Dr. Rocchio
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
MS. POMERANTZ
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Unnamed Questioner
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MS. POMERANTZ
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Expert witness |
7
|
3 | |
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Professional |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
witness
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Unnamed Questioner
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
the defense
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
American Psychological Association
|
Leadership membership |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Adversarial subject of motion |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Witness interviewer |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Expert witness adverse |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Unidentified Attorney
|
Witness examiner |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Dr. Dietz
|
Case related |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Expert witness counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Witness judge |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Defense
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Dr. Loftus
|
Case related |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Testimony | Dr. Rocchio provided expert testimony on the psychology of sexual trauma and the process of discl... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Daubert hearing | A prior hearing where Dr. Rocchio's article was referenced and she provided testimony. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Trial | A legal trial where the Government intends to offer Dr. Rocchio's expert testimony regarding vict... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Expert testimony | Dr. Rocchio is expected to give an opinion at trial on grooming and delayed disclosure. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Testimony of Dr. Rocchio | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination testimony regarding sexual abuse disclosure statistics. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination of Dr. Rocchio regarding forensic psychology methods. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination of Dr. Rocchio regarding Government Exhibit 3. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Trial | A trial where expert testimony was heard from Dr. Rocchio and testimony from Matt. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trial | The trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, where this summation was delivered. | Southern District Court (im... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Anticipated testimony of Dr. Rocchio regarding sexual abuse victims generally. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Cross-examination testimony regarding grooming tactics. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Trial | A trial occurred where Dr. Rocchio testified and the Government presented its case against the de... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination testimony regarding expert qualification and the nature of childhood sexual ab... | Court | View |
| 2025-01-15 | N/A | Filing of Document 782 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE | Southern District of New Yo... | View |
| 2025-01-15 | N/A | Direct examination of Dr. Rocchio regarding psychological models of abuse. | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| 2025-01-15 | Court testimony | Direct examination of Dr. Rocchio by Ms. Pomerantz regarding his opinion on a published article. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2025-01-15 | Meeting | Dr. Rocchio met with or had contact with the government approximately 14 times, including telepho... | N/A | View |
| 2025-01-15 | Court proceeding | A cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio, during which a legal argument occurred between Mr... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2025-01-15 | Court testimony | Direct examination of Dr. Rocchio in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, where he is questioned about Governm... | Court in the Southern District | View |
| 2025-01-15 | Court testimony | Direct examination of witness Dr. Rocchio by Ms. Pomerantz regarding grooming, risky sexual behav... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2025-01-15 | Direct examination | Ms. Pomerantz questions Dr. Rocchio about his employment at Brown University, his title, responsi... | Court proceeding (location ... | View |
| 2025-01-15 | Court testimony | Dr. Rocchio provides expert testimony during a direct examination in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2025-01-15 | Court testimony | Dr. Rocchio provides direct testimony about the strategies and tactics of grooming for the purpos... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2025-01-15 | Court proceeding | Cross-examination of Dr. Rocchio by Mr. Pagliuca in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | Courtroom | View |
DOJ-OGR-00005799.jpg
This document is a legal filing that refutes the defense's arguments against the admissibility of expert testimony from Dr. Rocchio. The author argues that the defense misinterprets legal precedent, specifically the Raymond case, and that Dr. Rocchio's testimony, based on qualitative social science, is valid under the standards established by cases like Daubert and United States v. Ferguson. The filing defends the expert's methodology against claims that it is unreliable, uncorroborated, and lacks statistical precision.
DOJ-OGR-00005798.jpg
This document is page 15 of a legal filing from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It argues for the admissibility of testimony by expert witness Dr. Rocchio, distinguishing her clinical, academic-based conclusions from those of an FBI agent in a precedent case (*Raymond*) whose testimony on child molester profiles was found unreliable. The filing emphasizes that Dr. Rocchio will testify on psychological underpinnings rather than offender profiling.
DOJ-OGR-00005794.jpg
This legal document, filed on October 29, 2021, is a motion arguing for the admissibility of expert testimony from a Dr. Rocchio. The document refutes the defendant's claim that Dr. Rocchio's opinions are unreliable, asserting that the testimony on coercion, attachment, and grooming in abuser-victim relationships is well-supported and will help the jury understand the evidence at trial.
DOJ-OGR-00005793.jpg
This legal filing (Document 397 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) argues for the admissibility of expert testimony regarding sex trafficking, coercive control, and the psychological relationship between pimps and victims. It cites several precedents (Kelly, Torres, Randall, Dupigny) where such testimony was permitted. Specifically, it defends the qualifications of Dr. Rocchio, a Brown University professor with 25 years of clinical experience, noting that the defendant does not contest her expertise.
DOJ-OGR-00005651.jpg
This document is a legal filing from the Government (prosecution) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), providing notice of expert testimony by Dr. Rocchio. The filing outlines that Dr. Rocchio will testify generally about the psychology of trauma, sexual abuse, grooming tactics, and delayed disclosure by victims, explicitly stating she has not evaluated any specific victims in this case. Additionally, the Government requests reciprocal discovery regarding any expert witnesses the defense intends to call.
DOJ-OGR-00005863.jpg
This is a page from a Government legal filing (dated Oct 29, 2021) in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It argues that witnesses, including expert Dr. Rocchio and the Minor Victims themselves, should be permitted to use the term 'victim' during testimony. Furthermore, it discloses that the Government expects testimony describing Jeffrey Epstein raping a minor, arguing this is directly relevant to the charges of trafficking and enticing minors.
DOJ-OGR-00005813.jpg
This page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) argues for the admissibility of Dr. Rocchio's expert testimony regarding delayed disclosure of child sexual abuse. It counters the defendant's argument that the testimony is unreliable by citing Dr. Rocchio's qualifications, academic literature, and the legal precedent set in *United States v. Gaudet*, which authorized similar expert testimony.
DOJ-OGR-00005811.jpg
This legal document, filed on October 29, 2021, argues for the admissibility of expert testimony from a Dr. Rocchio in a criminal case. The document outlines Dr. Rocchio's intended opinions on how grooming facilitates sexual abuse and why victims often delay disclosing trauma, asserting these opinions are reliable and supported by psychological literature. It distinguishes the defendant's alleged actions from 'grooming by proxy' and cites academic research to bolster the validity of the expert's claims about delayed disclosure.
DOJ-OGR-00014466.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (summation) filed on August 10, 2022, in the case USA v. Maxwell. Prosecutor Ms. Moe argues that the case centers on manipulation, money, and memory, highlighting how Maxwell groomed victims for Epstein. The text contrasts the small payments made to victim Carolyn (approx. $100) against the $30 million Maxwell received from Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00014431.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the summation by Ms. Moe (likely the prosecution). The text focuses on the testimony of Dr. Rocchio, an expert in the psychology of sexual trauma, explaining why victims (specifically Jane) delay disclosure or only provide partial details initially. Ms. Moe argues that Jane's behavior is consistent with 'textbook' child sexual abuse and highlights that Jane's testimony is corroborated by three other witnesses: Annie, Carolyn, and Kate.
DOJ-OGR-00014430.jpg
This document is a page from a court summation in which the speaker, likely a prosecutor, argues why a victim named Jane took a long time to disclose sexual abuse. The speaker cites expert testimony from Dr. Rocchio, who explained that victims are less likely to report abuse when the perpetrator is close to them, and points to Jane's close relationships with Maxwell (like a "big sister") and Epstein (a "godfather"). The text also recounts testimony from a witness, Matt, about Jane confronting her mother years later, stating that money she received was "not free."
DOJ-OGR-00014415.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the closing summation by prosecutor Ms. Moe. The text focuses on a restrictive household manual that warned employees to 'see nothing, hear nothing,' which the prosecution argues was designed to cover up the 'horrifying crimes' committed by Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. The prosecutor also highlights a repeating pattern or 'playbook' Maxwell used to exploit multiple victims, specifically naming Jane, Annie, Carolyn, and Kate.
DOJ-OGR-00014533.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript of a summation by Ms. Menninger, likely for the defense in a case involving Ghislaine Maxwell. Menninger challenges the prosecution's evidence by questioning a witness's ability to identify accents, discrediting the expert testimony of Dr. Rocchio by framing her as a 'victim apologist' and not a forensic expert, and asserting there is no evidence Maxwell groomed key individuals like Carolyn, Annie, or Kate.
DOJ-OGR-00011663.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing procedural discussions in a criminal case. An attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, requests and receives permission from the government and court to share Dr. Rocchio's testimony with two other witnesses, Dr. Dietz and Dr. Loftus. The court also sets a deadline of the upcoming Saturday for the government to provide its order-of-witness list and confirms with both the prosecution (Ms. Comey) and defense (Ms. Sternheim) that no plea offers have been communicated.
Grooming
Dr. Rocchio talked to the person being addressed about grooming.
Psychology of sexual trauma
Explained that disclosure is a process that unfolds over time.
Literature on grooming and seduction
Dr. Rocchio provided an article by Park Dietz to the government to help explain concepts of grooming and seduction.
Expert testimony preparation
The Government conducted interviews with Dr. Rocchio, and notes from these interviews were produced to the defense as part of the Jencks Act material.
Expert testimony preparation
The Government conducted interviews with Dr. Rocchio, and notes from these interviews were produced to the defense as part of the Jencks Act material.
Case preparation
Government took notes in connection with its meetings and phone calls with Dr. Rocchio.
Effects of child sexual abuse
Expert testimony on health risks and mental health problems resulting from abuse.
Scheduling and other matters
Dr. Rocchio mentions that some of the 14 contacts with the government in the last year were telephone calls for scheduling purposes.
The use and definition of the term 'grooming'
An unnamed questioner asks Dr. Rocchio to respond to a passage from an article about the term 'grooming'. Dr. Rocchio critiques the passage, finding it confusing and disagreeing with the author's conclusion that grooming cannot involve prosocial or normal behaviors.
Consistency of abuse reports and the concept of grooming
An unnamed questioner conducts a direct examination of Dr. Rocchio, asking about the consistency between victims' and perpetrators' accounts of abuse, the number of patients he has treated related to grooming, and the importance of the concept of grooming in treating childhood sexual abuse.
Definition of Grooming
Dr. Rocchio explains the history of grooming literature (since the 1980s) and outlines the five general stages of grooming behaviors.
Grooming and sexual gratification
Ms. Pomerantz asks if the person doing the grooming is always the recipient of sexual gratification. Dr. Rocchio begins to answer 'No' before being interrupted by an objection.
Dr. Rocchio's graduate studies and expertise in psychology
An unnamed individual questions Dr. Rocchio about his doctoral training in clinical psychology, his specific areas of focus such as traumatic stress and forensic psychology, and his knowledge of interpersonal violence.
Definitions of attachment, grooming, and coercive control
An unnamed questioner conducts a direct examination of Dr. Rocchio. Dr. Rocchio defines 'attachment' as a relationship and connection between people and explains how offenders use it in grooming to manipulate children by creating dependency and trust.
Expertise and research on the topic of grooming
Mr. Rohrbach questions Dr. Rocchio, who confirms he has not published his own research or conducted metadata studies on grooming. Dr. Rocchio also confirms his testimony is based on studies by other experts and acknowledges there is disagreement in the scientific literature on the topic.
Disclosure patterns of sexual abuse survivors
An unnamed questioner asks Dr. Rocchio about the frequency of delayed disclosure of sexual abuse, who survivors are most likely to disclose to (peers, trusted friends), and the likelihood of reporting to law enforcement (very low).
Basis of witness testimony and knowledge of the case
Ms. Pomerantz questions Dr. Rocchio, who confirms he has not interviewed witnesses, has no personal knowledge of the case facts, and that his testimony will not be based on information from this specific case. He also states he is being paid hourly for his time.
Delayed disclosure in childhood sexual abuse cases
An unidentified questioner asks Dr. Rocchio to define 'delayed disclosure' and explain how the relationship between a victim and perpetrator affects the reporting of abuse.
Expert Testimony Preparation/Interview
Discussion regarding Dr. Rocchio's qualifications, definitions of trauma, grooming behaviors, delayed disclosure, memory, and complex trauma.
Case discussion / Witness Interview
Dr. Rocchio was interviewed by the government; notes were produced (3500 material).
Vetting/Interview Call
Discussion regarding Dr. Rocchio's qualifications, experience with sexual trauma survivors, and forensic assessments.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity