DOJ-OGR-00005793.jpg
611 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
3
Organizations
2
Locations
5
Events
2
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal filing (court document)
File Size:
611 KB
Summary
This legal filing (Document 397 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) argues for the admissibility of expert testimony regarding sex trafficking, coercive control, and the psychological relationship between pimps and victims. It cites several precedents (Kelly, Torres, Randall, Dupigny) where such testimony was permitted. Specifically, it defends the qualifications of Dr. Rocchio, a Brown University professor with 25 years of clinical experience, noting that the defendant does not contest her expertise.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Dr. Rocchio | Expert Witness |
Described as a leader in her field, professor at Brown University, with 25 years of clinical experience treating trau...
|
| The Defendant | Defendant |
Implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The text notes she does not contest Dr. Rocchio's qualifications.
|
| Kelly | Defendant in cited case |
United States v. Kelly
|
| Torres | Defendant in cited case |
United States v. Torres
|
| Randall | Defendant in cited case |
United States v. Randall
|
| Dupigny | Defendant in cited case |
United States v. Dupigny
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Brown University |
Employer of expert witness Dr. Rocchio.
|
|
| District Court |
Referencing rulings in S.D.N.Y. and E.D.N.Y.
|
|
| Department of Justice (DOJ) |
Indicated by Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00005793.
|
Timeline (5 events)
Relationships (2)
teaching others as a professor at Brown University
The defendant does not contest that Dr. Rocchio is a qualified expert.
Key Quotes (4)
"The defendant does not contest that Dr. Rocchio is a qualified expert."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005793.jpg
Quote #1
"Dr. Rocchio is a leader in her field, teaching others as a professor at Brown University, and she has approximately twenty-five years of clinical experience."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005793.jpg
Quote #2
"permitting expert testimony on “[t]rauma and coercive control in the context of sex trafficking, including the psychological relationship between pimps and the women prostituted by them”"Source
DOJ-OGR-00005793.jpg
Quote #3
"case law quite commonly upholds this type of testimony against Daubert challenges"Source
DOJ-OGR-00005793.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,733 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 397 Filed 10/29/21 Page 10 of 84
quotation marks omitted). The district court rejected that argument, explaining that “case law quite
commonly upholds this type of testimony against Daubert challenges,” and that the expert’s
experience writing about, treating, and speaking to prostitutes was sufficiently reliable. Id. at 263-
64; see also, e.g., Letter, United States v. Kelly, No. 19 Cr. 286 (AMD) (E.D.N.Y. July 23, 2021)
(Dkt. No. 134); United States v. Torres, No. 20 Cr. 608 (DLC), 2021 WL 1947503, at *6 (S.D.N.Y.
May 13, 2021) (permitting expert testimony on “domestic abuse and coercive control”); Feb. 25,
2020 Tr. at 24:1-40:15, United States v. Randall, 19 Cr. 131 (PAE) (S.D.N.Y.), Dkt. No. 335
(permitting expert testimony on “[t]rauma and coercive control in the context of sex trafficking,
including the psychological relationship between pimps and the women prostituted by them”);
Notice and Oct. 17, 2019 Tr. at 27:1-12, United States v. Dupigny, No. 18 Cr. 528 (JMF)
(S.D.N.Y.), Dkt. Nos. 180-1, 198 (permitting expert testimony on “the psychological relationship
between a pimp and the woman prostituted by him” and “why prostituted women do not leave
their pimp”).
commonly upholds this type of testimony against Daubert challenges,” and that the expert’s
experience writing about, treating, and speaking to prostitutes was sufficiently reliable. Id. at 263-
64; see also, e.g., Letter, United States v. Kelly, No. 19 Cr. 286 (AMD) (E.D.N.Y. July 23, 2021)
(Dkt. No. 134); United States v. Torres, No. 20 Cr. 608 (DLC), 2021 WL 1947503, at *6 (S.D.N.Y.
May 13, 2021) (permitting expert testimony on “domestic abuse and coercive control”); Feb. 25,
2020 Tr. at 24:1-40:15, United States v. Randall, 19 Cr. 131 (PAE) (S.D.N.Y.), Dkt. No. 335
(permitting expert testimony on “[t]rauma and coercive control in the context of sex trafficking,
including the psychological relationship between pimps and the women prostituted by them”);
Notice and Oct. 17, 2019 Tr. at 27:1-12, United States v. Dupigny, No. 18 Cr. 528 (JMF)
(S.D.N.Y.), Dkt. Nos. 180-1, 198 (permitting expert testimony on “the psychological relationship
between a pimp and the woman prostituted by him” and “why prostituted women do not leave
their pimp”).
B. Discussion
The defendant does not contest that Dr. Rocchio is a qualified expert. Nor could she: Dr.
Rocchio is a leader in her field, teaching others as a professor at Brown University, and she has
approximately twenty-five years of clinical experience. She is testifying in general about core
concepts in her field, based on her “extensive study of the relevant data and literature and her
clinical experience treating hundreds of trauma and abuse patients over the past twenty years.”
Rocchio is a leader in her field, teaching others as a professor at Brown University, and she has
approximately twenty-five years of clinical experience. She is testifying in general about core
concepts in her field, based on her “extensive study of the relevant data and literature and her
clinical experience treating hundreds of trauma and abuse patients over the past twenty years.”
9
DOJ-OGR-00005793
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document