This legal document, page 16 of a filing from October 29, 2021, argues that the proposed expert testimony and 'grooming opinions' of an individual named Roccio should be deemed inadmissible. The author contends that Roccio's testimony is substantially more prejudicial than probative under Rule 403, fails to meet the Daubert standard for scientific reliability, and oversimplifies complex issues, thereby risking misleading the jury. The argument is supported by citations from several court cases, including United States v. Burns and Gonyer, which criticize similar 'grooming theories'.
This document is page 3 of a legal filing (Document 386) from the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on October 29, 2021. It is a Table of Authorities listing legal precedents, specifically focusing on case law regarding the admissibility of expert testimony (e.g., Daubert, Kumho Tire, Joiner). The document bears a Department of Justice footer (DOJ-OGR-00005627).
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity