this district
LocationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00005799.jpg
This document is a legal filing that refutes the defense's arguments against the admissibility of expert testimony from Dr. Rocchio. The author argues that the defense misinterprets legal precedent, specifically the Raymond case, and that Dr. Rocchio's testimony, based on qualitative social science, is valid under the standards established by cases like Daubert and United States v. Ferguson. The filing defends the expert's methodology against claims that it is unreliable, uncorroborated, and lacks statistical precision.
DOJ-OGR-00005362.jpg
This document is page 5 of a court filing (Document 367-1) from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on October 22, 2021. It appears to be a script for jury selection (voir dire), outlining the specific charges in the indictment against Maxwell, including conspiracy with Jeffrey Epstein to entice minors and sex trafficking between 1994 and 2004. The text details the first four counts of the indictment.
DOJ-OGR-00005863.jpg
This is a page from a Government legal filing (dated Oct 29, 2021) in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It argues that witnesses, including expert Dr. Rocchio and the Minor Victims themselves, should be permitted to use the term 'victim' during testimony. Furthermore, it discloses that the Government expects testimony describing Jeffrey Epstein raping a minor, arguing this is directly relevant to the charges of trafficking and enticing minors.
DOJ-OGR-00005847.jpg
This document is a page from a Government legal filing (dated Oct 29, 2021) in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The Government rebuts defense accusations regarding discovery violations, stating they provided co-conspirator statements 'unusually early' (seven weeks before trial). Additionally, the Government argues against suppressing the identification of the defendant by 'Minor Victim-4,' asserting that the victim knew the defendant personally for decades.
DOJ-OGR-00005843.jpg
This legal document is a filing by the Government in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, dated October 29, 2021. The Government argues that the defense is mistaken in its belief that the Court ordered the specific itemization and isolation of co-conspirator statements from other evidence. The filing asserts that the Court's orders only required the 'disclosure' of these statements and that compelling the Government to segregate them would be unsupported by precedent in the Second Circuit.
DOJ-OGR-00005253.jpg
This document is page 4 of a filing by the Government in Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The Government argues against attorney-led jury selection, supporting Court-led 'voir dire' instead. Additionally, the Government argues that individual sequestered voir dire is not warranted for all questions, suggesting that sensitive topics like sexual abuse and pretrial publicity can be handled at the sidebar rather than in a fully sequestered setting.
DOJ-OGR-00005220.jpg
This page from a legal document, filed on October 13, 2021, discusses the court's authority to manage the jury selection process known as voir dire. It argues that while the court can reasonably limit the time and scope of questioning by attorneys to prevent abuse, the unique circumstances of this case, including extensive pretrial publicity, necessitate an expansion of traditional voir dire protocols to effectively screen potential jurors for bias and prejudice.
DOJ-OGR-00011642.jpg
This document is a partial court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022, discussing the anticipated testimony of Mr. Flatley. His testimony concerns the retrieval of metadata from devices seized from Epstein's home, and the possibility of Mr. Kelso serving as a rebuttal witness. The government and defense are preparing for this testimony and related disclosures, with Mr. Flatley having given similar testimony in other cases.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity