DOJ-OGR-00005634.jpg
700 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal motion / memorandum of law (case filing)
File Size:
700 KB
Summary
This document is page 10 of a legal filing (Document 386) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (US v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on October 29, 2021. It is a defense argument seeking to exclude the testimony of an expert witness named Rocchio regarding 'grooming' patterns in sexual abuse cases. The text cites Federal Rules of Evidence 704, 403, and 404 to argue that such opinions are unreliable, prejudicial, and not based on scientific data.
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Department of Justice (DOJ) |
Indicated by the Bates stamp DOJ-OGR.
|
|
| Federal Court |
Implied by Federal Rules of Evidence citations.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2021-10-29
Document 386 filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE
Federal Court (SDNY implied by case number)
Relationships (1)
The document argues that 'each of Rocchio’s opinions is inadmissible' and 'unreliable'.
Key Quotes (4)
"Rocchio’s grooming opinions are unreliable."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005634.jpg
Quote #1
"Minor victims are often subject to a strategic pattern of behaviors, often called grooming, that can take a variety of forms and function to render the victims vulnerable to abuse, to obscure the nature of the abuse, and to build trust and attachment with their abuser."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005634.jpg
Quote #2
"These opinions on grooming are not based “on scientific research or data.”"Source
DOJ-OGR-00005634.jpg
Quote #3
"Rule 403 demands exclusion when the probative value of evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice or misleading the jury."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005634.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,045 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 386 Filed 10/29/21 Page 10 of 24
element of the crime charged or of a defense” because those “matters are for the trier of fact
alone.” Fed R. Evid. 704(b).
alone.” Fed R. Evid. 704(b).
Rule 403 demands exclusion when the probative value of evidence is substantially
outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice or misleading the jury. Fed. R. Evid. 403.
outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice or misleading the jury. Fed. R. Evid. 403.
And Rule 404 prohibits any witness, witness or lay, from offering evidence “of a person’s
character or character trait . . . to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in
accordance with the character or trait.” Fed. R. Evid. 404(a)(1).
character or character trait . . . to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in
accordance with the character or trait.” Fed. R. Evid. 404(a)(1).
Applying these provisions, and as elaborated below, each of Rocchio’s opinions is
inadmissible.
inadmissible.
A. Opinion 1: Minor victims are often subject to a strategic pattern of
behaviors, often called grooming, that can take a variety of forms and
function to render the victims vulnerable to abuse, to obscure the nature
of the abuse, and to build trust and attachment with their abuser.
behaviors, often called grooming, that can take a variety of forms and
function to render the victims vulnerable to abuse, to obscure the nature
of the abuse, and to build trust and attachment with their abuser.
1. Rocchio’s grooming opinions are unreliable.
Rocchio’s first and most prominent proposed area of testimony concerns “grooming,”
which she characterizes as “a strategic pattern of behavior[] . . . that can take a variety of forms
and function to render the victims vulnerable to abuse, to obscure the nature of the abuse, and to
build trust and attachment with their abuser.” Ex. 1, p 2. Rocchio continues that “[i]ndividuals
with particular vulnerabilities are often targeted [through grooming] by perpetrators of sexual
abuse” and that “[s]exual abuse of minors frequently occurs through the use of manipulation or
coercion in the context of an established relationship that is developed over time, rather than
through the use of forcible rape.” Id.
which she characterizes as “a strategic pattern of behavior[] . . . that can take a variety of forms
and function to render the victims vulnerable to abuse, to obscure the nature of the abuse, and to
build trust and attachment with their abuser.” Ex. 1, p 2. Rocchio continues that “[i]ndividuals
with particular vulnerabilities are often targeted [through grooming] by perpetrators of sexual
abuse” and that “[s]exual abuse of minors frequently occurs through the use of manipulation or
coercion in the context of an established relationship that is developed over time, rather than
through the use of forcible rape.” Id.
These opinions on grooming are not based “on scientific research or data.” Gonyer, 2012
WL 3043020, at *2 (granting defendant’s motion to preclude evidence from the government’s
“expert on sexual predator grooming techniques in its case-in-chief in a jury trial on charges of
WL 3043020, at *2 (granting defendant’s motion to preclude evidence from the government’s
“expert on sexual predator grooming techniques in its case-in-chief in a jury trial on charges of
5
DOJ-OGR-00005634
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document