Karen Read Day 25 RECAP – Revisiting Jen McCabe’s Google Search | LAWYER EXPLAINS

48 thoughts on “Karen Read Day 25 RECAP – Revisiting Jen McCabe’s Google Search | LAWYER EXPLAINS”

1. What did you think of Day 25?

2. What is my big question after this recap (and maybe Ms Hyde testified to it in the full version) – what does the timestamp on the Cellebrite Report mean? Is it "Created on", or "Changed at"? It would of course make a significant difference.

3. Is it possible the Browser state DB movement at 2:27 AM represents the deletion of the tab of " hos long to die in cold"? In other words, it was searched at 2:27 AM and then moved/deleted at that time? Hard to believe the time displays on our phones don't reflect what common sense dictates (the actual time) and we've never heard this before.
   Lastly, if the prosecution's witness is correct, it should be easily reproducible.

4. Sorry if I missed it but does the trigger report have times associated with it. Could this event be the tow truck driver loading the car onto the bed? He would have had to use pressure to move through the thick snow.

5. I need a recreation in front of my face. Search something. Dont close whatever they said wasn't closed, then later go back on phone and show that ot had a different time. All while on the stand.

6. Hos long to die in cold keeps putting the du hast song in my head.

7. The expert on searches.. I didn't find completely impressive. It sounds like tech stuff can be manipulated . Looking forward to defense. Regardless, if that 2:27 search was deleted bad for jen good for karen. Of it was later then its mute. Doesn't matter. Not like there isn't a mountain of reasonable doubt and sady behavior from that family and cops.

8. Where is the Apple/Safari expert to talk about ios15 or whatever software version Jen had running. Surely, if anyone has the answer and software for this l, it would be them

9. I do not buy Miss Hydes testimony at all. If she is correct, then no cell phone data would ever be reliable.

10. Hi!

11. Great recaps, Alyte!❤

12. That testimony only proved that it is the delivery, not the content, that convinces people….

    How does her testimony explain the "deleted" part? And the computer updates timestamps with each modification for every file except that one….. riiiiiiiiiiight…

    A lot of what she said may be true but she in no way proved that that was not the state of that tab at 2:27AM.

13. If I were a juror, none of this even matters. The fact that Brian Albert’s home was never investigated leaves all the room for reasonable doubt.

14. If this were a Lifetime movie, people would say how ridiculous it all is. “That could never happen in real life.” Oh, but it did.

15. If Aunt Bev hadn't pointed it out, nobody would have know that person was a juror. Also, not the media's fault. No need to punish. But the more time goes by, Auntie Bev DOES seem like she likes the punishing part of her job. And she seems to really like punishing the defense side. Since the public seem to be siding with the defense, and she can't punish the public, she'll punish the media.

16. How many people are in prison because their ph told on them??

17. This “expert” used this situation to promote his own program that pulled and ordered the info. Who has validated his program . 600 sales are not evidence of a reviewed and validated program.

18. I was not following the case. I randomly read an article about Procter’s disgusting texts about the defendant. So I spent the weekend binge watching all Legal Bytes recaps. This case is like watching a tv show! It’s unintentionally hilarious!

19. Did the judge have a Stern talking to herself since she's the one that didn't notify the cameraman that the jurors were going to walk right up to her? Of course not I'm sure she just huffed and puffed and acted ticked at the world like she has done since minute one of this trial I cannot even imagine working with that lady she has got the worst attitude I've ever seen in a judge

20. Is there any explanation as to why John would be behind her vehicle?

21. I appreciate you calling the judge by her proper title and name. I hate that people not only call her by her first name, but call her "auntie bev." This is incredibly misogynistic. No one would call a male judge they didn't like "uncle joe" or whatever. They'd call a male judge "Uncle" as a term of endearment.

    Further, this nickname is saying "she's biased/corrupt/has bad judgement because she's a woman."
    She's just a biased judge, arguably a BAD JUDGE. Let's leave her sex out of the conversation, please.

22. I'd also like to add, Trooper Paul's expert analyst, use of the word, "stuff" or, "and stuff". He used this to explain calculations that didn't add up, or make sense.

    If I said, 2+2=5. You would know I'm wrong.
    But if I said 2+2+stuff=5. It's plausible. As we assume the value of stuff.

    Trooper Paul said, "we calculated speed and stuff". Then gave the result.

23. Cat in the tank 🥰

24. You analysis is spot on. You explain it well. And the only thing you didn't say… but is a direct result of what you say. Is this.

    The police are framing and finding someone to pin it on, rather than conducting a proper investigation, which more than like showed involvement of the home owner.

    The blue line exists. And is preventing justice.

25. Watching this after Trooper Paul’s cross is hilarious 😆 The dramatic irony is delicious.

26. The only way to explain going in reverse at 24.5mph at such a sudden rate in such a short distance, is if there are icey conditions. This means the wheels are spinning, but the momentum of the SUV is not, or most likely, never reached 24.5mph.

    If you actually have ever driven in reverse, which I have as a driving challenge. You will find, it isn't as simple as it looks in the movies. Stability is lost and getting up to speed is frightening. If you add the road on the map… it is curved. This takes the theory and pushes it in the direction of a slick surface explaining the sudden speed.
    Recap
    Monitired Speed is easy to explain.
    Actual Velocity is implausible.

27. Jackson defense all ego overcharging Dedham prosecutor like prosecutor is overcharging KR. People in MA convict. Jackson hanging KR defense on very very deep dirty Canton PD & MA Staties hiding a Boston PD cop murder, by cops and/or family members, instead of on the very embarrassing low quality crappy unpro police work, murder conspiracy proved by Jen McCabe 2am 'how long' search. If Jackson just noted, very politely, the dozens of (sad & revolting for John O'Keefes fam) reasonable doubtable details in this sad sub par MA State Police investigation in every witness testimony, done because cops believe KR is guilty, not covering a cop murder. Should have left that unsaid. Those jurors relate to local prosecutors and cops and much more to Jen McCabe- than pretty Prof. KR drunk drama queen. They could and probably would have protected KR from the overcharge. She'd of got bene of doubt, maybe walked. Dedham, honest folk mostly, like most of the USA are- nice folk. Now- they will have to convict local and Mass State police of murder, & Jen McCabe and family of conspiracy after the fact, to find KR innocent. They won't do that. They more than anything else, relate to the O'Keefes. If Jackson was from Massechussettes, he would too.

28. The digit forensic witness was decent but she really didn't help the prosecution. She seemed more like a rebuttal witness than anything else. She was there to disprove a defense theory, which doesn't really effect the outcome of this case. What I mean by that is, the defense doesn't have to prove someone else did this or give an alternative option as a motive. They only have to prove Karen didn't do this.

    So, Jen McCade most likely didn't search "hos to die in the cold" at 2:30am (ish). That doesn't change the mismanagement of this investigation or sheer incompetence of this Police Dept. This doesn't sway my opinion either way.

29. IMO, it doesn't matter what time the search was made. Jennifer McCabe made the searches. As confrontational and outspoken as she was, I don’t buy the story that Karen Read made her do the search. Jennifer McCabe doesn't seem like anyone could make her do anything at all.

30. But why did she delete that specific search that’s suspicious

31. I thought Ms Hyde was a good witness for the prosecution however her testimony was very technical and difficult to understand. At least she is a real expert but I will wait to form an opinion until I hear the defence expert witnesses.

32. If the roads were icy, say because it was snowing, you could have tire spin. What the speed indicates is the expected speed with no slipping, and you could easily have a decrease in speed when you go from slipping to getting traction because the rest of the car is stationary and resists accelerating due to the laws of physics.

33. Advocat ❤❤❤

34. How unfortunate for the former juror. Hopefully no one harasses them at all.

35. I really like you, but sometimes your long-winded explanations of what you’re going to explain or just too much for me. I think you would benefit from an editor who could cut out some of the unnecessarily repetitive dialogue
    . do I think I could do it better no, I don’t. I admire what you do when the effort you put into it.

36. RAM is the reason your phone and computer start to get slow when you have too many tabs/apps open because that’s the storage your device uses for short term memory. Things like software, video games, and other stuff you’ve downloaded goes to your hard drive memory so your SSD (solid state drive) while RAM is your Random Access Memory. So best way to think about it is short term and long term memory. You can store a lot more information via long term memory. You pretty much have continued access to that information for as long as it’s stored. While storm term memory space is much more limited as you only need it to store information temporarily so that way you have a much easier way to access that information when needed. It would be a pain to have to either keep all data/information stored on your hard drive (SSD). You’ll run out of important space long before it would be reasonable to run out of hard drive space. Every time you open chrome or a web browser that’s going to access your RAM storage. It’s why you can minimize the tab, open up a completely different program and then come back two hours later to an unchanged window. Your RAM kept that data/information readily available so you can have instant access. Well what happens when you shut down your computer when you still have apps/programs up and running? You get a notification on your PC that you still have running programs and that your PC is trying to shut it down. Some of that information will get stored in the hard drive while the rest of it gets wiped from the RAM storage space. It’s why you can turn off and then turn your PC right back on and not have those same 50 tabs open. Your RAM storage was cleared. PC’s operate extremely similar to our brains. Whatever short term information that is deemed important gets transferred into long term memory storage while the PC deletes any useless data/information to free up storage space so that it can keep running optimally. Our brains work the exact same way. When we go to sleep our brains start doing very important maintenance that it can’t do while we are awaking. Any information that’s important and needed will be transferred to where we store long term memory. Any information deemed useless or not important enough will be cleaned away. Those connections that were created are too weak so the brain eats away at them to clear up space to keep your mind and body operating at normal capacity. TLDR; computers operate very similarly to how our brains operate. RAM= Short term memory. Hard drive = long term memory. RAM<SSD/Hard Drive storage capacity. Not enough free storage space will cause a device to slow down. So while yes these functions play a role in slowing your device down. The reason for it is because there’s not enough storage space to run these functions.

37. First, keep in mind Celebrite report clearly indicates a search was made at 2:27 and deleted. So the defense witness is simply supporting/verifying this evidence.

    There is an old brainteaser. “If a chicken and a half laid an egg and a half, how much would a pound of butter weigh?” Many people answer, “a pound and a half.”

    However, the answer is “1 pound.” A pound of butter will always weigh a pound- nothing can change that fact. The prosecution witnesses say lots of words that are confusing to a jury, but if my understanding is correct, none of it matters.

    A Write Ahead Log (.WAL) file is a temporary file that is never updated once it has been flushed to the database. Think of it like a time capsule that has been sealed. If Jen put her search in a time capsule and locked it under ground for eternity, then anything that happens after the fact is irrelevant.

    I will give the prosecution possibly one (unhelpful) point. These (WAL) files are “flushed” out at regular intervals. Perhaps every 5 minutes (estimate). But all that means is the search may have been done between 2:22 and 2:27 – either way it’s before the timestamp on the WAL file.

    If you want more detail, let me know. There is more to this.

    As far as the deletes. Notice how the prosecution witnesses don’t agree, and both seem confused about the deletes. This is a horse of a different color. I can explain my theory on that as well if you want me to.

    Keep in mind, the gold standard Celebrite report supports the defense not the prosecution.

38. Rule #1 of ALL judicial rulings:

    The judge nor their staff have never nor will ever error in any way, whatever the issue is, it is someone else's fault.

39. The Feds expert is more credible on the google searches

40. I'm a lecturer on digital forensic science specialising in mobile devices and feel like I can add something here. Full disclaimer, I have met Jessica before and would describe her as one of the most skilled DFS specialists that are out there right now. Also I'm not in the US, so I have probably a different understanding of "how to court".

    First, why do I think her conclusion is correct and not the one reached by the other expert?
    
    The difference in conclusion here stems from a different approach chosen. Contrary to the other expert, Jessica Hyde did tests. She took a phone, made different interactions and then looked at how that impacted the data. This is an approach that is way better than just looking at what the report says (and also what the cars expert should have done to understand the data from the car). As she explains during testimony, we cannot blindly trust values to mean what they appear to be. We have to create data in controlled conditions to understand what is going on.

    Second, I think that she is quite accommodating with Cellebrite here when she explains the way this table comes to be and that "deleted" would be better described as "recovered". As she stated, other tools have not included this element as search results and I personally think, the other tools were right to not do so. This result shows a change to the browser state and should not be included in a list of search results. I would call it an error by the tool manufacturer to include this element in the list.

    Finally, to the point the defense tried to make about whether it being possible that there was still a possibility that this search was made at 02:27 to which Jessica Hyde said that there was an equal amount of evidence that "Pandas" was searched at this time. I think this is a very good characterisation of the situation here. With absence of evidence, it is always almost impossible to rule out that something happened. However, given that there apparently was browser activity around that time, which was recovered, it seems unlikely to me that there might have been other activity that just did not generate any traces.

    As Alyte says, this does nothing for the prosecution to prove their case, all it does is shut down part of the defense's version. Personally, I feel like the defense should just drop that particular point. There are enough other things they can hammer the prosecution on.

41. How in the world is this points for the prosecution? At best it shows that maybe possibly the conspiracy to frame read didn't include jenn searching at 2:27. I still don't buy it and why are you just believing this woman who is the second called when first gave a different answer. She d3leted it, held on to her phone & the defense is right. Theres still a possibility. Wait unril we find iut that this is pseudo science and this witness is somehow connected to the McAlberts clan, proctor the judge or someone else involved in this crime and cover up!

42. Maybe I’m just misunderstanding but if she’s saying that the value will populate with the most recent search, wouldn’t the searches between the 2:30 one and the 6:30 one also have the same search? Why are those spellings different?

43. So, she opened the tab at 2:27 AM but made no searches until 6:23 yet this captured the second search not the first. That's not how a FIFO table works. If it is a LIFO table, then that would have been the last search before the tab was closed. Still that begs the following questions. Why did she open a tab and make no searches for 4 hours? Why did it clear the first search but not the second? Is Browser Tab a LIFO or FIFO table? (Last In First Out, First In First Out) The car data analysis doesn't account for slick road due to falling snow. Again we are in the Twilight Zone of start with a conclusion and back into an explanation ignoring all other considerations. Seems like prosecution is focussed on establishing possibility or plausibility, not actual proof of conduct or intent. What am I missing?

44. When Trooper Paul started talking I double checked that I had the video playing at normal speed. He talks so fast, he must be really nervous.

45. How dumb do you have to be to put on a case like this for the whole world to see? The prosecutor and the investigators have their total incompetence and lack of integrity on full display! Anyone can see this “ investigation” was a joke from the very beginning and these egotistical tyrants are too stupid to be embarrassed by their clearly embarrassing investigation and behavior. It’s just gross!

46. I am not an expert in digital forensics, and the jury will not know this, but I think it's important to note that this forensics expert is the second one that the prosecutor used after they didn't like the conclusion of the first. Both state's original expert and the defense expert say that the search happened at 2:27am.

47. It’s very easy to delete a search from Safari history. You don’t have to be a tech expert

48. As a juror, I would have disregarded all the non Cellibright data cause that is the one that is supposed to be the one the government relies upon. If it's so flawed, why use it and trust it? I'm sorry, but the other analysis don't hold as much weight to me as the one the government supposedly uses to convict people, especially if it doesn't help the government

Comments are closed.