DOJ-OGR-00011147.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 692 Filed 11/22/21 Page9of17 States v. Giovinco, No. 18-CR-14 (JSR), 2020 WL 832920, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 20, 2020) (finding that depression did not impact the witness’s “ability to accurately perceive or recall” relevant events); see also United States v. Cooper, No. 15-CR-152 (RMC), 2017 WL 11496709, at *1 (D.D.C. Jan. 27, 2017) (excluding diagnosis of major depressive disorder). Last, the Defense points to the diagnosis for ie ee ae Se. again, this is not a basis for impeaching Alleged Victim 4’s ability to testify truthfully under Sasso. 59 F.3d at 348; see also Hernandez v. Kelly, No. 09 CV 1576 TLM LB, 2011 WL 2117611, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. May 27, 2011) (explaining that a condition must “bear[ ] on [a witness’s] ability to rationally perceive events at the time and to accurately recollect and report his perceptions”). In assessing the relevance of each of these diagnoses, the Court also takes account of Dr. Hall’s conclusion that despite her several conditions, Alleged Victim 4 has no “psychotic believes [sic], hallucinations or delusions.” Report at 92; see also id. at 80 (“she reports no period of... hallucinations”). Further, Dr. Hall several times commented that Alleged Victim 4’s memory was very accurate. F.g., id. at 85 (“No .. . alterations in memory, or changes in orientation or level of attention.”’); 92 (“Her memory was impeccable and at multiple times during the evaluation she pointed out to the examiner questions he did or didn’t ask. She reported her memory is ‘perfect’ and that she will remember every detail of the room in which the evaluation was done.” (emphases in original)). On review, the Court cannot identify any point in the report at which Dr. Hall doubts Alleged Victim 4’s account of events. Instead, he appears to summarize and accept her story of sexual conduct with Epstein. /d. at 100-01. In short, none of DOJ-OGR-00011147