Recap, analysis of Jennifer McCabe's cross-examination

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Karen Read Murder Trial: Canton Confidential Episode: Recap and Analysis of Jennifer McCabe's Cross-Examination
Host/Author: NBC10 Boston
Release Date: May 1, 2025

---

Introduction

In this episode of Canton Confidential, NBC10 Boston provides an in-depth recap and analysis of the recent cross-examination of Jennifer McCabe, a pivotal prosecution witness in the high-profile Karen Read murder trial. The episode delves into the strategies employed by both the defense and prosecution, the demeanor and credibility of McCabe under questioning, and expert opinions on the potential impact of today's proceedings on the trial's outcome.

---

Jennifer McCabe’s Testimony and Cross-Examination

Jennifer McCabe, one of the three women who discovered the body of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe, took center stage in today's court proceedings. During her testimony, McCabe was subjected to intense cross-examination by defense attorney Alan Jackson, aiming to challenge her credibility and highlight inconsistencies in her statements.

Notable Exchanges:

• McCabe’s Assurance:
  Jennifer McCabe (00:26): “It wasn't a lie. No.”
  Raul (00:27): “Was it true?”
  McCabe (00:29): “I had. Was it true?”
  (McCabe emphasizes the truthfulness of her initial statements amid accusations of lying to federal agents.)

• McCabe’s Consistency:
  McCabe (00:41): “We both know what happened. We don't have to have a story. There is no story. There's what happened.”

---

Defense Attorney Alan Jackson’s Strategy

Attorney Alan Jackson focused his cross-examination on undermining McCabe's credibility by highlighting perceived inconsistencies and suggesting possible collusion with other witnesses. His approach aimed to portray McCabe as unreliable, thereby casting doubt on the prosecution's case.

Key Tactics:

• Highlighting Inconsistencies:
  Jackson scrutinized McCabe's statements regarding conversations with other witnesses and her recounting of events.
  Jackson (04:00): “You also left out that you contacted Brian Albert himself, correct?”
  McCabe (04:07): “Yes, my brother-in-law. I didn't lie to them. I had forgotten who I had called.”

• Questioning Testimony Preparation:
  Jackson (03:38): “Was there any discussion about crafting your testimony in any way to suggest a softer approach?”
  McCabe (03:46): “No.”

• Emphasizing Previous Statements:
  He brought attention to McCabe’s prior grand jury testimony, questioning discrepancies between her statements then and now.
  Jackson (04:34): “In your entire grand jury testimony, you never said, my client said the words, I hit him 12 separate times.”

---

Prosecution’s Response and Strategy

The prosecution, led by Attorney Brennan, countered the defense's attempts to discredit McCabe by reinforcing the consistency and reliability of her testimony. They strategically positioned expert testimonies and leveraged McCabe's previous statements to support their case.

Strategic Positioning:

• Expert Testimony Alignment:
  Alan Jackson (16:48): Praised the prosecution’s decision to present expert testimony before McCabe’s re-testimony, enhancing the credibility of the prosecution's narrative.

• Use of Visual Evidence:
  The prosecution utilized police dash cam footage and documentary clips to provide a comprehensive view of Karen Reed’s actions and character, aiming to preemptively address defense narratives.

---

Expert Analysis from NBC10 Boston Legal Analysts

The episode features insights from NBC10 Boston’s Chief Legal Analyst, Michael Coyne, and other legal experts who dissect the courtroom dynamics and the effectiveness of the defense’s cross-examination tactics.

Insights:

• Witness Preparation:
  Michael Coyne (06:11): “Every witness is prepped for their testimony... It would be malpractice for either the prosecution or the defense to not prepare their witnesses for what for many is a very difficult experience.”

• Impact of Defense Tactics:
  Coyne critiques Jackson’s aggressive style, suggesting it may backfire by eliciting jury sympathy for McCabe.
  Coyne (08:14): “The jury always feels sympathetic for the witness, not the lawyer, because we are seen as the bullies, the aggressors.”

• Courtroom Strategy Effectiveness:
  Martin Radner (14:35): Evaluates the defense's strategy of impeaching McCabe as effective, particularly by highlighting inconsistencies between her grand jury testimony and current statements.

---

Reactions from Karen Reed and Other Parties

Defendant Karen Reed vocally challenged McCabe’s credibility, accusing her of perjury and inconsistency. Reed’s reactions underscore the tension and high stakes of the trial, as the defense seeks to portray her as wrongfully accused.

Karen Reed’s Assertions:

• Karen Reed (05:08): “Another witness, another instance of perjury or instances?”
• Karen Reed (05:14): “This is very similar to what we saw a year ago.”

---

Conclusion and Implications for the Trial

Today's cross-examination of Jennifer McCabe represents a crucial juncture in the Karen Reed murder trial. The defense’s aggressive questioning aimed to dismantle the prosecution’s case by targeting McCabe’s credibility, while the prosecution remains steadfast in affirming the reliability of her testimony. Expert analyses suggest that while the defense’s tactics are bold, their effectiveness may vary based on jury perception.

Looking Forward:

• Upcoming Testimonies:
  McCabe is scheduled to return to the stand for a third day of testimony on Friday, where further examination of prior statements and alleged inconsistencies will continue.

• Strategic Shifts:
  The prosecution plans to emphasize the timeline and collaborative efforts among the witnesses to strengthen their narrative against Karen Reed.

This episode of Canton Confidential underscores the complexity of legal strategies in high-stakes trials and sets the stage for the ongoing battle for truth and justice in the Karen Reed case.

---

Notable Quotes with Timestamp Attribution:

• Jennifer McCabe (00:26): “It wasn't a lie. No.”
• Jennifer McCabe (00:41): “We both know what happened. We don't have to have a story. There is no story. There's what happened.”
• Karen Reed (04:34): “You were under the same oath that you were under today.”
• Michael Coyne (06:11): “Every witness is prepped for their testimony...”
• Michael Coyne (08:14): “The jury always feels sympathetic for the witness, not the lawyer...”
• Alan Jackson (16:48): “Oh, it was brilliant. It was absolutely brilliant.”

---

Stay Informed

For continuous updates and detailed analyses of the Karen Reed murder trial, tune into Canton Confidential weeknights at 7 on NBC10 Boston or stream episodes on Peacock. Engage with the community by sending your questions to CantonConfidentialBCuni.com, where the team will address as many queries as possible.

Transcript

[Latoya]

The Canton Confidential podcast is brought to you by NBC 10 Boston news worthy of you. Start your day with Latoya, Raul and Tevin, Weekday mornings at 6. NBC 10 Boston mornings. Worthy of you tonight, back on the stand.

[Raul]

Good morning, Mr. McCabe.

[Jennifer McCabe]

Good morning.

[Latoya]

Prosecution witness Jennifer McCabe cross examined by Karen Reed's defense.

[Jennifer McCabe]

It wasn't a lie. No.

[Raul]

Was it true?

[Jennifer McCabe]

I had. Was it true?

[Raul]

They're a lie.

[Jennifer McCabe]

It wasn't a lie.

[Latoya]

Why? She's being accused of lying to federal agents. Plus, the defense focuses on her conversations with other witnesses.

[Jennifer McCabe]

We both know what happened. We don't have to have a story. There is no story. There's what happened.

[Latoya]

What today's grilling could mean for the defense's bid to point the finger at third party culprits. And Karen Reed responds to McCabe's testimony.

[Karen Reed]

Another witness, Another instance of perjury or instances?

[Latoya]

I'd say what she had to say outside of court. Canton confidence. The Karen Reed murder trial starts now.

[Karen Reed]

We begin with a key prosecution witness in this high profile case taking center stage yet again. Good Evening, everyone. I'm J.C. monahan.

[Glenn Jones]

And I'm Glenn Jones. Jennifer McCabe was back on the stand today, but this time she spent hours cross examined by defense attorney Alan Jackson. One witness, a lot to unpack. Our Melanie Mendez is covering it all outside Norfolk Superior Court in Denham. Melody. This was a marathon day for Jennifer McCabe.

[Melanie Mendez]

It absolutely was. Glenn and J.C. you put it perfectly. A marathon day, hours and hours on the stand. Now, here's the thing. We know she is a central figure in this case. We heard a whole lot from her in the first trial. But the woman that we saw on the stand today came across very, very differently. She was friendly, she was smiling, very agreeable throughout her testimony. Now, here's the thing. There was clearly an effort that was being made her to connect with the jury. She was making eye contact with them, often smiling broadly when she did that. And she still though, managed to dodge some of the most important questions in the case. So take a look for yourself. Jennifer McCabe, a key witness in this case. Back on the stand, McCabe, one of three women who found John O'Keefe's body outside the Albert home. Her sister Nicole Albert, the owner of that home. McCabe was questioned about several times where she was speaking with other witnesses and law enforcement involved in the case, notably McCabe, saying that after O'Keeffe's body was taken from outside the home, she spent hours inside the Albert home with her family discussing what had Happened. She says it was during that time inside the home that she remembered Reed saying, I hit him. I hit him. I hit him. McCabe testified about sitting down with Carrie Roberts to write a timeline of the morning O'Keefe was found on cross examination. Defense attorney Alan Jackson started by asking McCabe when she last spoke with witness Carrie Roberts and pressed her as to whether the two discussed the case and collaborated on their testimony.

[Raul]

Neither one of you, your good friend Carrie Roberts and you have ever discussed either of your testimonies between that time and this time?

[Jennifer McCabe]

No, we've discussed the case and we've discussed what happened that moment. That's my story.

[Raul]

As you said, that's your story.

[Alan Jackson]

Correct.

[Jennifer McCabe]

My story.

[Raul]

It's the truth.

[Melanie Mendez]

Noticeably different this time around, McCabe's demeanor on the stand. Jackson asking McCabe about several, several recent meetings she had with the DA's office in anticipation of Wednesday's testimony.

[Raul]

Was there any discussion about crafting your testimony in any way to suggest a softer approach?

[Jennifer McCabe]

No.

[Melanie Mendez]

She was also asked about an interview with federal law enforcement at her home in which she asked for time to get ready before the interview started, but in that time made several phone calls. McCabe later admitting she misinformed investigators about who she'd called.

[Raul]

You also left out that you contacted Brian Albert himself, correct?

[Jennifer McCabe]

Yes, my brother in law. I didn't lie to them. I had forgotten who I had called.

[Raul]

And all of a sudden you had an epiphany right after they walked out the door?

[Jennifer McCabe]

Yes.

[Melanie Mendez]

During a particularly tense exchange toward the end of the day, Jackson pressed McCabe on her testimony, telling the jury today that she heard Karen Reed say, I hit him three times, but never mentioning anything like that when she testified before the grand jury just weeks after the incident happened.

[Raul]

In your entire grand jury testimony, you never said, my client said the words, I hit him 12 separate times. You were asked to repeat words that my client said and you recounted those words truthfully and honestly at that time. Correct?

[Jennifer McCabe]

Correct.

[Raul]

Because you were under the same oath that you were under today.

[Jennifer McCabe]

Correct.

[Raul]

And things were much fresher in your mind then than they are now three and a half years later.

[Melanie Mendez]

Karen Reed reacting to McCabe's testimony on her way out of court.

[Jennifer McCabe]

It's just more of the same inconsistencies.

[Karen Reed]

Every statement's different under oath, not under oath.

[Jennifer McCabe]

The cops are all wrong. This is.

[Karen Reed]

This is very similar to what we saw a year ago.

[Glenn Jones]

Do you think that she colluded with why? Why is she so inconsistent?

[Karen Reed]

Because she's lying.

[Melanie Mendez]

So on her way out of court. Karen Movies also asked, did you ever ask Jennifer McCabe to Google search how long to die in cold? And she said I did not. And, and I certainly did not tell her to make the search at 2:27am either. Now Jennifer McCabe will be back on the witness stand again. Alan Jackson saying he still has a few more hours of cross examination to go. She will be back for her third day of testimony on Friday. Glenn, J.C. back to you with three.

[Karen Reed]

Days on the stand last time in the first trial. We're joined now by NBC 10 Boston Chief Legal Analyst Michael Coyne. Michael, can we just turn back for just a moment because Ellen Jackson was asking about how much Prep did Jennifer McCabe have in the DA's office before she took the stand this time? Is that normal? What can or can't they do? Because there was a tonal shift in how she presented herself.

[Michael Coyne]

But that could be a self assessment as well. You know, every witness is prepped for their testimony and that just simply means walking them through, having them understand what the dynamics of the courtroom are, how to respond to questions and not get angry. It's very difficult, I think, for a lot of witnesses not to take it personally, but it would be malpractice for either the prosecution or the defense to not prepare their witnesses for what for many is a very difficult experience.

[Karen Reed]

So then why did he ask?

[Michael Coyne]

I think he thinks it's going to land with the jury and somehow they're going to feel that this is some lower level than conspiracy. I don't see it. And I think what we're going to find is when his witnesses are there, we're going to see tit for tat. These witnesses are also prepped by the, by the defendant now. And prepped just simply means trying to make the witness comfortable on the stand with what for many is an extraordinarily difficult experience.

[Karen Reed]

Yes.

[Glenn Jones]

Like Jackson's cross examination in the first trial, he has been picking apart differences between what Jennifer McCabe is saying now and what she said on the stand or to investigators before. Here's a listen.

[Jennifer McCabe]

Okay.

[Raul]

Jurors, ignore the comments of counsel.

[Karen Reed]

Ask one question.

[Raul]

Mr. Jackson, you said that she said, could I have hit him? Did I hit him in the presence of the female emt? That's what you testified to under oath at the grand jury, isn't it?

[Jennifer McCabe]

Yes, because she also said that.

[Glenn Jones]

So there was that point. There was also this point about not telling the federal investigators who came to see her who she had called on the telephone before she began talking to them. I wonder if you think this is effective by Alan Jackson or does he run the risk of bullying the witness where the jury starts to feel sympathetic for her?

[Michael Coyne]

You know, the jury always feels sympathetic for the witness, not the lawyer, because we are seen as the bullies, the aggressors. So you have to play that line very, very carefully.

[Glenn Jones]

How is he doing in that regard?

[Michael Coyne]

I'm not so sure that he's doing it as effectively as he would like. You would actually think the big time Hollywood superstar lawyer would be a complete mismatch against the basketball mom from the suburbs. I think she's more than held her own and I think at times that sympathy. There are jurors in all likelihood who are thinking, well, boy, would he do that to me if I was on the stand. Others might well be taking it as well. She's still not telling the entire truth about some of the earlier statements. So it's actually a toss up as to how that juror, that jury, is receiving it in its entirety.

[Karen Reed]

To that point. Alan Jackson talked a lot about how much time Jennifer McCabe spent with other people, going over the timeline, reviewing what happened that day. Again, we know that the defense is trying to point fingers at other people that there was a conspiracy. But to your point, as I was sitting there, I was like, well, I would talk to my friends and family too, in this case. It happens to be a lot of people on the witness list, but in general, that's who I would go to to talk about it. So again, hit or a miss for. For the prosecutor, for the defense, again.

[Michael Coyne]

I don't think it's as effective as he's expecting simply because it is a shared experience that is horrific from the standpoint of how a fun night ended just so badly with the good friend dying and now the friends are family and friends are getting together to say, well, what happened? Was he sick? What. What was the problem? I don't think it's as effective to suggest that they should have no communications once this event happens. And I don't think it's going to get them where they want to go, which is trying to argue that third party culprit.

[Glenn Jones]

Defense McCabe was also asked on cross about her meeting with friends and family in the hours after John O'Keefe was discovered in the snow. He asked whether they separated themselves from each other. Let's listen to a clip that discusses that.

[Raul]

You're not a professional investigator, correct?

[Jennifer McCabe]

I'm not, no.

[Raul]

You're not a trained investigator?

[Jennifer McCabe]

No.

[Raul]

You're certainly not a homicide detective. Correct.

[Jennifer McCabe]

No.

[Raul]

None of you witnesses were ever separated, were you, that morning?

[Jennifer McCabe]

There was no reason to separate us.

[Raul]

I'm asking you if there was a reason. I'm asking you whether or not factually anybody was separated in the house or is everybody allowed to talk amongst themselves?

[Jennifer McCabe]

I was with my family. We didn't need to be allowed.

[Karen Reed]

NBC10 courtroom insider Sue O'Connell joining the conversation now. So to this point, sue and Michael here, Jackson is putting the onus on the witness that they should have separated themselves immediately in the presence of law enforcement. But really that should be on police. They're the ones who should do that. So again, start with you, Sue. Why? How did it feel in the courtroom in that position where he keeps needling that?

[Sue O'Connell]

Well, he not only did that, he also kind of kept asking her when Sergeant Lank was. What was Lank doing that when you called to see him? He had to put on his gear and he had to get there. And he was in the. She's like, I don't know what he was doing. That wasn't my job to know that was doing. I was expecting an objection from Brennan on that. I mean, I think what Jackson was doing was arguing or cross examining the other Jen McCabe from the last trial, and he was trying to have her react in some way. And he might have been, to your point, Michael, doing a balance here. If I can get her off her feet a little bit, maybe I can get something from her. And he was doing a balance of if it was worth doing it at the risk of the losing the jury or not. But. But it wasn't really getting any traction. There was a lot of this cross that didn't get traction.

[Glenn Jones]

Michael, one of the most memorable things you said at this table during the first trial is that law enforcement was not covering itself in glory. Is this another example of that?

[Michael Coyne]

Absolutely. But the witnesses should have been instructed not to talk about it. They should have been interviewed separately. But there was a lot of time spent now trying to develop this whole point about she's fabricating the. I hit him. I've already seen testimony in this case from an outtake from an interview that the defendant did where she admitted that, okay, I said I hit him, but I didn't think I said it as often as law enforcement says I did. So for at least an hour today, an hour plus maybe an hour and a half, two hours, all I kept hearing was, I hit him, I hit him, I hit him. Even if you want to argue about it and parse it the way we did is that hitting with the jury and reminding them of that earlier testimony that was introduced by her in the outtake from the interview that she admitted it. So there's a lot of capital being spent that I think unnecessarily about this issue of did she say it? Because she's admitted it now.

[Karen Reed]

All right, Sue, Michael, stay there. Don't go anywhere. They'll be sticking around. So we'll see you in just a bit. But coming up next, we dig deeper into the defense's cross examination of Jennifer McCabe. She wasn't the first prosecution witness to be impeached by the defense, but is this strategy working? A legal expert, a new one joining us to offer his take.

[Martin Radner]

What if you could use your home equity to pay off your debt without monthly payments so you could focus on reaching your other financial goals? With a home equity investment from HomeTap, you can get access to your home equity in cash, get closer to financial freedom and get more out of life. Learn more and see if you pre qualify for an [e-mail] Subject to eligibility, terms and conditions apply. Get access to your home equity in cash. Visit hometap.com to apply in minutes. That's hometap.com don't miss any of the.

[Latoya]

Karen Reed murder trial. Get the full recap of what happened in court, expert analysis and what we could see next. This is coverage you won't see anywhere else. Canton confidential, weeknights at 7 on NBC 10 Boston.

[Jennifer McCabe]

I don't need to see my transcript. I know what I know and I know what I remember. So that's not my question.

[Raul]

I'm not asking what you remember now. I'm asking how you testified a year ago, ma'am.

[Jennifer McCabe]

Whether I said it was as we're fighting over silly words, whether I said as I got out of the car, we were there.

[Raul]

Words matter. They matter lost.

[Glenn Jones]

Let's get back to breaking down Jennifer McCabe's testimony today at Karen Reed's retrial. Defense attorney Alan Jackson was clearly focused on impeaching Jennifer McCabe on the stand.

[Karen Reed]

So this continues an ongoing pattern by the defense. Joining us now is Martin Radner. He's a Michigan based attorney following this case on his YouTube channel, Brother Counsel. All right, let's talk about the defense's strategy of impeaching witnesses. We saw it again today with McCabe. Do you think it's a strategy that is working?

[Alan Jackson]

Well, we understand that this time, you know, Jennifer McCabe is coming across much more soft, as Alan Jackson himself pointed out, much more compassionate Much more controlled. We're definitely seeing that. So it's a little bit less combative. However, once you get past that optics and the jury's actually thinking about the evidence or thinking about the facts in this case, and then they start thinking about the inconsistencies, they think about how Alan Jackson lays out this foundation, that this is something Karen Reed, that she would say to this emt, I hit him, I hit him. I hit him affirmatively, not in a question. And that's what Jennifer McCabe heard. And this was so memorable, it was so unforgettable. It was so something that you would never overlook. And yet in the grand jury testimony, she overlooks it. So it's a very strong point for cross examination on impeaching Jennifer McCabe's credibility. So absolutely. And then remember, number two in this case is the Chloe. Where is Chloe after all? There's chaos in front in the front yard, there's lights, there's screaming by Karen Reed, there's screaming by Carrie Roberts. Jennifer McCabe bursts into the bedroom and she has no recollection at all about anything to do with Chloe. And remember, Chloe's going to play a very important part in this case. So that was something else that Alan Jackson was able to bring out, which throws a lot of questions about this case.

[Glenn Jones]

You know, on your first point, Jackson dramatically handed over 200 pages of her grand jury testimony and told her to find where she said it. Of course, she didn't actually go through the 200 pages, but it was a very dramatic act in court. Let's switch to the prosecution strategy. They had McCabe testify right after Ian Wiffen, the Cellebrite expert who testified about the time of the Google searches. For so many people who even follow this trial, superficially, they know about that. How's long to die in the cold Google search that the prosecution is trying to debunk happened at 2:27am what do you think about their positioning of having that expert testimony right before Jim McCabe gets on the stand?

[Alan Jackson]

Oh, it was brilliant. It was absolutely brilliant. And you got to have them back to back. And in fact, to have Ian Whiffin come first before Jennifer McCabe, that is just great strategy because if you have Jennifer McCabe go first and then she's able to be impeached by Ellen Jackson, showing the celle by records which show that this suture, this search was done at 2:27 in the morning and it does show in a deleted state without any sort of explanation to the jury. That can look very damaging. But when you have Ian Whiffin go first and explain how the search never happened at 227 and that the deleted, the deleted state was not because of any action that Jennifer McCabe did. Well, then in that case, the jury already understands this before Jennifer McCabe takes the stand, and it's a lot more believable. So I thought that that was a great ordering, great strategy by Hank Brennan right there.

[Karen Reed]

What about Brennan using video clips as he lays out the Commonwealth's case against Karen Reid? He worked in Police Dash Day. It's a lot different than Trial one. Do you think it's more effective?

[Alan Jackson]

Oh, yeah. Well, the dash cam we saw plenty about in Trial one. So that's always effective to be able to identify what people are doing, where they are, who they're talking to. So that's always very compelling and effective. But also these, this part when we're going to be seeing clips of Karen Reid herself and all these documentaries and these docuseries, that's really changing this trial, I think a lot. I think the jury can already start to get a feeling of who Karen Reid is, the type of personality she is. It's almost like she's testifying without taking the stand. So that was probably a big mistake that she was talking to all these news outlets and doing these documentaries and those clips Hank Brennan is using to his advantage. And I think that's also something that's going to be very different and weighing on the jury's mind about how they're actually taking in who Karen Reid actually is as a person and maybe making some judgments based on that.

[Glenn Jones]

Martin Radner, we appreciate your insight. It's so great having you. We hope to see you again before this trial is over. Thanks so much for joining us.

[Alan Jackson]

Thank you for having me on. Glenn and J.C. good luck to you.

[Glenn Jones]

All right, we're back now with Michael Coyne and Sue O'Connell. So no court tomorrow, but Jennifer McCabe will be back on the stand again on Friday. Maybe we should pick up where Martin left off because he did see Jackson's cross as slightly more effective in the eyes of the jury than you do. But I guess that just goes to show it's really in the eye of the beholder how they're going to evaluate something like that.

[Michael Coyne]

Want a different opinion, get a different so. But no, I mean, you know, and there's a jury instruction that says if a witness has lied on anything, you are free to disbelieve the entirety of their testimony. And so there, there are problems with the testimony. The advantage is I thought it'd be a lot, that it could have been a lot worse. And so right now, she's holding her own. I think what we'll see then as we move forward to the redirect on Friday, I think Attorney Brennan will focus on the fact that in Karen Reid's time of need, she turned to two people who she believed were friends and they're the ones that manufactured the framing of all of this evidence and the fabrication. I just don't think it's plausible. And I think that's what he'll focus on and redirect.

[Karen Reed]

We have a whole other day, fully no doubt, with Jennifer McCabe. Thank you both, sue and Michael, very much. Again, we can talk about everything we're going to offer you here right here on Canton Compound Confidential. And if you have any questions about this case, keep sending them our way. The email is on your screen, Canton ConfidentialBCuni.com we'll answer as many questions as we can.

[Glenn Jones]

And remember to join us on Canton Confidential, the Karen Reid murder trial. Every weeknight at 7. We'll have a full recap of the latest developments from court, as well as legal analysis. Plus episodes will be streaming on Peacock. This is Canton Confidential, the Karen Reed murder trial.