Epstein Secrets

adicted also by that of a disinterested witness, Andrew Rambush. The court is of the opinion that Monro

d- missible only to show a state of mind, the exclusionary hearsay rule is quite ir- relevant. McCormick, Evidence, § 228, at pp. 465-467 (1954); 6 Wigmore, Evidence, §§ 1766, 1770, 1772, and 1789 (3rd ed. 1940). It might be added that, even if all of the testimony to which this objection has been ma

roud to have been named after. “Daniel Webster,” “Andrew Jackson” and “Oliver Wendell Holmes.” That’s what

chool professors on “Psychoanalysis, Psychiatry and the Law”—to reverse what appeared to be a possibly unjust conviction. The great legal commentator Wigmore had written the following about evidence of guilty feelings: “The commission of a crime leaves usually upon the consciousness a moral impression whi

is essentially rape” and that 7 [get sources] 8 [Andrew Dworkin] 231 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017318 4.2.12 WC:

ion that when it comes to rape only women always tell the truth. This bias is an wrongheaded as the anachronistic bias, reflected in the writings of Wigmore and others, that men are more likely to tell the truth than women. A highly publicized case in 2011 may well illustrate the reality that both men an