Defense Attorney (2:27)

Her testimony on 227 is not reliable. I'm not looking to exclude it.

Legal Analyst (2:33)

I'm looking to cross her on her reliability.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (2:37)

This is an attempt to try to.

Judge (2:38)

Malign a witness with Something that's wholly unrelated.

Digital Forensics Expert 3 (2:41)

Judge Canoni eventually ruling the defense could not reference the Maryland case in their cross examination. Similarly to what we heard from another expert last week. Hyde said that McCabe opened a tab at 2:27am for something unrelated, left it open, then used the same tab for the Google search hours later.

Digital Forensics Expert (2:58)

There is a timestamp for the search. Ha's long to die in cold. However, that time stamp isn't about active searches. It's about the time that a tab was either opened or moved to the background. There's a really scary danger that an examiner who has not dug into the artifact and tested to see what it means may assume erroneously that that 2:27 timestamp is the time that what is there is searched.

Digital Forensics Expert 3 (3:30)

During cross. Alessi asked about her communication with State Trooper Brian Tully while working on her analysis.

Digital Forensics Expert (3:35)

I'd have to review my call logs. I'm not gonna test more than 10. More than 10, I'm sure.

Digital Forensics Expert 3 (3:39)

Tully was a commander in the detective unit, but later transferred out amid an Internal affairs investigation. Tully was one of Michael Proctor's supervisors. On redirect, Brennan asked if she was ever asked by anyone to reach a certain conclusion.

Digital Forensics Expert (3:53)

My analysis was independent of the District Attorn office.

Digital Forensics Expert 3 (3:56)

And she was asked about the Apple health Data on John O' Keefe's phone.

Defense Attorney (3:59)

You note under the data that John.

Courtroom Insider (4:03)

O' Keefe's phone registered 80 steps at.

Digital Forensics Expert 3 (4:08)

122110 defense attorneys have attempted to show that those steps prove o' Keefe entered Brian Albert's home. The prosecution says there's no evidence he ever went inside. All right, now, once that expert was finished with her testimony, we saw another media clip of a Karen Reid interview that was played. Court resumes at nine o' clock tomorrow morning. We'll be here for it all.

Judge (4:33)

Glenn.

Digital Forensics Expert 3 (4:34)

JC back to you Now.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (4:35)

The defense spent a lot of time yesterday on the police work in this case. Did that continue today?

News Anchor 2 (4:42)

It did.

Digital Forensics Expert 3 (4:42)

You know what? Specifically, they asked the expert witness, Jessica Hyde, to speak to John o' Keefe's phone in the hours after his body was discovered. Specifically, they wanted to know whether that phone was put in something called a phrase, Faraday bag. So essentially, that's a device that's designed to shield any signals from getting to the phone or leaving the phone. So essentially it's to. If you want to think of it as freezing a phone in its current state, nothing can change about that phone once it's in that Faraday bag. But when asked if that device was put into a Faraday bag right away. She said it is best practices to do so, but she could tell from the data that it wasn't done until noon that day, confirming that if it's not in a Faraday bag, data can be overwritten on that device. Glenn JC all right, Melody, thank you.

News Anchor 2 (5:31)

Joining the conversation now is our chief legal analyst, Michael Coyne, as well as attorney William Kickham. Again, as always, thank you both for joining us. Melody just mentioned that Judge Canoni denied a defense's request to bring up this other trial that happened in another state. She said not relevant to it. There was a lot of back and forth on this. There was like a lot of numbers, but also a little human moment. Take a listen to what Judge Canoni said coming out of the lunch break to the jury, and I can't stress.

Courtroom Insider (6:01)

Enough that this should have been brought up before today.

News Anchor 2 (6:03)

So I'll hear you about your concerns, Mr. Alessi. I'll hear the commonwealth's response, then I'll go finish reading everything else you gave me. I get frustrated at lawyers about something. I try not to, and I don't think I am. But if I seem to cut somebody short, the lawyers are just doing all right. Michael Williams, Judge Canole clearly trying to keep this trial moving without having any interference in the actual process. What did you think of the moment, that moment right there in particular, that she's basically saying to the jury, you know, if I sound frustrated, disregard humanity 101.

Legal Analyst (6:42)

I mean, this is. This is a very tense environment. It's very filled with all kinds of biases and thoughts and positions, and you can cut it with a knife. And she's trying to be human. She's trying to say, without saying it, I'm human, too. I'm a person, too. I can get frustrated, too. If I sound frustrated to you, I don't mean to be that kind of thing. And it comes across well.

Defense Attorney (7:06)

And you don't want your actions to influence the jury. You don't want them thinking you're mad at one side or the other or you're curt with one side or the other, because that could potentially sway jurors one way or the other. So what she's doing is, out of an abundance of caution, making sure early on that they understand, you know, things. I say things, the lawyers say things at times focus on the evidence and.

News Anchor 2 (7:29)

Basically saying, lawyers are doing their jobs.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (7:31)

Right?

News Anchor 2 (7:32)

Whatever my response, they're doing what they're supposed to be doing.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (7:35)

So once that hearing was solidified, Jessica Hyde was allowed to testify. She focused on the timing of the much debated Google search House Long to Die in Cold, which was found on Jennifer McCabe's phone. The defense has maintained for years that search was made at 2:27am Before John O' Keefe's body was found. Hyde says the search was really made at 6:24am According to the prosecution's expert, the 2am hour was when the browser tab was open, not when the search was made. And that's the source of the confusion. So I am almost afraid to ask this question, but what's the net net? When did this search happen?

Defense Attorney (8:16)

The jury will decide exactly what the facts actually are because as you noticed, they have an expert coming. She even testified today that their expert is well regarded in the field as well. And they are going to say the exact opposite, that the search was somewhere at around 2am that morning. The jury will ultimately have to sort through and figure out which expert is more credible, what the facts actually for.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (8:41)

Us, why this is so important, this.

Legal Analyst (8:43)

Is critical because if the search was made earlier in the earlier in the day, it points to a certain degree of culpability or guilt. And if it was made later, it doesn't. And you've got two experts for the prosecution, Ian Whiffin and Jessica Hyde so far. And we're going to have expert witnesses for the defense, no doubt, and it's going to come down to credibility. What do these jurors see in each of these experts? Is there a nuance? Is there an inflection of the voice? Is there body language? Is there something that can lead a juror to say, I think it was this time?

News Anchor 2 (9:20)

Well, when it came to the defense, lessee got up there and really was, you know, very heated at times with this expert. You know, yes, she's getting paid by the prosecution to have done the work, but at the same time, her work is her work. So did the defense make any progress with that? Because from an outside perspective, just from mine, I kept trying to see where Alessi was trying to land with his points about is her timeline correct? Is she using correct numbers to try to prove she's wrong, that it did happen at 2:27am he's hammering in on.

Legal Analyst (9:50)

Two words that mean everything, reasonable doubt. Can you be absolutely, positively, scientifically certain that that call was made in the morning?

News Anchor 2 (10:01)

Do you think he.

Defense Attorney (10:02)

I don't think. I don't think he landed. I would call her a Teflon expert. The fact is, everything she owned up to, what she had to own up to. Yes, you read that correctly. She never really faltered she held out on the line and she gave us at the end that that phone never moved from 12:32 that morning from wherever it was located. And that's a big get for the government to that. That shows he never got in the house and that he never wandered too far from where he exited the vehicle. She was a strong witness for the government, I'd agree.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (10:35)

Today's first witness was state trooper Connor Keefe. He's a digital forensics examiner and helped process the scene at 34 Fairview. While on the stand, Trooper Keefe showed the court pieces of evidence, taking out one of John O. Keefes shoes and pieces of broken taillight. And that leads us to a viewer question about handling evidence more generally. Crystal from Texas wants to know if there is an expert witness or investigator handling one piece of evidence with gloves on and then handles another piece of evidence from a different secured bag. Is that not a potential for cross contamination? Michael, why don't you start us off on this one?

Defense Attorney (11:13)

Yes, it is, potentially, except all of the testing and all of the study has already been done. So when they're revealing it in court with the gloves on, the testing, all the results are already in place and so they're not really going to contaminate it. If you were to test it post that, then potentially you have that risk.

News Anchor 2 (11:31)

All right, William, then I'm going to ask you this viewer question. It focuses on legal terminology and the first trial. So Caroline asks in regards to Karen Reed's lawyers and even some witnesses, quote, I've noticed they correct themselves when they use the word trial when referring to the first trial and correct themselves to use the word proceeding. Are they not allowed to allude to the previous TR at all? And if so, why not? Is the jury not supposed to take into account that there was a mistrial or even a first trial at all?

Legal Analyst (11:59)

This is an interesting exercise in semantics. The prosecution doesn't want to use the word trial because they don't want to be perceived as persecuting. And the defense doesn't want to use the word trial because they don't want to acknowledge that there's a prosecution going on. And so you're going to hear proceeding chosen in a long time in many ways instead of trial.

Defense Attorney (12:23)

And they also use proceeding with respect to the grand jury. So they refer to it almost generically, both their trial and the grand jury proceedings as proceeding.

News Anchor 2 (12:33)

Well, you can see why people get confused.

Defense Attorney (12:35)

Absolutely.

News Anchor 2 (12:37)

Dance around it and they can't. But that makes sense. This is all perception and how people are taking in information. You don't want to be the bad guy.

Legal Analyst (12:43)

Right.

Defense Attorney (12:45)

And the silly part of it is everyone who is in panel knows there was another trial. In order to be part of this jury, we had to carefully question them to make sure they wouldn't have listened to the evidence from the first trial and only use what's received here. So.

Legal Analyst (13:01)

So they're all aware.

Defense Attorney (13:02)

Yeah.

News Anchor 2 (13:03)

And yet the dance continues.

Legal Analyst (13:05)

The dance continues.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (13:06)

Gentlemen, thank you.

News Anchor 2 (13:07)

William, thank you for coming. We'll see you again. Michael, we're chaining you to the test. Stick around.

Defense Attorney (13:12)

I'll be here.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (13:14)

Up next, how does today's testimony compare to what was said by the same digital forensics expert during the first trial? Stay with us. Our courtroom insider, Sue o' Connell is joining us. Plus, we're answering more of your viewer questions.

News Anchor 2 (13:28)

And before we go to break, we want to take a moment to remember John o' Keefe, the victim in this case. The Braintree native was a father of figure who stepped up to look after his niece and nephew after an unimaginable family tragedy. Canton Confidential, the Karen Reeve murder trial will be back right after this.

Advertiser (13:50)

Moms deserve our very best, especially on Mother's Day. There's only one place I trust to deliver high quality mom Approved rose bouquets, 1-800-FLowers.com. this year, 1-800-FLowers wants to make sure all the mothers in your life get the best with double the roses for free. When you buy one dozen, they'll double your bouquet to two dozen roses. To claim the double roses offer, go to 1-800-flowers.com sxm. That's 1-800-flowers. Com sxm, the official florist of Mother's Day.

News Anchor 1 (14:21)

Don't miss any of the Karen Reid 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. This Canton confidential, weeknights at 7 on NBC, 10 Boston.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (14:40)

We're back now with chief legal analyst Michael Coyne and courtroom insider Sue o' Connell. So, sue, you were there for Jessica Hyde's testimony and cross examination today as well as in the last trial. So what are some of the differences you're walking away with?

Courtroom Insider (14:54)

Well, one of the big differences is the cross Yannetti didn't do. David Yannetti didn't do very much of a cross at the first trial. This time, the cross was sort of the main piece of what we experience today. As far as her testimony goes, it was pretty, pretty much on point. I mean, she also used the restaurant Analogy to explain where things go in your phone when you're deleting them and they wait in the wait area. So that was on point. And I think that I didn't compare word for word, obviously, but it looks like she was more certain in her reports this time when she was presenting that the search didn't happen in the 2 o' clock hour than it happened in the 6 o' clock clock hour.

News Anchor 2 (15:31)

It was very dense. You know, a lot of tech talk. We had a little of that with the meteorologist, but this was a lot of tech talk. And we know because we've brought in the former juror from the first trial, Ronald and Staslow. I swear, I'm never going to get that name right. So he talked about how this kind of expert testimony in the first trial went over with the jury. Take a listen to what he said.

Judge (15:52)

I think there's still that piece of reasonable doubt because it's not very clear. Right. So. So in a juror's mind, just like when I perceived it for the first time way back then, it seemed like it's not very clear. Right. You have this expert who's saying they're an expert, but it's not very clear in my mind or in anyone's mind. Right. If you look up something, can it happen now or can it happen in the future? Right. So it's still unclear in my mind. I don't know if it's going to resonate in the minds.

News Anchor 2 (16:27)

I know you are looking at those jurors. Does it look like it's registering?

Courtroom Insider (16:31)

Well, again, they're a very stoic group and they take a lot of notes. So they're not giving me a lot. But, you know, you do see people kind of considering things when they're talking about the number of phone calls that, you know, eventually, seven layers down, they get deleted. You have 200 calls that are on your log, 200 WhatsApp, on your log, 200 FaceTime. So you could see those things registering. But I have to say, even for myself, just for me, I have been in the technology world since like 1992. I've run websites, I've built websites. I understand. I've heard testimony like this now four times. And I still get lost. Right. Understanding. And to his point, to Ronald's point, we're going to get another expert up who's going to say the exact opposite of this and be probably just as convincing in a different way. And again, I think the jurors are going to look at this. If history is our Guide and say, I don't know. But the one thing we have different is we have Carrie Roberts saying that, you know, that she did not now say that she heard Karen Tell Jen McCabe to do that search. So will that piece of real life testimony and evidence, is that going to come into play in their closing?

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (17:40)

Michael, let me approach this from a different angle. Do I need to believe that this search happened at 2:27am in order to accord quit Karen Reid? Are the two things tied together?

Defense Attorney (17:52)

No, those two things aren't tied together. But we are looking at this search microscopically. In order for this search to matter to that extent, you have to buy in that he was killed in the house and a group of people that conspired to then leave him out on the front lawn. I think that evidence is lacking. So if this is the linchpin for that, it's up in the air at this point whether in fact you're going to decide that this how long to die in the cold is really that important. They've got to have other evidence that support the meaning of this in order to make it work.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (18:27)

Sort of a series of building blocks.

Defense Attorney (18:29)

Big blocks. Big blocks.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (18:30)

All right, now we want to circle back to those voicemails Karen Reed left for John o' Keefe.

Courtroom Insider (18:40)

Yes.

News Anchor 2 (18:41)

One in the morning.

Courtroom Insider (18:41)

I'm with your.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (18:44)

You pervert.

News Anchor 1 (18:45)

You're a pervert.

News Anchor 2 (18:48)

Okay, we're not playing all of those. That was just a few of the eight voicemails that carried me left on John o' Keefe's phone in those early morning hours before he was found outside 34 Fairview. So, sue and Michael, this got some of our viewers talking. Beth wrote in asking regarding the numerous phone calls. If she was so desperate to talk to him, why didn't she turn her car around and go back to the Albert house to talk to him? I think she was creating an alibi with. We can't get into Karen Reid's mind, but to the point of this viewer, Beth, was she creating an alibi?

Courtroom Insider (19:17)

Well, I think honestly, if she was creating an alibi, I think she would have done a better job creating an alibi because calling and yelling at him, this angry vitriol with all these insults really does say they had a fight before he got out of the car, regardless of what happened. So I think that it doesn't necessarily say that she did or didn't do it, but it's just not the best airtight alibi. If I was going to make an alibi, it would be, honey, have a great Night at the house. I'll see you later. I will not be doing that.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (19:45)

All right, Michael, listen to this one. Because a viewer asked almost the exact opposite thing. Albert and Merrimack wrote in saying, with the amount of calls, texts and voicemails made to o' Keefe, if, quote, it appears to contain a level of either innocence or ignorance, as she is obviously unaware of John's position at that time. Do those messages help or hurt the defense, Michael?

Defense Attorney (20:07)

They do both. Because it now is clearer to me why the jury in the first case could reject count three, listening to those voicemails saying, well, she didn't know she hit him. The problem is that they are full of invectives and hate, and some of the counts really talk about being reckless and intending to kill him. I think there should be no doubt that if in fact she's convicted on counts two or three, the DUI manslaughter, or count three, leaving him to die in the cold after having hit him, it will be because of her words, her voicemails, and all the videos that we've heard so far that she never should have given.

News Anchor 2 (20:45)

Speaking of which, we ended the day again with a clip from that documentary where Karen Reid was saying, if it has to be Jen McCabe or me, you know, so be it. It's going to be me. How did that.

Defense Attorney (20:55)

It's going to be Jen, right?

News Anchor 2 (20:58)

Depending on how you look at it. Yes. Yes.

Courtroom Insider (21:00)

So jc, again, it's not a TV show, so the TV person in me is frustrated. We had this really long, dense huss, long Google search testimony that we were all squirming about, waiting to end. And then Brennan special Prosecutor Brennan plays the clip, and then it's the lights go right up. And then Judge Canoni says, okay, George, that's the day, because we're on schedule. So if it landed, you know, we'd say, give it a moment to marinate, right? We'd say give it some air. They don't get that. But I asked Michael before the show, do they get to bring these clips with them during deliberation? And he says yes. So I think that's when they're. We'll find out if it actually.

Defense Attorney (21:39)

I mean, well, they'll hear it again in clothes as well. He will emphasize the most important ones during his clothes. He'll put them in context. He'll tell the story and wrap it all up. And a lot of times that is what you do in the close. You now pull a lot of things at people saying, well, why is that? Why is that the story in the clothes will tie all this together and he will do it because he's a.

News Anchor 2 (21:59)

Great storyteller and a reminder that defense hasn't told their story yet.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (22:02)

That's right.

News Anchor 2 (22:03)

So they'll do the same thing using clips.

Defense Attorney (22:05)

They'll tie all of this together. At some point as they start putting their evidence in, they will get to offer some clips in order to put some of these comments in context, but they won't have the same leeway that the government does.

News Anchor 2 (22:19)

Michael sue, as always, thank you so.

Digital Forensics Expert 2 (22:21)

Much and remember to join us every weeknight at 7 on NBC 10 Boston. We'll have a full recap of the latest developments from court as well as legal analysis. Plus, this week's episodes will be streaming on Peacock starting on Sunday. You're watching Canton Confidential, the Karen Reed Murder trial.

News Anchor 1 (22:39)

Watch Latoya Edwards and Raul Martinez weekdays at 6am on NBC 10 Boston to watch full episodes of Canton Confidential, the Karen Reed Murder trial. Tune in to NBC 10 Boston weeknights at 7 through the duration of the trial. You can also catch past episodes on the NBC 10 Boston YouTube page. Full episodes are posted one day after airing. NBC 10 Boston news worthy of you.