← Back to home

Document 482

AI Analysis

Summary: The court partially grants and denies the government's motion to preclude the testimony of two expert witnesses, Dr. Dietz and Dr. Loftus, and orders the parties to propose redactions to certain documents and justify any requests for sealing by November 23, 2021.
Significance: This document is significant because it reveals the court's decision regarding the admissibility of expert witness testimony in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial and the subsequent instructions for handling potentially sensitive information.
Key Topics: Expert Witness Testimony Motion to Preclude Testimony Sealing and Redactions of Court Documents
Key People:
  • Alison J. Nathan - United States District Judge
  • Ghislaine Maxwell - Defendant
  • Dr. Dietz - Expert Witness for the Defense
  • Dr. Loftus - Expert Witness for the Defense
Document Type
Court Filing
Date
11/21/21
Pages
2
Folder
IMAGES003
Has Stamps
Yes

Full Text

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 482 Filed 11/21/21 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK United States of America, -v- Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant. ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge: On November 1, 2021, the Defense noticed eight expert witnesses. Def. Br., Ex. 1 ("Notice"). On November 8, 2021, the Government filed a motion to partially preclude the testimony of two of those experts, Dr. Dietz and Dr. Loftus. Gov't Br., Dkt. No. 424. The Defense filed a response via email on November 12, 2021, to permit the Government the opportunity to propose redactions. In an Opinion and Order temporarily filed under seal, the Court DENIES in part and GRANTS in part the Government's motion to preclude Dr. Dietz's testimony and DENIES in part and GRANTS in part the Government's motion to preclude Dr. Loftus's testimony. It does so after considering the admissibility of the anticipated testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). The Court will send the temporarily sealed Opinion & Order to the parties. By November 23, 2021, the parties are ORDERED to inform the Court whether either seeks sealing or limited redactions of the Court's Opinion & Order, justifying any such request by reference to the three-part test articulated by the Second Circuit in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). In addition, by that date, the parties are FURTHER ORDERED to file 1 DOJ-OGR-00007385 --- PAGE BREAK --- Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 482 Filed 11/21/21 Page 2 of 2 any proposed redactions to the Defense's response brief and/or supporting exhibits on the public docket, again justifying any such request by reference to the Lugosch test. SO ORDERED. Dated: November 21, 2021 New York, New York ALISON J. NATHAN United States District Judge 2 DOJ-OGR-00007386

Individual Pages

Page 1 of 2 - DOJ-OGR-00007385
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 482 Filed 11/21/21 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK United States of America, -v- Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant. ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge: On November 1, 2021, the Defense noticed eight expert witnesses. Def. Br., Ex. 1 ("Notice"). On November 8, 2021, the Government filed a motion to partially preclude the testimony of two of those experts, Dr. Dietz and Dr. Loftus. Gov't Br., Dkt. No. 424. The Defense filed a response via email on November 12, 2021, to permit the Government the opportunity to propose redactions. In an Opinion and Order temporarily filed under seal, the Court DENIES in part and GRANTS in part the Government's motion to preclude Dr. Dietz's testimony and DENIES in part and GRANTS in part the Government's motion to preclude Dr. Loftus's testimony. It does so after considering the admissibility of the anticipated testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). The Court will send the temporarily sealed Opinion & Order to the parties. By November 23, 2021, the parties are ORDERED to inform the Court whether either seeks sealing or limited redactions of the Court's Opinion & Order, justifying any such request by reference to the three-part test articulated by the Second Circuit in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). In addition, by that date, the parties are FURTHER ORDERED to file 1 DOJ-OGR-00007385
Page 2 - DOJ-OGR-00007386
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 482 Filed 11/21/21 Page 2 of 2 any proposed redactions to the Defense's response brief and/or supporting exhibits on the public docket, again justifying any such request by reference to the Lugosch test. SO ORDERED. Dated: November 21, 2021 New York, New York ALISON J. NATHAN United States District Judge 2 DOJ-OGR-00007386