Epstein Secrets

ill preclude the expert testimony of Dr. Ryan Hall The Government moves to preclude the expert testimony of Dr. Ryan Hall. Dr. Hall was retained by Jeffrey Epstein to evaluate Alleged Victim 4, which Dr. Hall did in 2009, in connection with Alleged Victim 4's civil suit against Epstein. Epstein admitted liabili

was retained by Jeffrey Epstein to evaluate Alleged Victim 4, which Dr. Hall did in 2009, in connection with Alleged Victim 4's civil suit against Epstein. Epstein admitted liability for sexually abusing Alleged Victim 4 and the dispute was about the extent of damages only. Dr. Hall issued a report in

imony of Dr. Ryan Hall. Dr. Hall was retained by Jeffrey Epstein to evaluate Alleged Victim 4, which Dr. H

pend on Alleged Victim 4's response to that question, whether any prior statement is actually "inconsistent" with her response, see United States v. Trzaska, 111 F.3d 1019,1024-25 (2d Cir. 1997) (reversing a district court's admission of prior statements that were not inconsistent), and whether the Defe

ill preclude the expert testimony of Dr. Ryan Hall The Government moves to preclude the expert testimony of Dr. Ryan Hall. Dr. Hall was retained by Jeffrey Epstein to evaluate Alleged Victim 4, which Dr. Hall did in 2009, in connection with Alleged Victim 4's civil suit against Epstein. Epstein admitted liabili

was retained by Jeffrey Epstein to evaluate Alleged Victim 4, which Dr. Hall did in 2009, in connection with Alleged Victim 4's civil suit against Epstein. Epstein admitted liability for sexually abusing Alleged Victim 4 and the dispute was about the extent of damages only. Dr. Hall issued a report in

imony of Dr. Ryan Hall. Dr. Hall was retained by Jeffrey Epstein to evaluate Alleged Victim 4, which Dr. H

pend on Alleged Victim 4's response to that question, whether any prior statement is actually "inconsistent" with her response, see United States v. Trzaska, 111 F.3d 1019,1024-25 (2d Cir. 1997) (reversing a district court's admission of prior statements that were not inconsistent), and whether the Defe

at the time of the events in question do not favor admission. Dr. Hall's report does not delineate clearly which conditions existed at the time of Epstein's abuse, but it appears that at least But at no point in his report does Dr. Hall suggest that these conditions—or any other diagnosed condition

pend on Alleged Victim 4's response to that question, whether any prior statement is actually "inconsistent" with her response, see United States v. Trzaska, 111 F.3d 1019,1024-25 (2d Cir. 1997) (reversing a district court's admission of prior statements that were not inconsistent), and whether the Defe