Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-1647House OversightLegal Filing

The government argues that Dr. Ryan Hall's testimony should be excluded as irrelevant, more prejudic...

The government argues that Dr. Ryan Hall's testimony should be excluded as irrelevant, more prejudicial than probative, and consisting of inadmissible hearsay. The government disputes the defendant's claims that Dr. Hall's opinions are admissible under various rules of evidence, and argues that the testimony is an attempt to attack Minor Victim-4's credibility without a valid basis.

Date
Unknown
Source
House Oversight
Reference
d-1647
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The government argues that Dr. Ryan Hall's testimony should be excluded as irrelevant, more prejudicial than probative, and consisting of inadmissible hearsay. The government disputes the defendant's claims that Dr. Hall's opinions are admissible under various rules of evidence, and argues that the testimony is an attempt to attack Minor Victim-4's credibility without a valid basis.

Tags

Exclusion of expert testimonyAdmissibility of hearsay evidenceCredibility of Minor Victim-4
0Share
PostReddit

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.