DOJ-OGR-00008087.pdf

--- Page 1 --- **Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE** **Document 508** **Filed 11/24/21** **Page 2 of 25** **TABLE OF CONTENTS** **TABLE OF CONTENTS** * i * ii **TABLE OF AUTHORITIES** * i * ii **INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT** * 1 * ARGUMENT + 1 + I. Dr. Hall's Testimony Is Admissible. - 1 - A. Factual background. - 3 - B. The government's motion is not a Rule 702 challenge. - 5 - C. Excluding Dr. Hall's expert opinions would deprive Ms. Maxwell of her constitutional rights to confrontation and to present a defense. - 6 + 7 + 12 + 14 + 14 + 16 + 17 + 17 + 19 + 19 + 21 **ARGUMENT** * 1 **Dr. Hall's Testimony Is Admissible.** * 1 * A. Factual background. + 3 * B. The government's motion is not a Rule 702 challenge. + 5 * C. Excluding Dr. Hall's expert opinions would deprive Ms. Maxwell of her constitutional rights to confrontation and to present a defense. + 6 **Dr. Hall's opinions are not unfairly prejudicial under Rule 403.** * 14 **Rule 703 does not bar Dr. Hall from testifying.** * 14 **Dr. Hall's "fact testimony."** * 16 **Conclusion.** * 17 **Professor Gershman's Testimony is Admissible.** * 17 **This Court Should Reject the Government's Remaining Arguments.** * 19 **CONCLUSION** * 19 **Certificate of Service** * 21