mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES003/DOJ-OGR-00008185.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "13",
    "document_number": "516",
    "date": "11/21/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 516 Filed 11/21/21 Page 13 of 17\n\nlying,\" \"false memories,\" \"intoxication,\" and \"a variety of psychiatric disorders\" can lead to false accusations. Nov. 10 Tr. at 154. This exchange shows that cross-examination is an adequate basis for testing Dr. Rocchio's opinion and that jurors do not require an expert to understand the content of that cross-examination. Because this testimony goes to \"lay matters which a jury is capable of understanding and deciding without the expert's help,\" the Court excludes testimony on these matters. United States v. Mulder, 273 F.3d 91, 101 (2d Cir. 2001) (quoting United States v. Castillo, 924 F.2d 1227, 1232 (2d Cir. 1991)).\n\nThird, Dr. Dietz's opinion on false memories rests on the research of Dr. Loftus. Because the Court will admit Dr. Loftus's testimony on false memories, the Court will preclude Dr. Dietz's testimony on the same issue as needlessly cumulative and causing undue delay.\n\nFourth, in the second pathway, Dr. Dietz states that implied consent can lead to false accusations. Notice at 7–8. Based on the offenses charged, the alleged victims' willingness or verbal consent to engage in sexual conduct is irrelevant here: Whether there was consent turns entirely on the alleged victims' ages. See Kidd, 385 F. Supp. 3d at 252–53. The Court therefore excludes this opinion under Rules 401 and 403 because it is not probative but risks confusing jurors about the proper standard of guilt.\n\nIn sum, on the present record, the Court will exclude Dr. Dietz's \"pathways to false accusations\" opinion.\n\nIII. The testimony of Dr. Elizabeth Loftus\n\nThe Defense also seeks to admit the testimony of Dr. Elizabeth Loftus as an expert on the science of memory. The Defense's notice listed approximately five opinions. Notice at 1–2. First, the \"creation\" and \"characteristics of false memories.\" Second, \"how memory fades and weakens over time.\" Third, \"how memory becomes more vulnerable to contamination.\" Fourth,\n\n13\n\nDOJ-OGR-00008185",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 516 Filed 11/21/21 Page 13 of 17",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "lying,\" \"false memories,\" \"intoxication,\" and \"a variety of psychiatric disorders\" can lead to false accusations. Nov. 10 Tr. at 154. This exchange shows that cross-examination is an adequate basis for testing Dr. Rocchio's opinion and that jurors do not require an expert to understand the content of that cross-examination. Because this testimony goes to \"lay matters which a jury is capable of understanding and deciding without the expert's help,\" the Court excludes testimony on these matters. United States v. Mulder, 273 F.3d 91, 101 (2d Cir. 2001) (quoting United States v. Castillo, 924 F.2d 1227, 1232 (2d Cir. 1991)).\n\nThird, Dr. Dietz's opinion on false memories rests on the research of Dr. Loftus. Because the Court will admit Dr. Loftus's testimony on false memories, the Court will preclude Dr. Dietz's testimony on the same issue as needlessly cumulative and causing undue delay.\n\nFourth, in the second pathway, Dr. Dietz states that implied consent can lead to false accusations. Notice at 7–8. Based on the offenses charged, the alleged victims' willingness or verbal consent to engage in sexual conduct is irrelevant here: Whether there was consent turns entirely on the alleged victims' ages. See Kidd, 385 F. Supp. 3d at 252–53. The Court therefore excludes this opinion under Rules 401 and 403 because it is not probative but risks confusing jurors about the proper standard of guilt.\n\nIn sum, on the present record, the Court will exclude Dr. Dietz's \"pathways to false accusations\" opinion.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "III. The testimony of Dr. Elizabeth Loftus\n\nThe Defense also seeks to admit the testimony of Dr. Elizabeth Loftus as an expert on the science of memory. The Defense's notice listed approximately five opinions. Notice at 1–2. First, the \"creation\" and \"characteristics of false memories.\" Second, \"how memory fades and weakens over time.\" Third, \"how memory becomes more vulnerable to contamination.\" Fourth,",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "13",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00008185",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Dr. Rocchio",
      "Dr. Loftus",
      "Dr. Dietz",
      "Dr. Elizabeth Loftus"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Court"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "Nov. 10",
      "11/21/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 516",
      "DOJ-OGR-00008185"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case. The text is mostly printed, with no handwritten content or stamps visible. The document is well-formatted and legible."
}