SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
OrganizationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00015002.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated January 15, 2025, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio. The questioning focuses on the methodology of a study or article, specifically the demographic characteristics of the "experts" and professionals involved, and challenges the response rate of the data collection, which the questioner labels a "dropout rate."
DOJ-OGR-00015001.jpg
This document is a transcript from a legal proceeding, specifically the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio, filed on January 15, 2025. The questioning centers on a study about "predatory alienation," a term the questioner asserts was created by an advocacy group. Rocchio clarifies that the study is qualitative rather than subjective, while the questioner probes its methodology and origins.
DOJ-OGR-00014999.jpg
This document is a partial court transcript from January 15, 2025, detailing a cross-examination by Mr. Pagliuca in the case Rocchio - Cross. The discussion centers on an article titled 'Observing Coercive Control Beyond Intimate Partner Violence' and its study, specifically questioning the witness about the 22 unidentified professional participants. The Court intervenes briefly for clarification during the testimony.
DOJ-OGR-00014996.jpg
This document is page 120 of a court transcript filed on January 15, 2025, from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (the Ghislaine Maxwell case). It features the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio (likely an expert) regarding academic studies on 'delayed disclosures' of abuse. The testimony distinguishes between 'disclosure' (to friends, parents, teachers) and 'reporting' (to law enforcement), and discusses how studies define 'delay' ranging from one week to one year.
DOJ-OGR-00014992.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on January 15, 2025. It features the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio, focusing on the distinction between normal parenting behaviors (providing food, education, presents) and 'grooming.' The witness testifies that grooming requires a coercive or controlling context/intent.
DOJ-OGR-00014991.jpg
This document is page 115 of a court transcript (Document 782) filed on January 15, 2025, from the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330). It features the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio, who is testifying about the clinical and legal definitions of 'grooming' versus 'normative behaviors.' The dialogue focuses on the necessity of 'intent to sexually abuse' to distinguish grooming tactics from normal relationship-building or parenting.
DOJ-OGR-00014990.jpg
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.
DOJ-OGR-00014989.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated January 15, 2025, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio. The testimony focuses on the connection between vulnerability factors and becoming a victim of sexual abuse. The witness provides a formal definition of 'grooming' as a set of deceptive strategies used to establish coercion and control for the purpose of sexual exploitation and abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00014988.jpg
This page contains a cross-examination transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on January 15, 2025. A witness named Rocchio is being questioned regarding the definition and implications of 'vulnerable populations,' specifically regarding risks of sexual abuse, physical assault, substance abuse, and school drop-out rates. Rocchio pushes back against the attorney's broad generalization of risk, emphasizing specific research contexts regarding sexual victimization.
DOJ-OGR-00014987.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a cross-examination in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on January 15, 2025. Attorney Mr. Pagliuca questions a witness, Rocchio, about the existence of a definitive list of vulnerable populations, referencing the DSM 5 and the American Psychological Association. The witness states that while such lists exist in scientific literature, they have not personally written one down but are aware of these populations through their professional training and knowledge.
DOJ-OGR-00014986.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on January 15, 2025, for case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It details the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio about factors that could make an individual vulnerable, including emotional disabilities, personality disorders, unstable lives, low self-esteem, drug abuse, and past sexual assault. The witness consistently qualifies their answers, stating a need to consult scientific literature before making definitive connections between these factors and vulnerability.
DOJ-OGR-00014985.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript of a cross-examination filed on January 15, 2025. An attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, questions a witness named Rocchio about a letter from the government dated April 23, 2021. The questioning establishes and confirms various categories of vulnerable individuals who are often targeted for sexual abuse, including the economically disadvantaged, those without family, and individuals with cognitive or emotional disabilities.
DOJ-OGR-00014984.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) filed on January 15, 2025. It features the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio, a psychologist, regarding the definition of forensic psychology versus therapeutic roles and the potential for 'dual roles' or boundary violations. The witness confirms they are testifying in a forensic capacity subject to APA guidelines and acknowledges reviewing a letter sent by the government on April 23rd that outlined their opinions.
DOJ-OGR-00014983.jpg
This document is page 107 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on January 15, 2025. It features the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio, focusing on the independence of their investigations and the specific instructions given by the lawyers who hire them. The questioning seeks to establish the boundaries of the witness's independence when hired by a specific party in litigation.
DOJ-OGR-00014982.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Cross-examination of witness Rocchio) filed on January 15, 2025, related to Case 1:20-cr-00330 (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The questioning focuses on Rocchio's qualifications as a forensic psychologist, specifically challenging whether they were explicitly qualified as an expert on 'grooming' in previous cases. Rocchio argues that grooming falls under 'interpersonal violence,' but admits to only testifying as a forensic psychologist approximately six times and being deposed four times.
DOJ-OGR-00014980.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated January 15, 2025, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio. The questioning focuses on the definition of "trauma," referencing the DSM and PTSD criteria, and clarifies the scope of Rocchio's duties as a clinical psychologist beyond just treating clients.
DOJ-OGR-00014978.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated January 15, 2025, featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio. The questioning focuses on a phone call in April 2021 where Rocchio allegedly defined terms such as 'child,' 'sexual abuse,' and 'nonconsensual' to a group of Assistant US Attorneys (Comey, Moe, Pomerantz, Rohrbach). Rocchio states they do not specifically recall the definitions given or the context of the notes taken by the AUSAs.
DOJ-OGR-00014977.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on January 15, 2025, related to Case 1:20-cr-00330 (USA v. Maxwell). It features the cross-examination of an expert witness, Dr. Rocchio, by defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning focuses on Dr. Rocchio's definition of a 'child' (age of consent vs. under 18) and references a prior interview with the government on April 9, 2021, documented in '3500 material' (Jencks Act disclosures).
DOJ-OGR-00014976.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case dated January 15, 2025. In it, an attorney named Mr. Pagliuca requests the time records of a witness, Rocchio, to establish potential financial motive and bias related to a contract. The judge questions the legal basis for this request, prompting Mr. Pagliuca to argue his entitlement under the legal precedents of Brady and Giglio.
DOJ-OGR-00014975.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a cross-examination in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on January 15, 2025. An attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, questions a witness, Rocchio, about a contract with the government. Rocchio confirms the contract is for up to $45,000 at a rate of $450 per hour, but clarifies that they have not yet been paid because an invoice has not been submitted.
DOJ-OGR-00014974.jpg
This document is a court transcript from January 15, 2025, detailing a discussion between an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, and the judge. Mr. Pagliuca argues that under Rule 16, he should be able to examine all materials a witness, Dr. Rocchio, used to prepare her testimony. The judge challenges this broad interpretation, clarifying that only materials that form the actual basis of her opinion, not discarded notes or unrelated contracts, are relevant.
DOJ-OGR-00014973.jpg
Transcript page from the cross-examination of Dr. Rocchio in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Maxwell). The witness confirms possession of his engagement agreement and time logs, prompting defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca to request immediate production of the file. Prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz responds that the government has already fulfilled its Jencks Act obligations by producing notes from meetings and calls with the witness.
DOJ-OGR-00014972.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio, filed on January 15, 2025. The questioning focuses on the witness's note-taking practices during prior interviews with the government. Rocchio admits to taking temporary notes on topics like "grooming" to research later and then discarding them, but confirms maintaining a file related to their retention in the case.
DOJ-OGR-00014971.jpg
This document is a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on January 15, 2025. It captures the beginning of a cross-examination where counsel Mr. Pagliuca questions a witness, Dr. Rocchio, about the frequency of his meetings with the government. Dr. Rocchio acknowledges that he may have had around 14 contacts with the government in the past year, clarifying that this number would include telephone calls for scheduling.
DOJ-OGR-00014970.jpg
This is page 94 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on Jan 15, 2025. It features the direct examination of a witness named Rocchio, who is testifying as an expert on the link between childhood sexual abuse and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The testimony covers the risk factors for PTSD and the criteria used to evaluate the scientific quality of literature and studies on the subject.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity