centers on scientific articles Rocchio provided to the government, discussing their relevance to the Daubert standard, the recency of an article labeled Exhibit 3, and a specific 'Winters article' from 2020. The witness clarifies the scope of their testimony and corrects the questioner on the recency of the evidence presented.
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the page as the court reporting service.
|
| government | Government agency |
Mentioned as the recipient of articles provided by the witness in support of testimony.
|
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by the name of the court reporting company, "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
|
Relationships (1)
The document is a transcript of a cross-examination, where the questioner is challenging the witness's testimony and the evidence provided.
Key Quotes (3)
"I wouldn't presume to make an opinion about -- to offer an opinion about Daubert specifically, but certainly I'm here to talk about the state of the scientific literature in my areas of expertise."Source
— Rocchio (as 'A')
(Responding to a question about disagreeing with an opinion related to the Daubert standard.)
DOJ-OGR-00015011.jpg
Quote #1
"No. That's an example of a recent article that was done and not the most recent, nor is it the only."Source
— Rocchio (as 'A')
(Correcting the questioner's assertion that Exhibit 3 represents the most recent state of scientific literature.)
DOJ-OGR-00015011.jpg
Quote #2
"It's possible that this was pub -- the Winters article we've been talking about was published, I believe, in 2020."Source
— Rocchio (as 'A')
(Providing information about the publication date of a specific article under discussion.)
DOJ-OGR-00015011.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,425 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 782 Filed 01/15/25 Page 135 of 158 135
LBAAMAX5ps Rocchio - Cross
LBAAMAX5ps Rocchio - Cross
1 not meeting the Daubert standard. Correct?
2 A. That was one of their opinions at the conclusion of the
3 article.
4 Q. Right, which you did not agree with. Is that right?
5 A. I, I wouldn't presume to make an opinion about -- to offer
6 an opinion about Daubert specifically, but certainly I'm here
7 to talk about the state of the scientific literature in my
8 areas of expertise.
9 Q. OK. But the most recent state of the scientific literature
10 is Exhibit 3. Is that right?
11 A. No. That's an example of a recent article that was done
12 and not the most recent, nor is it the only.
13 Q. Well, did you give any other more recent article to the
14 government in support of your testimony here today?
15 A. I would have to look at the dates of all of the articles I
16 gave them. I'm not sure of the order of publication. It's
17 possible that this was pub -- the Winters article we've been
18 talking about was published, I believe, in 2020. So I would --
19 certainly there have been articles published since that time.
20 Q. Do you know of one that does anything with the Winters
21 study to move it forward, to validate it in any way?
22 A. Not specifically. I would have to look for that. At the
23 moment no.
24 Q. OK. Thank you.
25 Exhibit 5 --
2 A. That was one of their opinions at the conclusion of the
3 article.
4 Q. Right, which you did not agree with. Is that right?
5 A. I, I wouldn't presume to make an opinion about -- to offer
6 an opinion about Daubert specifically, but certainly I'm here
7 to talk about the state of the scientific literature in my
8 areas of expertise.
9 Q. OK. But the most recent state of the scientific literature
10 is Exhibit 3. Is that right?
11 A. No. That's an example of a recent article that was done
12 and not the most recent, nor is it the only.
13 Q. Well, did you give any other more recent article to the
14 government in support of your testimony here today?
15 A. I would have to look at the dates of all of the articles I
16 gave them. I'm not sure of the order of publication. It's
17 possible that this was pub -- the Winters article we've been
18 talking about was published, I believe, in 2020. So I would --
19 certainly there have been articles published since that time.
20 Q. Do you know of one that does anything with the Winters
21 study to move it forward, to validate it in any way?
22 A. Not specifically. I would have to look for that. At the
23 moment no.
24 Q. OK. Thank you.
25 Exhibit 5 --
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00015011
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document