This document is a page from a court transcript involving the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio (likely an expert witness). The questioning focuses on the witness's academic or professional definition of 'grooming,' noting that while they haven't published a specific definition, they rely on common literature. The dialogue references a list of '77 specific behaviors' associated with grooming and debates whether intent and context determine if an act constitutes grooming.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Rocchio | Witness |
Subject to cross-examination; testifying as an expert regarding the definition and behaviors of 'grooming'.
|
| Unidentified Attorney (Q) | Interrogator |
Conducting the cross-examination, questioning the witness's publications and definitions.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. | ||
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (referenced in Bates stamp DOJ-OGR)
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction of the court (likely SDNY based on case number format)
|
"It's a common definition and the one I'm using in my testimony, yes."Source
"Specifically about grooming, no. But I have certainly published and made reference to grooming."Source
"Those were 77 specific behaviors that had been identified in the literature as potentially being part of the grooming process, yes."Source
"It would depend on the pattern of behavior and the context in which it's occurring."Source
"Because what you're saying is, it depends on the groomer's intent in doing a specific act is what, in your view, makes it grooming or not"Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,609 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document