Ms. Pomerantz is objecting to the anticipated line of questioning from Mr. Pagliuca, indicating they are likely opposing counsel in the legal case.
They are both speaking during the same legal proceeding, with Mr. Pagliuca interjecting during Ms. Pomerantz's statement.
They are both speaking during the same legal proceeding, with Mr. Pagliuca interjecting during Ms. Pomerantz's statement.
They are opposing counsel in a legal proceeding. Mr. Pagliuca objects to the questions Ms. Pomerantz is asking the witness.
They are both present in a court proceeding, likely as opposing counsel, as Mr. Pagliuca responds to the admission of evidence related to Ms. Pomerantz's questioning.
They are both present in a court proceeding, likely as opposing counsel, as Mr. Pagliuca responds to the admission of evidence related to Ms. Pomerantz's questioning.
They appear as opposing counsel in a court hearing, with Ms. Pomerantz responding to Mr. Pagliuca's motions.
DOJ-OGR-00016659.jpg
This document is a partial transcript from a legal proceeding filed on August 10, 2022, detailing a segment of a cross-examination. Ms. Pomerantz argues for the relevance of a witness's experiments on memory, distinguishing them from other evidence related to Dr. Rocchio, while Mr. Pagliuca briefly interjects. The Court ultimately rules 'Overruled' on an unspecified objection or motion.
DOJ-OGR-00014924.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on January 15, 2025. An attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, questions a witness, Dr. Rocchio, about a peer-reviewed study published in October 2020 concerning the behaviors of perpetrators. Dr. Rocchio explains that the study involved a comprehensive literature review to identify common behavioral stages and strategies.
DOJ-OGR-00015016.jpg
This document is a court transcript from January 15, 2025, detailing a portion of the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio. Attorney Pagliuca successfully moves to admit Defendant's Exhibit A into evidence with no objection from opposing counsel, Ms. Pomerantz. Mr. Pagliuca then begins to question the witness, addressed as 'Doctor', about another piece of evidence, Exhibit B.
DOJ-OGR-00017948.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between a judge (THE COURT) and a lawyer (MS. POMERANTZ). Ms. Pomerantz raises a concern about the scope of questioning by another lawyer, Mr. Pagliuca, regarding a witness's testimony on the delayed disclosure of sexual abuse. The discussion centers on defining the line between permissible cross-examination and improperly soliciting expert opinions.
DOJ-OGR-00017939.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, showing the direct examination of a witness, Dr. Rocchio, by an attorney, Ms. Pomerantz. The testimony focuses on the psychological aspects of childhood sexual abuse, specifically the role of trust in treatment. Another attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, objects to the line of questioning, leading to rulings from the judge.
Entities connected to both MS. POMERANTZ and MR. PAGLIUCA
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein relationship