House Oversight — DOJ production
- Format
- File
- 516.pdf
- Set
- House Oversight (DOJ)
- Pages
- 17
- Text
- Searchable
- Text confidence
- 93%
Text as released
Machine-read from the scan. Names, dates and numbers can be misread — check anything you rely on against the original page.
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document516- Filed 11/21/21 Page1of17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #; DATE FILED: 1 United States of America, —-V- 20-CR-330 (AJN) Ghislaine Maxwell, OPINION & ORDER Defendant. ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge: The Defense on November 1, 2021, noticed eight expert witnesses. Def. Br., Ex. 1 (“Notice”). Two of those experts, Dr. Park Dietz and Dr. Elizabeth Loftus, are expected to offer opinions that rebut opinions of the Government’s expert witness, Dr. Lisa Rocchio. The Court on November 11, 2021, issued an Opinion and Order that denied in part and granted in part the Defense’s motion to preclude Dr. Rocchio’s testimony. Dkt. No. 435. The Government on November 8, 2021, filed a motion to partially preclude the testimony of Dr. Dietz and Dr. Loftus. Gov’t Br., Dkt. No. 424. The Defense filed a response on November 12, 2021. 1. Legal standard Federal Rule of Evidence 702 governs the admissibility of expert testimony. That rule states: A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: (a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue; 1 DOJ-OGR-00008173 Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document516~ Filed 11/21/21 Page2of17 (b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; (c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and (d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case. The Court exercises a “gatekeeper function” in assessing the admissibility of expert testimony. Restivo v. Hessemann, 846 F.3d 547, 575 (2d Cir. 2017). To determine whether an expert’s method is reliable, the Court considers the non-exhaustive list provided by the Supreme Court in Daubert, including whether the expert’s method has been t […]