627 F.2d 635, 636 (2d Cir.1980). We agree with the statement in Messina that [a]s has been pointed out repeatedly, “[a]n extradition hearing is not the occasion for an adjudication of guilt or innocence.” Melia v. United States, 667 F.2d 300, 302 (2d Cir.1981). The eviden-tiary rules of criminal litigation are not applicable. Id.; Simmons v. Braun, [627 F.2d 635,] 636 [(2d Cir.1980)]; Fed.R.Crim.P. 54(b)(5); Fed.R.Evid. 1101(d)(3). As in the case of a grand jury proceeding, a defendant has no right to cross-examine witnesses or introduce evidence to rebut that of the prosecutor. Charlton v. Kelly, 229 U.S. 447, 462 [33 S.Ct. 945, 950, 57 L.Ed. 1274] (1913); see United States v. Y. Hata & Co., 535 F.2d 508, 512 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 828, 97 S.Ct. 87, 50 L.Ed.2d 92 (1976) [(<HOLDING>) ]. Messina, 728 F.2d at 80. Accordingly, Oen
holding the trial court erred in ordering the transcription of grand jury proceedings so that it could intervene in the operations of the grand jury holding that where witness refused to take the oath and testify his grand jury testimony should not have been admitted because he was not subject to cross examination before the grand jury holding no right to crossexamine in grand jury proceedings holding that the first amendment protects the right to criticize a grand jury investigation holding that right was available in grand jury proceedings