DOJ-OGR-00006240.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 424 _ Filed 11/08/21 Page 29 of 41 widespread or general acceptance, or are otherwise reliable. See Daubert, 509 U.S. at 593-95, 592 &n.10. Accordingly, unless the defense meets its burden of affirmatively establishing that this opinion, as applied to the context of this case, meets the Daubert reliability standard, it should be precluded. See, e.g., P.S. ex rel. Nelson v. The Farm, Inc., 658 F. Supp. 2d 1281, 1288 (D. Kan. 2009) (excluding as unreliable an expert’s opinion that children typically report abuse in response to direct questioning without holding hearing). Should the defense come forward with some evidence of reliability in its response papers, the Government would respectfully request an opportunity to reply or, in the alternative, a Daubert hearing to probe the issue. To the extent Dr. Dietz seeks to apply his opinions to the context of this case, the defendant has not established the reliability of these opinions, which should be precluded or, at a minimum, explored at a hearing. And to the extent Dr. Dietz seeks to apply his opinions to other contexts, they are irrelevant.” I. CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE PROPOSED EXPERT TESTIMONY OF DR. ELIZABETH LOFTUS SHOULD BE PRECLUDED A. Background The defense seeks to offer expert opinions of Dr. Loftus on “the workings of human memory.” (Ex. A at 1). Specifically, the defense seeks to offer testimony from Dr. Loftus regarding: 1. “[H]ow memory fades and weakens over time.” ? The Government understands that Dr. Dietz is not planning on attending the November 10, 2021 Daubert hearing of Dr. Rocchio, and the Government has not to date received any Rule 26.2 disclosures from Dr. Dietz, or even a complete bibliography of the sources cited in his disclosure. The Government respectfully requests that, should a hearing be scheduled on the reliability of Dr. Dietz’s opinions, that hearing be held after the defense’s response to this motion and after all necessary Rule 26.2 disclosures are made. 29 DOJ-OGR-00006240