This document is a page from the court transcript for Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. It details the cross-examination of Dr. Rocchio, where the defense asks about the impact of traumatic brain injury, alcohol, and controlled substances on memory recall and the concept of 'confabulation.' Ms. Pomerantz (prosecution) successfully objects to several questions regarding memory and abuse disclosure, but an objection regarding the definition of confabulation is overruled.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Dr. Rocchio | Witness / Expert |
Under cross-examination regarding memory, trauma, and confabulation.
|
| Ms. Pomerantz | Attorney (Prosecution) |
Making objections to the defense's line of questioning.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Ruling on objections (Sustaining most, overruling one).
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Listed in the footer.
|
|
| US District Court |
Implied by Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (SDNY).
|
|
| DOJ |
Implied by Bates stamp DOJ-OGR.
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by case number and reporter location.
|
"Q. For example if somebody has a traumatic brain injury, it may be difficult for someone as a matter of physiology to retrieve a memory?"Source
"Q. Are you familiar with the concept of confabulation, Dr. Rocchio?"Source
"Q. If someone is consuming alcohol or controlled substances, they may not have a very good recall of a particular event, correct?"Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,241 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document