Latest news with #RobertAlessi
Yahoo
6 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Karen Read trial Day 22 recap: Defense rips apart crash expert's testimony
A crash reconstructionist resumed testimony Wednesday in Karen Read's second murder trial, as prosecutors appear poised to soon wrap their case against the Massachusetts woman accused of killing her cop boyfriend. Expert Judson Welcher clashed with Read's defense team during cross examination about his analysis of what occurred the night Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe died in January 2022 using data from Read's Lexus SUV, O'Keefe's phone and crime scene evidence. More: Karen Read: Jurors get look at wounds of cop boyfriend she's accused of killing Prosecutors have built their case on the argument that Read, 45, deliberately struck O'Keefe, 46, with her SUV in a drunken rage and left him to die in the snow outside the home of another cop after a night out drinking with friends. They've presented evidence of a bombshell admission Read allegedly made the morning O'Keefe's body was found, damage discovered on her Lexus SUV and a timeline that puts Read at the scene of the crime. Welcher's findings that the damage to Read's Lexus was consistent with a collision and O'Keefe's injuries match those of a car accident victim are the linchpin of their case. But Read's attorney, Robert Alessi, disputes that the car crash ever even happened. They allege that O'Keefe was beaten by Massachusetts police officers inside the home of Brian Albert and then attacked by a dog. Read has long said she was framed. Her first trial ended in July 2024 after jurors could not come to a unanimous verdict. Here's what happened on Day 22 of the trial. Judge Beverly Cannone dismissed the jury a few minutes before 4 p.m., allowing Alessi to question whether evidence from Welcher would be admissible. Alessi asked where Welcher got an aerial image, which he believed was from a report compiled by Massachusetts State Police Trooper Joseph Paul. Welcher said the image was not from Paul's report, but came from a folder emailed to him by police. Brennan then asked Welcher whether he relied on Paul's report to build his analysis, and he responded that he did not. Cannone, who did not immediately rule on the evidence, said the court will be in session for only a half day on Thursday to accommodate one of the jurors schedules. The mood in the courtroom became contentious as Alessi began asking Welcher about where, and how far Read's SUV traveled outside 34 Fairview, based on his analysis. 'How many feet do you believe the Lexus went in reverse?' he asked, to which Welcher responded, 'Your 're question doesn't make any sense.' Welcher explained that the car moved forward, and then switched gears into reverse. Alessi later turned to whether it was 'reasonable' or 'possible' for Read's car to have gone up onto the yard at 34 Fairview. Welcher said it was 'possible,' noting that in engineering, nearly any event has some statistical possibility, but he said he did not have enough data to know whether it was probable. When asked if O'Keefe would have had vertical, rather than horizontal, lacerations from being hit by the vehicle, Welcher said 'absolutely not.' He stood up to demonstrate how the car would have pushed O'Keefe's skin and then told Alessi 'my slide shows this quite clearly.' Welcher's dizzying day of testimony ended after he told jurors he tries to "eliminate all confirmation bias" in his analyses. Alessi zeroed in on Welcher's review of scientific studies about bodily harm caused by car collisions. On Tuesday, Welcher told jurors that the studies he reviewed showed that brain trauma is the most common injury caused by car accidents. But Alessi pointed out that one of the studies Welcher reviewed was published in the 1970s and is more than 45 years old. Alessi questioned the validity of experiments Welcher conducted to determine whether O'Keefe's injuries could have been caused by Read's Lexus. He suggested that Welcher did not account for a roughly 4-inch berm on the lawn at 34 Fairview Road near where O'Keefe's body was found in his analysis. That small hill, Alessi alleged, would have put O'Keefe's body at a different position in relation to Read's vehicle. Welcher reiterated that he couldn't model exactly how O'Keefe could have been injured, because he did not have the precise location where or know how O'Keefe was standing. Welcher said data from Read's car showed that her tires spun for a few seconds during her back up maneuver, and he hypothesized that this could have resulted from her car rising onto the berm. Alessi then asked Welcher to calculate the force it would take for a car to break bones in the hand. Welcher pushed back on the wording of the question and said he needed more specifics to answer. 'Is there any part of the back of the Lexus in any manner where you can get a break to the hand from 300 to 400 pounds of force?' Alessi asked. Welcher said 'probably,' and then pointed to pieces of the car where there would have been enough force to cause a hand fracture, including near the license plate. Alessi questioned Welcher about changes he made to his report during the midst of the trial. Welcher said he added another possible route Read could have driven based on an interview clip he received from the prosecution in mid-April. At times, the cross-examination became combative as Welcher struggled to explain the technical aspects of his report within the confines of Alessi's questions. Judge Beverly Cannone interrupted the questioning multiple times for long sidebar discussions with attorneys about the way they were probing the witness. Welcher presented evidence from an unrelated case where a pedestrian was killed by a car backing up at roughly 25 mph. In that case, the victim had lacerations on his right arm, but his bones were not broken. Similar to O'Keefe, the victim did not have injuries on the lower part of his body, but did suffer severe brain damage. He testified that he believed the damage to Read's Lexus was consistent with a collision and that the lacerations on O'Keefe's arm were consistent with being hit by a car. The prosecution ended their questioning of Welcher at about 10:30 a.m. Cannone ruled Wednesday morning against admitting into testimony Welcher's conclusion that Read hit O'Keefe with her vehicle. Her problem with the testimony was not that it pertained to the "ultimate issue" in the case, but rather that Welcher drew "an inference based upon more than scientific method." "The jurors are as well positioned to draw, or object the inference as any expert," she said. Welcher is allowed to testify that the damage to Read's SUV is consistent with a collision and that the injuries sustained by O'Keefe are consistent with being struck by a Lexus that is "physically identical" to Read's car, Cannone said. The ruling comes after defense attorney Robert Alessi forcefully objected Tuesday after Welcher said he believed to a 'reasonable degree of scientific certainty' that Read hit O'Keefe with her vehicle, arguing that the answer infringed on the jury's decision-making duty. He and Prosecutor Hank Brennan sparred about whether the fundamental question in the case hinges on whether Read hit O'Keefe deliberately, accidentally or whether she hit him at all. CourtTV has been covering the case against Read and the criminal investigation since early 2022, when O'Keefe's body was found outside a Massachusetts home. You can watch CourtTV's live feed of the Read trial proceedings from Norfolk Superior Court in Dedham, Massachusetts. Proceedings began at 10 a.m. ET. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Karen Read trial: Key crash expert's testimony under scrutiny
Yahoo
6 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Karen Read defense grills crash expert over $400K price tag and experimentation methods
Karen Read's defense team looked to chip away at a crash expert's credibility by pointing to eye-watering expenditures and alleged inconsistencies in experiments as the state enters the 11th hour of testimony in their case. Read is accused of killing her then-boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, by striking him with her Lexus SUV outside a house party at 34 Fairview Road and leaving him to die in frigid temperatures shortly after midnight on Jan. 29, 2022. The state's expected final witness, Dr. Judson Welcher, a crash reconstructionist with Texas-based Aperture LLC, held firm on his findings that Read's vehicle allegedly struck O'Keefe. KAREN READ'S SUV REACHED '74% THROTTLE' MOMENTS BEFORE JOHN O'KEEFE'S FINAL MOVEMENTS, CRASH EXPERT TESTIFIES "[O'Keefe's injuries are] consistent with being struck by a Lexus and also contacting a hard surface, such as frozen ground," Welcher told special prosecutor Hank Brennan. In a sometimes-evasive line of cross-examination, Welcher often provided non-answers to defense attorney Robert Alessi's questions surrounding his modifications to a PowerPoint presentation used in Read's trial to depict Aperture's investigation. Read On The Fox News App "Assume the trial started approximately April 22, 2025," Alessi said. "Did you create your updated presentation before or after [it began]?" "I don't know," Welcher replied. Karen Read Trial Witness Faces Brutal Cross-examination Over Vehicle Data Alessi looked to nail down a timeline of when Welcher may have made changes to the document and whether the prosecution communicated with him regarding the alterations. Welcher eventually relented before testifying that he altered the presentation for the first time on May 13, with the most recent change occurring "like, 10 minutes ago." "Half of that was in response to objections from the defense," Welcher said. "I had to add all the parts to where everything was. Then, when I got out here, Mr. Brennan asked me to take out references to evidence about statements that I was not allowed to present. So that would have been within the last three days. Then I've modified it a couple of times today based on rulings from the judge." Brain Surgeon Testifies John O'keefe Died From Fall On Frozen Ground In Karen Read Trial However, Welcher testified on cross-examination that the amendments he made to the presentation did not alter the overall document. "I changed one slide," Welcher said. "There were 130 slides originally, or something like that. So half of the changes [were] on that day, which was one slide. I added one line to the bottom of the previous slide." "Well then, why did you make it in the middle of trial if it wasn't significant?" Alessi asked. "Why didn't you just leave it off and then discuss it in terms of testimony?" Expert Witness In Karen Read Murder Trial Caught With 'Errors' Inflating His Credentials "So it ultimately was left off because it was insignificant, and I didn't need to have it," Welcher said. "The way it got presented was exactly the way it was before May 13. So it didn't change anything." On cross-examination, Welcher revealed the district attorney's office previously agreed to pay Aperture at least $325,000 for the firm's services, along with covering the cost of the Lexus SUV used in testing. "We're keeping [the vehicle] until the trial's over," Welcher said. "[Then] we're selling it and charging the commonwealth the difference in the price exactly." Karen Read Scores Major Win As Judge Allows Crash Reconstruction Testimony Aperture has been paid $44,510 for its services to date, with the state expected to pay upwards of $400,000 for around eight months of work, according to Alessi. "Dr. Welcher was perfect on direction, but only a B- on cross-examination," retired Massachusetts Superior Court Judge and Boston College law professor Jack Lu told Fox News Digital. "He is not answering the questions from Mr. Alessi directly. He may not be intentionally being evasive, but he's no longer a near-perfect example of how an expert witness should testify." O'Keefe's arm injuries were concurrent with being struck by the make and model of Read's vehicle, Welcher testified on direct examination. The crash expert pointed to a video showing him painting the taillight of the car before brushing up against it to mimic a collision. Follow The Fox True Crime Team On X Alessi looked to create doubt surrounding Welcher's findings, grilling the biomechanical engineer on the methodology behind his experiment surrounding the cause of the injury to O'Keefe's eye. "I'm trying to make it clear," Welcher said. "We don't know his exact body position at the point of impact, nor do we know the exact position on the ground. Which is part of the reason why I haven't tried to exactly simulate this, because we don't have enough parameters to do that. So I don't have that information. I'm showing the geometry relative to someone of Mr. O'Keefe's height." "So you don't have the information to do that properly," Alessi said. "So therefore, you can't preclude that he had a laceration to the eye from the spoiler by your own answer that you just gave, correct?" Welcher doubled down on his investigation, asserting on the stand that Aperture's experiment was correct based on the information the firm had at the time, despite Alessi revealing the vehicle in Welcher's test was moving only two miles per hour — significantly less than the speed of Read's vehicle. SIGN UP TO GET True-crime Newsletter "Would you agree that you did a blue paint test with the vehicle going at two miles per hour?" Alessi asked. "Of course," Welcher said. "You didn't do a blue paint test with the vehicle going at 20 miles per hour, correct?" Alessi said. "That is correct," Welcher said. "I was not going to hit myself with the Lexus at 20 miles an hour." Wednesday marked the second day of testimony from Welcher, as the state is expected to rest its case this week. Read pleaded not guilty and is facing the possibility of life in prison if convicted of the top charge, second-degree murder. "The model being followed here is very good and professional," Lu said. "What you have here is a very nice judge meets a very nice lawyer," adding, "This results in a looser, less-focused cross-examination. It's working out fine here, partially because the witness is not being super evasive."Original article source: Karen Read defense grills crash expert over $400K price tag and experimentation methods
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Yahoo
Karen Read trial witness faces brutal cross-examination over vehicle data
Karen Read's defense revved up its attacks on unexpected new expert findings Tuesday, which contradict the timeline they say proves she didn't hit boyfriend John O'Keefe with her Lexus SUV and leave him to die in a blizzard in 2022. Shanon Burgess, an expert on vehicle and phone data from the digital forensics firm Aperture, returned to the stand for a second day of brutal cross-examination with defense attorney Robert Alessi at the wheel. Alessi pointed out inconsistencies in Burgess' resume and revealed he got the dates wrong on a timeline that was supposed to be accurate "to the second." And nothing in Burgess' findings directly indicated that a fatal crash happened. Expert Witness In Karen Read Murder Trial Caught With 'Errors' Inflating His Credentials "As you sit here today, none of the information in that black box that you referred to on direct testimony indicates that there was a collision on Jan. 29," Alessi said. "Does it?" "Not by itself," Burgess replied. Read On The Fox News App Special prosecutor Hank Brennan pumped the brakes when he returned for redirect questioning, asking the expert about flaws he had found in a previous analysis that indicated O'Keefe, a Boston police officer, was interacting with his iPhone after the time when prosecutors allege he was fatally struck by the defendant. Karen Read Murder Trial: Niece Reveals 'Frantic' Behavior On Morning Boston Officer Was Found Dead The math veered out of alignment, Burgess testified. A defense expert had relied on call logs to synchronize the internal clocks in Read's Lexus SUV and O'Keefe's iPhone. But that doesn't work, Burgess explained, because the expert used calls that Read made when her car was powered off, so the vehicle's internal clock had nothing to do with them. Their timing was the product of the internal clock on her smartphone, which he said synced up with the Lexus the next time she turned it on. Those calls indicated a variance of just one or two seconds between the vehicle and the victim's phone. Karen Read Judge Blocks Sandra Birchmore Mentions; Expert Says Cases Should Be Wake-up Call For Police Using other metrics, including user data stored in the Lexus that prior analysts failed to identify and recover, the variance inflates to between 21 and 29 seconds, Burgess testified. It is unclear whether Burgess' credibility is running out of gas with jurors after Alessi found online resumes that wrongly stated he has a bachelor's degree from the University of Alabama. GET REAL-TIME UPDATES DIRECTLY ON THE True Crime Hub "This expert needs to go home," said Grace Edwards, a Massachusetts defense attorney who is following the case. She said the prosecution is risking the chance that jurors will find him "shady" and disregard his findings, even though a bachelor's degree is not required in his field. "This is a murder trial," she told Fox News Digital. "And the fact that he got the beginning and the end date on the slide wrong just screams his work is sloppy and he does not fact-check his work." She pointed to Burgess' apparent mix-up of bits and bytes when referring to data obtained from Read's SUV. "Attorney Alessi set up a trap that he walked into, which destroyed Burgess on the stand," Edwards said. "Precision matters when you are a tech expert." Follow The Fox True Crime Team On X Burgess testified that he does not have a bachelor's degree, despite his official Aperture bio and an old LinkedIn account, which appears to have been deactivated in the past few days, stating otherwise. Brennan attempted to repair the damage by showing jurors two updated resumes, from last year and this year, that Burgess had submitted to the defense prior to trial, showing his credentials. Neither claimed that he has a bachelor's degree. "Did you ever hear of Bill Gates?" Brennan asked. "Yes," Burgess replied, referring to the billionaire Microsoft founder who famously dropped out of Harvard before graduation. Burgess eventually said he would like to get his bachelor's degree some day, but "work, family and life" keep getting in the way. "As a personal objective, I would like to finish my bachelor's," Burgess testified. "But again, work and life gets in the way." After he left the witness stand, Brennan played three clips of Read discussing the timeline in her own words for a TV documentary. She said she believes O'Keefe died around 12:30 a.m. on Jan. 29, 2022. The next witness was Christina Hanley, an analyst at the Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab who examined the broken glass found near O'Keefe's remains at 34 Fairview Road in Canton, about 20 miles south of Boston. Hanley is expected to return to the stand at 9 a.m. article source: Karen Read trial witness faces brutal cross-examination over vehicle data
