[00:25.940 --> 00:33.920]  Well, hey, everybody. Welcome back. Day seven is in the bag. I promised you I was going
[00:33.920 --> 00:39.460]  to degrade in appearance over the course of this trial. And so I'm the girl of my word.
[00:40.240 --> 00:45.840]  I live up to my commitment. So we got out a little bit early today. I had the choice
[00:45.840 --> 00:49.940]  between taking a little nap or taking a little shower. And I chose the one I thought
[00:49.940 --> 00:56.660]  neighbors in the pews would appreciate a little bit more. Well, let me go ahead and just give you
[00:56.660 --> 01:02.280]  guys the big picture right off the bat. Today was all about Bridge Guy. Today was all about
[01:02.280 --> 01:08.620]  Bridge Guy. So we got the details about Libby's cell phone extraction. We got to see the video.
[01:09.220 --> 01:15.020]  It's nothing at all like the little pieces that have been released to the public. So I'm going
[01:15.020 --> 01:22.160]  ahead and tell you guys about that in a little bit. We learned about basically what police had
[01:22.160 --> 01:27.940]  to do to the video in order to enhance it, to get the images of Bridge Guy that were released
[01:27.940 --> 01:33.220]  to the public, and also that audio clip that everybody heard of the girls down the hill.
[01:34.780 --> 01:41.360]  We then heard from three of the eyewitnesses out on the trail that day, the folks who saw
[01:41.360 --> 01:46.700]  Bridge Guy and or at least who they believe was Bridge Guy, and provided descriptions to
[01:46.700 --> 01:54.420]  law enforcement. Those were Raylee Voorhees, Breanne Wilbur, and Betsy Blair. It is possible
[01:54.420 --> 02:01.680]  that Betsy opened the door to bringing in those sketches that we heard about. And finally,
[02:01.800 --> 02:07.180]  and I thought most notably, out of all these eyewitnesses, not a single one,
[02:07.840 --> 02:15.560]  gave an in-court identification of Richard Allen as the man they saw out there on the trails.
[02:16.720 --> 02:23.560]  Nobody ID'd him as Bridge Guy. So with that, I just dropped my pen. Let's go ahead and get
[02:23.560 --> 02:37.160]  down to the nitty-gritty. We started off today, before we got to Bridge Guy, we were
[02:37.160 --> 02:43.680]  a CSI investigator out there at the scene from the Idaho State Police. And he is the one who
[02:43.680 --> 02:49.520]  was tasked with collecting and securing all of the evidence that was collected from the scene.
[02:50.220 --> 02:57.640]  So we got quite a long list of all of the different things that he had booked into
[02:57.640 --> 03:01.840]  evidence. So all of these things are not necessarily things he personally collected.
[03:02.980 --> 03:07.080]  Some of them were collected by other people. He was just the one that was responsible for
[03:07.080 --> 03:12.300]  securing them and transporting them to wherever they needed to go, and then
[03:12.300 --> 03:23.780]  entering them into the secure evidence area. So we had something like, oh gosh, let me count,
[03:30.140 --> 03:38.140]  about 12 items, 10 items that were recovered from the area of Deer Creek. And so that
[03:38.140 --> 03:43.660]  included all the clothing that had come, that they had collected, the stuff they found
[03:43.660 --> 03:53.980]  in the water, as well as the magic bullet, as the defense called it, and got chastised for
[03:53.980 --> 04:04.900]  the magic bullet, the shoe, the phone. We had then, or I'm sorry, those were just the
[04:04.900 --> 04:10.140]  that were collected from Deer Creek. Then the items that were actually collected from the scene,
[04:10.280 --> 04:16.580]  there were about 22 of those things. And so that's included the magic bullet.
[04:17.080 --> 04:25.400]  Got a little bit more detail. Item 149 is a bag that contains a strand of material taken from
[04:25.400 --> 04:32.100]  between the fingers of Abby's right hand. We now know that to be the hair. So between her
[04:32.100 --> 04:39.040]  that explains the defense team's use of the word entangled when they were describing
[04:39.040 --> 04:50.880]  how that hair was found. Several swabs, lots of swabs were taken from the bodies at the scene.
[04:51.800 --> 04:56.000]  Swabs from Abby's right hand,
[04:59.360 --> 05:08.160]  Abby's left arm, Libby's left and right wrist, just various different parts of the bodies.
[05:09.100 --> 05:15.320]  Swabs from some of the blood stains. Of course, clothing, phone, and magic bullet,
[05:15.320 --> 05:23.840]  those were all recovered from the scene. Some swabs from Libby's left index finger and left
[05:23.840 --> 05:32.140]  pinky finger. Not entirely clear where or exactly what they were getting at there.
[05:32.780 --> 05:40.800]  And then a swab that one of the sergeants took from basically the cell phone. So the
[05:40.800 --> 05:45.240]  of the cell phone was swabbed and that was taken into evidence.
[05:47.720 --> 05:54.300]  All of that stuff was then delivered to wherever it was going to go the morning
[05:54.300 --> 06:01.380]  or the evening of February the 14th. So then on the morning of February the 15th,
[06:01.380 --> 06:10.580]  the following day, Trooper Olhi attended the autopsy. So he also was responsible for collecting
[06:10.580 --> 06:18.820]  and storing the items that were collected during the autopsy. So again, we had a number of
[06:18.820 --> 06:25.600]  swabs that were collected. Notably, they did perform sexual assault kits for both Libby and
[06:25.600 --> 06:32.440]  both of those were taken into evidence. Also, some trace fiber from Abbey's arm,
[06:32.740 --> 06:39.020]  the clothing that they were wearing. And there was a photo that showed
[06:40.920 --> 06:46.940]  basically the pink... Abbey had been wearing a pink sleeveless shirt underneath the the
[06:46.940 --> 06:54.640]  Delphi Swim sweatshirt. And that had some red stained areas on it, as well as some lines
[06:54.640 --> 07:00.080]  on it that according to the witness were indicative of the moisture. So where the
[07:00.080 --> 07:09.850]  moisture reached and created a line then as it dried. We then went to cross-examination.
[07:11.110 --> 07:17.450]  Before we get there though, there were some things that raised my eyebrows a little bit
[07:17.450 --> 07:23.550]  as we went through this list of evidence. And the main thing was some stuff that was not
[07:23.550 --> 07:31.630]  there. Fingernails. There was no mention of fingernail clippings or swabbing underneath
[07:31.630 --> 07:40.330]  the fingernails. This is a little mind-boggling to me because that seems just incredibly intuitive.
[07:41.350 --> 07:49.810]  And so I am expecting an answer from the medical examiner when we get to that particular
[07:49.810 --> 07:56.390]  witness. I can't... I just... I have a hard time thinking of a good reason why you wouldn't do
[07:56.390 --> 08:04.210]  that. Just the possibility that either of these girls would have had, would have grasped,
[08:04.230 --> 08:13.090]  touched, somehow had some contact with the perpetrator really seems like a go-to to me.
[08:13.090 --> 08:18.570]  But we didn't we didn't get anything like that. So no fingernail clippings, no like even
[08:18.570 --> 08:26.790]  swabs of the fingertips or underneath swabs of the hands. I mentioned they had swabbed Libby's
[08:26.790 --> 08:33.350]  wrist areas. There were not nearly as many swabs from Abby. That was kind of the other
[08:33.350 --> 08:40.250]  thing that really stood out to me. Quite a lot of swabs taken from Libby. Not very many
[08:40.250 --> 08:50.070]  taken from Abby. And perhaps that is because Abby was clothed. And so the the assumption is
[08:50.070 --> 08:58.770]  that just less of her was exposed to be able to collect, have contact, to be a repository
[08:58.770 --> 09:06.670]  for some some type of trace DNA. But again even just things like the hands, the blood
[09:06.670 --> 09:20.690]  stains on her. Some of the swabs from Libby seem to be in the area of where she had blood
[09:20.690 --> 09:31.710]  stains. The pinky finger, some swabs from from the thigh area. But not similar types of things
[09:31.710 --> 09:37.790]  swabbed from Abby. So that was just that was just notable. There's nowhere near as much
[09:37.790 --> 09:42.230]  evidence that is particular to Abby as there is particular to Libby.
[09:44.530 --> 09:52.570]  The cross-examination was done by Brad Rosie. So first off, Brad Rosie today was in a
[09:52.570 --> 10:01.690]  kind of medium gray suit. Like not a light gray but not a charcoal gray kind of in the
[10:01.690 --> 10:09.050]  and what almost looked like an eggplant kind of colored diagonal striped tie. So for you,
[10:09.310 --> 10:13.830]  you Rosie, Rosie tie followers that's that's what he served up for the day.
[10:15.230 --> 10:21.910]  This guy is a beast at cross-examination. He is so good. He's really really good and he's so
[10:21.910 --> 10:30.050]  good that he was drawing these extremely petty objections from Mr. Littrell who was handling
[10:30.050 --> 10:37.010]  the prosecution the prosecution witness. These, as you may suspect, were being sustained by
[10:37.010 --> 10:40.970]  Judge Bev. So I will I will get into that in a moment.
[10:45.750 --> 10:53.810]  The first very first thing that he elicited was given all of the evidence that he had
[10:53.810 --> 10:58.890]  presented about the many many swabs that had been collected. The very first thing that he
[10:58.890 --> 11:05.450]  had elicited was that the witness was not aware of any collection of DNA that
[11:07.050 --> 11:12.010]  established a connection to Mr. Allen. And he was making this point repeatedly,
[11:12.150 --> 11:15.210]  kind of going through the different the different swabs. The swab of this wrist,
[11:15.450 --> 11:19.050]  no no connection. The swab of that, no connection. The swab of that, no connection.
[11:20.670 --> 11:26.470]  After about seven times, Mr. Littrell objected on relevance grounds
[11:29.790 --> 11:35.410]  and that was that was sustained. The relevance ground was that because the question,
[11:35.570 --> 11:41.050]  the way Mr. Rosie was asking the question was, are you aware of whether any of these things
[11:41.050 --> 11:49.010]  turned returned DNA DNA connection to Mr. Allen? And the argument was whether or not
[11:49.010 --> 11:53.850]  he was aware doesn't matter. That doesn't matter. So therefore it's irrelevant.
[11:55.510 --> 12:01.410]  I'm definitely going to dispute that relevance is an extremely low bar. It's an extremely
[12:01.410 --> 12:09.110]  low bar and the chief crime scene investigator, you would expect to be aware of the results of
[12:09.110 --> 12:15.710]  things like that because they typically have to follow up. And also because they're often the
[12:15.710 --> 12:20.430]  person that is submitting the evidence to the lab, that means they're also often the person
[12:20.430 --> 12:25.090]  who is in receipt of the results from the lab, which they would then pass along to the detective.
[12:25.190 --> 12:30.710]  Now, I don't know for sure if that's how they did it in this case. But in any event,
[12:30.870 --> 12:36.510]  you know, being an investigator, his awareness is, yeah, it's kind of an issue. Okay, maybe
[12:36.510 --> 12:41.130]  it's not the most important, not the most relevant. The most important thing is going
[12:41.130 --> 12:45.410]  to be those results themselves, which we'll get to when we get to the DNA analysts.
[12:47.190 --> 12:54.230]  But just an instance of relevance suddenly getting a very strict
[12:54.230 --> 13:10.020]  definition when it's the way the defense is asking their questions. And
[13:11.180 --> 13:17.880]  ultimately the judge basically said he... Mr. Rosie continued to ask about results from
[13:17.880 --> 13:23.220]  different pieces of evidence and information at the scene. Objected on relevance grounds,
[13:23.220 --> 13:27.580]  Mr. Rosie is like, it's highly relevant, you know, what's the results of what's at the scene?
[13:27.900 --> 13:32.660]  And the judge's answer is, well, maybe for another witness and she sustained it. Now,
[13:32.660 --> 13:37.660]  that's not relevance. That would be lack of personal knowledge, which was not the basis
[13:37.660 --> 13:47.980]  for the objection. You know, these technical, technical things, technical things, but they do
[13:47.980 --> 14:00.750]  little details certainly do add up. He questioned Trooper Olahi about his knowledge of problems
[14:00.750 --> 14:05.470]  with the integrity of the scene and the integrity of the investigation.
[14:07.670 --> 14:14.730]  Asked if he was aware of a breach of integrity of the crime scene. That, again,
[14:14.750 --> 14:18.940]  was objected to on relevance grounds. This time it was overruled. Yes.
[14:19.350 --> 14:23.690]  The integrity of the crime scene and his knowledge of it is pretty important.
[14:24.510 --> 14:30.370]  So then Mr. Rosie asked more specifically if he had knowledge of photos that had been taken at
[14:30.370 --> 14:35.590]  the scene and leaked to the public. He did not have any particular knowledge of that, but that
[14:35.590 --> 14:39.910]  scene has been planted. And so now there is an expectation that the defense is going to
[14:39.910 --> 14:50.780]  elicit that from one of their witnesses on the stand that that happened. Mr. Rosie was
[14:50.780 --> 14:56.060]  asking a lot of his questions in the form of, would you agree that...
[14:59.060 --> 15:03.080]  X, Y, Z, yada, yada, yada, however you want to put it. Would you agree that?
[15:04.880 --> 15:10.280]  The state objected to this. This was one of the more bizarre things, one of the more
[15:10.280 --> 15:17.420]  bizarre things I've seen in a trial. Objected to that on the basis that he thought that
[15:18.260 --> 15:24.700]  constituted a statement of counsel's opinion and asking him whether he agreed with counsel's
[15:24.700 --> 15:30.480]  opinion or not. And since counsel's opinion isn't relevant, it's an improper question.
[15:32.640 --> 15:35.700]  This is one of the... I mean, honestly, this is dumb.
[15:36.900 --> 15:42.600]  This is dumb. Asking somebody if they agree with something is not at all implying that you
[15:42.600 --> 15:47.500]  agree with it. You're just asking them, do you agree with a certain proposition?
[15:48.300 --> 15:52.900]  And so the reason you do that in a cross-examination is because it's setting you
[15:52.900 --> 15:57.400]  up for your closing argument. When you're going to be able to go to the jury and say,
[15:57.660 --> 16:04.320]  ladies and gentlemen, here's this proposition and here's why you should or should not
[16:04.320 --> 16:09.960]  find that a reasonable proposition. Therefore, here's why you should or should not find this
[16:10.560 --> 16:15.800]  agreement or lack of agreement with the proposition to be unreasonable. And therefore,
[16:16.220 --> 16:21.340]  you should question that witness's credibility. So it's just a way of establishing kind of
[16:21.340 --> 16:26.410]  where a person stands on an issue to help the jury be able to weigh that.
[16:28.420 --> 16:36.380]  It got really illustrated to me that this is just a dumb objection. It has nothing to do
[16:36.380 --> 16:43.080]  counsel's opinion. Because at one point, the question that Mr. Rosie had asked was,
[16:43.180 --> 16:53.550]  would you agree that exhibit number 53 would have received the same treatment as exhibit number
[16:54.500 --> 17:02.340]  45? Where's the opinion in there? There is no opinion. This is just a straightforward
[17:02.340 --> 17:07.700]  elicitation of a factual proposition. Do you agree with that or do you not agree with that?
[17:08.900 --> 17:14.100]  Nevertheless, this was sustained. All of these objections to do you agree...
[17:16.040 --> 17:23.040]  Judge Kenoni looks very thoughtful. Yes, I agree. Sustains all of them. So they don't get
[17:23.040 --> 17:30.620]  to use the do you agree questions. It was quite evident to me that these are not
[17:32.520 --> 17:36.860]  substantive objections, right? Because it doesn't matter. He can just rephrase his question and
[17:36.860 --> 17:41.940]  get the same information. You're not objecting to the information coming out. These are just
[17:41.940 --> 17:47.500]  trying to interrupt his flow. These are trying to mess with his... trying to get in his mind.
[17:48.160 --> 17:54.620]  Trying to get in his mind and knock him out of his groove and make him have to adjust on
[17:54.620 --> 17:59.400]  the fly. Well, he was able to do that. So at the end of the day, it really wasn't any
[17:59.400 --> 18:08.680]  big deal. But, you know, just just another example of prosecution is litigating stuff on
[18:10.180 --> 18:15.940]  form. You know, the things the things that don't matter did take you taking a little bit of an
[18:15.940 --> 18:22.420]  obstructionist kind of approach, a hyper technical approach. There have been many,
[18:23.180 --> 18:28.140]  many things the prosecution has done in their questioning that are highly objectionable.
[18:28.140 --> 18:34.140]  I mentioned the other day about how Ms. Diener has a very difficult time asking questions that
[18:34.140 --> 18:39.760]  are not extremely leading. And by and large, the defense has just let these things go,
[18:39.860 --> 18:45.420]  because they don't matter and they make you look petty. Especially when you state your
[18:45.420 --> 18:54.880]  objections in this completely pissy tone, like Mr. Littrell was doing. Your honor,
[18:55.560 --> 19:03.500]  asking for his agreement is improper. It's just just this very, you know, very annoyed type of
[19:03.500 --> 19:11.460]  tone. All very silly. But that's just part of the part of the game part of the game playing
[19:11.460 --> 19:16.540]  and part of the strategy that goes more to the gamesmanship than it does to the actual
[19:16.540 --> 19:24.680]  merits of the case or the evidence. When he questioned Trooper Olahi about the sticks,
[19:24.880 --> 19:28.800]  Trooper Olahi conceded that the sticks appeared to be placed by human hands,
[19:28.800 --> 19:34.520]  but he asserted he believed it was an attempt at concealment. I don't think this is credible.
[19:34.520 --> 19:40.660]  I would have a hard time thinking that the jury is going to find this credible because the
[19:40.660 --> 19:46.140]  girls were really not concealed at all. They weren't covered in foliage. It was the branch
[19:46.140 --> 19:52.160]  part. And just, you know, in a few discrete areas where there were branches that covered
[19:52.700 --> 19:58.280]  relatively minimal parts of their bodies. If they had wanted to conceal the girls,
[19:58.720 --> 20:04.020]  there is a massive amount of leaf litter on the ground in this area. And I would think
[20:04.020 --> 20:11.760]  the logical thing to do would be pick up some of these leaves, dump them on the girls,
[20:11.760 --> 20:15.260]  bury the girls in a leaf pile. If you wanted to conceal them,
[20:16.000 --> 20:19.180]  that is what is available right there to be able to do it.
[20:20.500 --> 20:29.180]  These twigs? No. This is just really not a credible position. So he did have to concede,
[20:29.340 --> 20:33.720]  yes, very little of them were actually concealed and they were not very covered.
[20:35.120 --> 20:41.420]  He did not recall if there was any indication that any of the sticks had been cut,
[20:41.420 --> 20:47.600]  that there were like cut marks or, you know, way to tell that a limb had been
[20:47.600 --> 20:52.100]  cut from a tree as opposed to just naturally having fallen off the tree onto the ground
[20:52.100 --> 21:06.500]  and used that way. Definitely established that the logical assumption from the clothing
[21:06.500 --> 21:11.900]  was that Abby had been dressed in Libby's clothing. This from the fact that the sweatshirt
[21:11.900 --> 21:19.480]  had the name German on the back, so it appeared to be from the German family,
[21:19.680 --> 21:27.220]  the sizing of the clothing. Abby is considerably smaller than Libby and the clothes were too
[21:27.220 --> 21:33.960]  large for her. So the logical assumption was that Libby had been disrobed or had disrobed
[21:33.960 --> 21:42.380]  and Abby then dressed in Libby's clothing. But they had no information or analysis about
[21:42.380 --> 21:49.480]  when or where that would have taken place. At one point, well, I'll get to that and I'll
[21:49.480 --> 21:54.060]  get to that in a little bit, they didn't analyze the sticks to see if they could
[21:54.060 --> 21:59.560]  determine what trees they were from, like what species of tree, which might have been
[21:59.560 --> 22:06.980]  helpful information. Let you know if they had been transported for quite some time,
[22:07.040 --> 22:11.440]  if they could be attributed to trees that were right there in the ground zero area,
[22:11.800 --> 22:20.820]  if they had been brought in from off the scene. Those could have been pieces of
[22:20.820 --> 22:26.760]  information that might have added something to the story of what was going on down here at
[22:26.760 --> 22:38.030]  crime scene. He acknowledged they had found shoe impressions near ground zero on the banks
[22:38.030 --> 22:43.470]  near the creek. But he minimized this by pointing out, well, there had been very large,
[22:43.470 --> 22:48.450]  very large search in this general area. And so we made no effort to find the source of
[22:48.450 --> 22:55.010]  the shoe prints. This I thought was a little bit of an own goal. This kind of backfires a
[22:55.010 --> 23:00.370]  bit because that tends to support then the defense theory that there were searchers down
[23:00.370 --> 23:05.250]  in the area of ground zero. And if there were searchers down in the area of ground zero,
[23:07.410 --> 23:15.240]  stands to reason, at least it raises the question, why didn't they see the bodies?
[23:15.600 --> 23:19.640]  Why didn't they see the bodies if they were down there searching in this particular area?
[23:20.760 --> 23:24.980]  There's a lot of possible explanations, but certainly a possible explanation is because
[23:24.980 --> 23:31.120]  bodies were not there. It's not the only explanation, but it certainly helps the
[23:31.120 --> 23:36.600]  defense's argument that they're that they're trying to make that the searchers had been in
[23:36.600 --> 23:41.860]  that area. And if the bodies had been there, they would have seen them. They did
[23:41.860 --> 23:51.400]  acknowledge that one of the shoe prints that had been identified had similarities to one of
[23:51.400 --> 23:59.640]  shoes that had been recovered from the scene. Nevertheless, they didn't do anything with that.
[23:59.820 --> 24:06.360]  They did not take imprints or anything like that. They just photographed the shoe prints.
[24:06.560 --> 24:12.380]  And that was basically that. They did not go to any effort to try to find out what the
[24:12.380 --> 24:24.690]  shoe prints were. Trooper Olahi said that the reason they had not looked for fingerprints was
[24:24.690 --> 24:28.790]  that there were no good substrates for fingerprints. It would have been the sticks
[24:28.790 --> 24:34.250]  and the clothes and things like that. Those are not good sources to be able to find fingerprints.
[24:36.180 --> 24:46.640]  Mr. Rosie questioned Trooper Olahi about the markings, the blood marks on the F tree.
[24:50.500 --> 25:02.020]  And Trooper Olahi didn't like to answer the defense questions. He's one of these
[25:02.020 --> 25:09.880]  officer witnesses. Trooper Page was like this as well, where they would often answer
[25:09.880 --> 25:14.260]  something other than the question that was asked. They would avoid answering the question
[25:14.260 --> 25:19.860]  that was asked, or they would kind of question the question and try to move the goalposts a
[25:19.860 --> 25:26.460]  little bit so that they could answer it the way that they wanted to. The problem with this,
[25:26.500 --> 25:31.640]  from my perspective, is you run the risk that the jury is going to think that you're being
[25:31.640 --> 25:37.680]  invasive. And you, the law enforcement officer, should be like the last person who is being
[25:37.680 --> 25:45.820]  evasive. You're not there to promote an agenda. You're there for the truth. You're there to be
[25:45.820 --> 25:50.960]  forthcoming. Tell the jury what you knew, what you observed, and so forth. And so when you
[25:50.960 --> 25:55.580]  don't do that, when you get all squirrely and don't want to answer questions, it's just
[25:55.580 --> 26:01.180]  really not a good look. Not everybody is going to see it that way, but it just is a risk
[26:01.180 --> 26:07.780]  that you take that jurors may potentially get that impression. So in this particular line
[26:07.780 --> 26:15.600]  of questioning, what Mr. Rosie was focusing on was that in this particular red stain,
[26:17.160 --> 26:23.500]  I mentioned this yesterday, it looks like there are very vertical marks on it. It looks
[26:23.500 --> 26:30.440]  linear, certain parts of it. He really didn't want to concede this, so he gave this kind
[26:30.440 --> 26:36.380]  of rambling answer about how he didn't use a compass or a ruler to determine the angle
[26:36.980 --> 26:43.440]  of the blood stain. But ultimately, you know, he has to concede, yeah,
[26:43.440 --> 26:47.280]  it looks pretty straight. Do you have eyeballs? Yes, you have eyeballs. And with your eyeballs,
[26:47.340 --> 26:50.520]  does it appear? Yes, it appears to be these appear to be straight lines.
[26:51.000 --> 26:57.420]  So really, all he would concede was that it was it appeared to him to be a large area
[26:57.420 --> 27:02.700]  of contact transfer of blood. So meaning something had contacted the blood and then
[27:03.460 --> 27:10.000]  transferred the blood onto the tree. Didn't give, you know, didn't want to go anywhere
[27:10.000 --> 27:15.120]  as far as was this like an accidental transfer? Was this deliberate? The defense is, I think,
[27:15.240 --> 27:20.060]  clearly setting the stage for this is deliberate because of just the nature of the markings,
[27:20.160 --> 27:26.960]  the linear quality to them. It's not like an accidental handprint or something like that.
[27:29.020 --> 27:34.180]  He did not have anybody examine the mark on the tree. They did not preserve the trunk of the
[27:34.180 --> 27:39.760]  tree. They simply photographed, they simply photographed the marks. This seems like an
[27:39.760 --> 27:46.100]  oversight to me. You can you can cut down that tree and you can secure and keep that
[27:46.100 --> 27:53.020]  section of trunk so that you have it. Don't know if that's going to end up being
[27:53.020 --> 27:57.400]  important or not. It's just at this point, they could have done it and they didn't. So
[27:57.420 --> 28:03.280]  does it matter? It will matter if the quality of the photographs isn't enough to be able to draw
[28:03.280 --> 28:07.780]  good conclusions from it. And where Mr. Rosie is going with this line of questioning is he's
[28:07.780 --> 28:14.960]  talking about the ultimate introduction of a blood spatter expert. I would think a blood
[28:14.960 --> 28:21.800]  spatter expert would be helped by having the 3D item there in front of him so that he can see
[28:25.160 --> 28:34.020]  depth. Potentially just better information than you're necessarily going to get from a photograph.
[28:34.240 --> 28:39.320]  It's taking this 3D item. It's flattening it into two dimensions. It's like we talked about
[28:39.320 --> 28:43.960]  the other day with the lens lengths can be a little bit distorting. There can be issues with
[28:43.960 --> 28:49.320]  light and shadow and so forth. Just really feel like it would not have been hard to
[28:49.320 --> 28:55.580]  that tree trunk. And hopefully that doesn't end up being an issue but it's just another
[28:56.320 --> 29:02.920]  piece of the wall the defense is building here to raise these kind of woulda coulda shouldas
[29:04.760 --> 29:15.640]  to argue that this investigation fell short in many respects. He indicated that he could
[29:15.640 --> 29:24.500]  have gotten a blood spatter expert back in 2017 but for whatever reason they did not.
[29:25.080 --> 29:30.580]  He agreed it was possible that a blood spatter expert could have helped with determining the
[29:30.580 --> 29:38.980]  timeline by just establishing the order and course of events by looking at the blood stains
[29:38.980 --> 29:47.600]  at the scene. Might have given them some insight into how the blood would move differently.
[29:47.720 --> 29:53.580]  For example if a person is clothed versus if they aren't clothed. He revisited the
[29:53.580 --> 30:00.140]  scavengers this idea that had these girls been out there overnight. It seems like there may
[30:00.860 --> 30:06.860]  just just that's the question is it likely or would one expect that there would be scavenger
[30:06.860 --> 30:15.780]  activity of some kind. Trooper Olahi was very very bearish on that very negative on that.
[30:15.980 --> 30:22.380]  He took the position that while things like insects can be they can be very helpful in
[30:22.380 --> 30:27.760]  determining a cause of death the problem is that this was February you don't have many
[30:27.760 --> 30:36.840]  insects in February they are all dormant underground and so you wouldn't get the direct
[30:37.840 --> 30:44.960]  Olahi the insect activity is then in turn what tends to attract the other scavengers the
[30:44.960 --> 30:51.940]  foxes the raccoons and so forth. I'm not sure that I agree with that.
[30:54.020 --> 30:58.880]  I'm really not sure that I agree with that. Anyway Mr. Rosie had a good rebuttal to that
[30:58.880 --> 31:04.120]  he's like don't don't don't we have turkey buzzards here in Indiana yeah they do I've
[31:04.120 --> 31:09.160]  seen a lot of them a lot of them circling there was a whole I was I was I had to I had
[31:09.160 --> 31:13.760]  to do a quick run I forget what I needed to get I needed to get something I was at Walmart
[31:13.760 --> 31:21.100]  here over here in Logansport and there's a pond out front of the parking lot and I see
[31:21.100 --> 31:24.920]  all these blackbirds and I'm thinking those are those are some funny looking crows it looked
[31:24.920 --> 31:29.960]  you know at the distance like just a group of crows a murder they call it a murder of crows
[31:29.960 --> 31:41.020]  That's how ironic. But they were funny looking, and it wasn't until I kind of, you know, a couple times, I realized, oh, it's a big old group of buzzards there, sitting there, hanging out at that pond.
[31:41.100 --> 31:50.720]  So yeah, there are a lot of them, and they're all around. Buzzards are not going to be attracted to insects, you know, they are circling, they're looking for carrion on the ground, that's what they're attracted to.
[31:51.200 --> 31:57.600]  The reason why I disagree with the insects or the attractant is because what scavengers go for is awful.
[31:57.600 --> 32:13.290]  Scavengers go for organs. They're rich in nutrients, you know, what can I tell you? That's what is going to go first if you have scavenger activity in the area.
[32:13.850 --> 32:23.150]  I've already told you guys all about the roadkill here, how much roadkill there is. It's everywhere, like every couple hundred feet there's something, there's big things, there's small things.
[32:23.150 --> 32:33.490]  Saw the first, saw my first fox, fox roadkill this evening. Raccoons everywhere. They're going to be all over this wooded area.
[32:34.450 --> 32:47.850]  Trooper Olahi acknowledged that this is like prime deer country. Asked him, you know, given his experience as a hunter, he then kind of backpedaled. He's not really a deer hunter, he's more of a bird hunter.
[32:47.850 --> 32:57.170]  So I don't know if that means like swamp bird, like duck, you know, duck hunter or if it means like upland bird, like pheasant, you know, chucker, things like that.
[32:57.170 --> 33:06.290]  I don't know if they have chucker out here in Indiana. Somebody from Indiana, let me know. Do you guys have chuckers here? That's some hardcore hunting. They like to run uphill. You got to chase them uphill.
[33:08.610 --> 33:16.010]  Anyway, so this is this is an area that is a habitat for a lot of wildlife. They would be there.
[33:17.210 --> 33:27.950]  Wildlife, like anybody else, wants to meet their basic survival needs. This, you know, sorry to be crude or whatever, but these these are potentially very rich food sources.
[33:28.550 --> 33:44.370]  So it seems like a reasonable inference to me, obviously not definitive, but just, you know, yeah, seems seems very possible that with that amount of time, almost 24 hours laying out that the scavengers scavengers would have found them.
[33:47.680 --> 33:56.500]  One of the most ironic statements of the day, in my opinion, came from came from Trooper Olhi.
[33:57.840 --> 34:03.440]  He was asked if he could determine a cause of death. He said he could not and that it's a very imprecise science.
[34:06.520 --> 34:17.460]  Determining the time of death is a very imprecise science as opposed to looking at a couple of bullets side by side and trying to say they came from the same gun.
[34:17.680 --> 34:25.940]  Oh, man, it's comical. It really is. It's it's just it's it's it's very darkly humorous.
[34:28.850 --> 34:33.270]  Nobody that he was aware of took measurements of this of the creek.
[34:33.270 --> 34:35.110]  This came back as an issue.
[34:35.410 --> 34:47.730]  The defense is exploring this because they are challenging the explanation that Abby and Libby waded across the stream or like were forced to cross the stream themselves.
[34:49.290 --> 34:57.090]  And so I mean, the photos, you know, the water, the water is fairly high.
[34:57.870 --> 35:02.710]  Trooper Olhi basically said, no, to his knowledge, nobody took measurements.
[35:02.710 --> 35:04.970]  But there was a dive team out there.
[35:04.970 --> 35:12.770]  There are some photos that have been in evidence where if you look really, really closely, you can see some of the dive team members out there in the water.
[35:12.770 --> 35:16.110]  And so you can see the level that it comes up.
[35:16.110 --> 35:20.390]  So he's estimated it's two to two and a half, maybe three feet in some areas.
[35:21.190 --> 35:32.990]  But again, the issue is that the stream depth varies depending on where you are, which is also it's very normal for any any stream and natural stream that isn't confined or damned.
[35:33.070 --> 35:36.230]  It will it will cut a channel, however it flows.
[35:36.270 --> 35:38.410]  And that that channel will often move.
[35:38.430 --> 35:41.210]  It can have a couple of different, you know, a couple of different channels.
[35:42.130 --> 35:51.050]  That's what I saw when I was over there the other day, because the water is so low, you really can see where the channels have been have been carved out.
[35:51.370 --> 35:57.950]  And the, you know, as the water recedes, it recedes down into that channel and the channel remains deeper.
[35:57.950 --> 36:00.770]  And as you as you get further out, it gets much shallower.
[36:01.490 --> 36:04.190]  So it's a fairly normal stream that way.
[36:04.250 --> 36:11.110]  But we still don't really have very good information about, you know, had they crossed the stream, how deep would the water have been?
[36:11.130 --> 36:15.830]  How fast would the flow have been? Is this really, really feasible that that would have happened?
[36:21.400 --> 36:23.980]  He asked, I thought, a really good question.
[36:24.300 --> 36:29.200]  Is there anything unusual about finding an unspent cartridge in a woodlot in Indiana?
[36:30.280 --> 36:37.620]  This is where he was getting into the hunting and just raising the issue that hunting and shooting are very common in these rural areas.
[36:37.680 --> 36:44.320]  It's probably not that not that uncommon at all to find, you know, some dropped some dropped cartridge somewhere.
[36:48.620 --> 36:54.320]  Turbur Olahi basically said, I don't think it would be odd to find a round anywhere in the state of Indiana.
[36:54.800 --> 37:09.600]  But he did nitpick on basically arguing that the 40 caliber is what made it unusual, that he would expect to find a hunting cartridge or a like a rifle cartridge or a shotgun shell or something like that.
[37:09.840 --> 37:13.460]  Not so much a handgun, a handgun cartridge.
[37:14.420 --> 37:18.860]  But he did concede people that live in the country often have guns.
[37:19.060 --> 37:22.620]  They shoot them. They shoot them on other people's property.
[37:22.800 --> 37:26.460]  Wouldn't be wouldn't be surprised if they did that in the woods.
[37:37.440 --> 37:44.060]  Mr. Rosie spent some time with the photographs of the area where the clothing in the creek had been recovered.
[37:44.060 --> 37:58.380]  His point was to kind of establish where it was and then kind of point out that it was unknown at what point those items were put in the stream.
[37:58.760 --> 38:12.080]  That basically it was very feasible that they could have floated downstream and then gotten entangled in the roots and the branches that the area where they were ultimately ultimately connect collected.
[38:12.080 --> 38:17.320]  And in fact, it's almost certain that I mean, at least to a small degree, that's exactly what happened because they did.
[38:17.400 --> 38:23.380]  They got they got entangled in this in this just debris that's that's there in the river.
[38:23.380 --> 38:27.080]  So even if it was a small area, you know, they likely floated down.
[38:27.880 --> 38:32.380]  But holding open the possibility, it could have been from it could have been from quite a ways upstream.
[38:32.540 --> 38:34.500]  We just don't know.
[38:36.040 --> 38:52.700]  Agreed that he did not search any area, any of the immediate area north of the county road, county road 300 north, which is the one that leads to the the Mears, the Mears entrance to these trails that we've been talking about.
[38:53.240 --> 39:04.220]  It was at this point where he referred to the bullet as the magic bullet, which got a true a pissy sounding objection.
[39:04.220 --> 39:09.520]  From Mr. Littrell, it's irrelevant if the defendant calls it the magic bullet.
[39:10.040 --> 39:14.020]  And that was that was sustained judge. Your characterization is improper.
[39:15.260 --> 39:30.020]  So, again, just establishing they had they took several photos of the bullet as it lie as it laid on the ground in the in that 45 degree angle with the head stamp showing.
[39:30.240 --> 39:31.840]  But you can't see the bullet itself.
[39:31.840 --> 39:34.200]  You can't see the tip, the tip of the cartridge.
[39:35.960 --> 39:53.700]  So he emphasized, emphasized that and was asking if he thought it would be helpful to have taken more photos if in hindsight, he wished he had taken more photos of the round and he said no.
[39:54.600 --> 39:55.940]  He said no.
[39:55.940 --> 39:59.300]  Nope. In hindsight, the photos that they took were perfectly good.
[39:59.440 --> 40:04.840]  While at the same time, he's conceding that generally more information is better.
[40:05.080 --> 40:07.840]  Film is free in this day and age it is.
[40:08.180 --> 40:14.020]  And that, you know, you might as well you might as well take more more photos rather than fewer.
[40:15.460 --> 40:19.400]  Cross examined him on the point. I was like, this is my point. I made this point yesterday.
[40:20.120 --> 40:31.580]  He had argued that you wouldn't you wouldn't take the bullet from the ground and hold it up and take a photograph of it like that or, you know, in your palm or something like that to see the entire bullet because that would be unprofessional.
[40:31.820 --> 40:32.580]  And so Mr.
[40:32.620 --> 40:39.940]  Rosie handed him up those photos of the FBI agents collecting the clothing, holding it up in their gloved hands.
[40:40.100 --> 40:41.880]  Are these unprofessional?
[40:42.600 --> 40:43.400]  Thank you.
[40:43.740 --> 40:45.180]  Thank you.
[40:45.180 --> 40:47.240]  Well, it's it wouldn't be my preferred method.
[40:50.200 --> 40:52.140]  The last thing that Mr.
[40:52.340 --> 41:00.400]  Rosie elicited from Trooper Olahi was that he had inspected Libby's wrist and hands for defensive wounds.
[41:00.560 --> 41:03.000]  She had no defensive wounds on her body.
[41:05.880 --> 41:17.720]  Very, very, very good at cross examination, even with all of the sniping that was coming and how irritating that is when when somebody is just pulling this petty stuff.
[41:17.740 --> 41:21.740]  It's getting sustained because you already know the judge is going to give them whatever they want.
[41:23.760 --> 41:25.920]  He's he's very, very good at this.
[41:25.980 --> 41:32.280]  He knows what point he's making and he's able to to get to that point very, very well.
[41:36.380 --> 41:40.160]  Mr. Littrell did a redirect that I basically just have in my notes.
[41:40.200 --> 41:43.700]  It was pointless. It was one of these you just needed to have the last word.
[41:43.860 --> 41:48.200]  You didn't elicit anything that was particularly helpful or new.
[41:48.480 --> 41:51.760]  Like you're just kind of repeating things that already came out across.
[41:54.020 --> 41:58.000]  The documentation and preservation of items is the most important thing at the scene.
[41:58.740 --> 42:00.660]  Yeah, I know. We know.
[42:00.960 --> 42:02.700]  Like there there was there was no need for it.
[42:02.700 --> 42:04.720]  He just really needed to have the last word.
[42:05.400 --> 42:09.460]  Well, so Mr. Rosie didn't let him have that.
[42:09.680 --> 42:11.980]  He went ahead and asked some more questions.
[42:12.480 --> 42:20.080]  So he got back into the scavenger activity, said no, he wouldn't be surprised to see no scavenger activity.
[42:20.080 --> 42:24.280]  This is where he got into how there's no insect activity right now.
[42:24.440 --> 42:27.120]  Yeah, but there are turkey buzzards. You've seen those around, right? Yeah.
[42:27.120 --> 42:29.840]  OK, yeah, there are acknowledged.
[42:30.140 --> 42:33.960]  Finally, he could have spent more time on the round if he could do it over.
[42:34.120 --> 42:36.860]  No, he would not take more photos of the area.
[42:37.200 --> 42:42.940]  Mr. Rosie was asking specifically about the area where the bullet had been found
[42:42.940 --> 42:49.100]  and how that could have been like close up photographed with the bullet in situ, you know,
[42:49.100 --> 42:53.220]  where where it's located before the leaves were removed so that you could see it.
[42:54.060 --> 42:58.840]  Photographs of the location where the bullet had been found after the bullet was was taken away.
[42:59.200 --> 43:03.560]  None of this was done, but he would not he would not do that.
[43:05.220 --> 43:10.400]  So that was our answer to that jury had a lot of questions today.
[43:10.400 --> 43:17.960]  So some very, very good questions, especially in a moment when we get to the cell phone extraction leads me to the suspicion
[43:17.960 --> 43:20.520]  we have some technical people on this jury.
[43:21.420 --> 43:29.660]  So the first question, did the undergrowth under Abby appear disturbed and indicate she was dressed as she laid there?
[43:30.220 --> 43:36.880]  And I thought that was a very good question, because, yes, if Abby had been dressed by somebody else while she was laying there,
[43:37.680 --> 43:45.420]  you would expect to see just that the leaves in the ground and stuff are going to be moved around from the act of moving her body.
[43:45.420 --> 43:50.860]  He did not recall anything like that other than from when they themselves,
[43:51.140 --> 43:57.500]  the responders moved the bodies to document the scene and then and then to recover and remove them.
[43:58.820 --> 44:04.440]  They asked when evidence is tested at the lab, how is it logged and resealed in the same bag?
[44:04.440 --> 44:15.520]  So we had gotten some of the description from Trooper Olahi about the logging process and how numbers are assigned in a barcode
[44:15.520 --> 44:25.060]  and then it's held in secure and the chain of custody log is created that shows where it's gone and who's handled it and so forth.
[44:25.840 --> 44:28.620]  So how do they reseal it in the same bag?
[44:28.620 --> 44:32.560]  So he went through the explanation of here's how it's sealed.
[44:32.860 --> 44:43.260]  And then, you know, when the lab goes and opens it, they do it over here and then they will re-label it, re-close it with their own labels and initial it.
[44:43.340 --> 44:50.120]  How the initials on it are basically how you track who has touched it, who has touched it where.
[44:52.580 --> 44:56.580]  Is it common? Is it common? Great question.
[44:56.580 --> 45:01.180]  Is it common to change gloves during evidence collection of different items?
[45:02.720 --> 45:13.760]  Thank you. Thank you, Jers, because, you know, if you watch Karen Reed, you know, you know where I'm at.
[45:13.900 --> 45:15.500]  You know where I'm at with this.
[45:15.900 --> 45:23.940]  How we sit and watch them on the stands, go in and touch every single little piece of evidence and the outsides of things and their hair and, you know,
[45:23.940 --> 45:32.500]  whatever with the same gloves on their hands, therefore pretty much destroying the integrity of any of those items.
[45:33.740 --> 45:36.320]  He said, yes, absolutely. That is common.
[45:36.440 --> 45:47.600]  He had already said that his personal practice is to wear two pairs of gloves because it's easier to change them out and you need to change them out quite a bit.
[45:47.600 --> 45:53.000]  If you it's your skin, you know, these gloves are tight and your skin gets sweaty and whatever.
[45:53.200 --> 46:00.200]  It's hard to get them on. If you have another pair of gloves on, it's much easier to put on a new glove over a glove than it is over your bare skin.
[46:01.900 --> 46:08.080]  They asked, was the bullet collected in an envelope or in a pill box?
[46:08.080 --> 46:22.660]  This came up because one of the previous crime scene investigators had testified that the pill box would be like the like how you would want to preserve something like a cartridge so that it doesn't get damaged.
[46:22.660 --> 46:25.320]  But these were clearly in an envelope.
[46:26.120 --> 46:40.660]  And so Trooper Olahi said that no, it had been in this this original packing and had never been never had been removed from that that they wouldn't transfer it because they didn't they you wouldn't want to risk damaging it.
[46:40.660 --> 46:42.440]  So you'd keep it in the in the original.
[46:43.000 --> 46:52.960]  And then the final question is what identified where an item was resealed and that had essentially already been answered through the question about the about the labels.
[46:54.160 --> 47:13.400]  So jurors thinking along the same lines there obviously and very concerned about integrity the integrity of what it is they're seeing and the mechanisms that are in place to preserve it to make sure that it hasn't been tainted hasn't been altered that they can count on what is being presented to them.
[47:16.680 --> 47:29.860]  We got all our recesses today by the way we did have a morning recess after this and we had a lunch and we had an afternoon recess and then we broke it like just after just right about five o'clock so fairly fairly normal length of court day today.
[47:30.560 --> 47:46.120]  The next witness was Brian Bunner he is the digital forensics supervisor for the Idaho State Police back at the time in 2017 he was the analyst so he's the one that did the celebrate extractions on Libby's phones.
[47:46.620 --> 47:57.140]  Now I say celebrate extractions because there were multiple and so we'll get into that and what kind of some of the questions were raised and implications of that.
[47:58.020 --> 48:16.820]  So celebrate is the most common program that's used for analysis of cell phone data he described the process how it works you go through and you extract the data from the phone that then gets analyzed and parsed into a readable format because what's actually
[48:16.820 --> 48:21.780]  Extracted is, you know, it's just a binary code and a bunch of 1s and 0s. It's not something that
[48:21.780 --> 48:27.380]  I think most of us would be able to sit and read. So that has to be translated into something that
[48:28.040 --> 48:34.860]  people can understand. And then that produces a report that puts the data in a usable format.
[48:34.900 --> 48:40.180]  You can see, for example, the photos, the videos, and so forth that were on the telephone.
[48:42.280 --> 48:46.800]  But I was real horrified, real horrified when he was describing what they did with
[48:46.800 --> 48:56.580]  his phone. According to him, in 2017, the normal practice was that you would go through and manually
[48:56.580 --> 49:03.860]  examine the phone first. And so you would document it. So first off, you would document,
[49:03.880 --> 49:07.660]  photograph the exterior of the phone, just the condition. You know, does it have a cracked
[49:07.660 --> 49:12.080]  screen? Does it have a case on it? Things like that. You would pull out the SIM card,
[49:12.080 --> 49:19.480]  photograph the SIM card, and then you would turn on the phone. You would turn on the phone
[49:19.480 --> 49:26.520]  and get in the phone and take photos of things on the phone. I am here to tell you
[49:26.520 --> 49:32.240]  that in 2017, that was 100% not the best practice. They have known for a long time
[49:32.240 --> 49:38.280]  the best practice has been when you get that phone, you put it on airplane mode. If it's on,
[49:38.280 --> 49:43.820]  put it in airplane mode, you power it off and you keep it off and you don't do anything with
[49:43.820 --> 49:52.440]  it because anything you do to that phone runs the risk of overriding information that is stored
[49:52.440 --> 49:57.060]  there. And so it's destroying potential stuff that is available to be recovered.
[49:57.800 --> 50:04.560]  The other reason is because even, you know, back in 2017, there are remote access
[50:04.560 --> 50:12.140]  potential ways to get into the phone remotely, where somebody can go in and remotely wipe it
[50:12.140 --> 50:16.840]  or something. That would be pretty bad. You know, you got some drug dealer's phone,
[50:16.980 --> 50:20.140]  you're going through like all, you're getting all of his evidence of all of his deals that
[50:20.140 --> 50:26.740]  he's making over the phone, but you're in there and it's on and he's able to hit that
[50:28.060 --> 50:33.020]  mission impossible, that self-destruct switch. The phone is gone and so is your case.
[50:33.020 --> 50:40.300]  So you don't do that. This is just mind-blowing to me. I really thought this was basic knowledge
[50:40.300 --> 50:44.540]  because I knew it and I had heard it. You know, I knew this because I had heard it from
[50:45.740 --> 50:49.580]  just all kinds of different cell phone examiners.
[50:51.060 --> 50:54.940]  So that's not what they did. They open the settings, they take photos of the screen to
[50:54.940 --> 51:00.640]  the software version, you know, the operating system and so forth.
[51:01.780 --> 51:09.100]  Just all the identifying information from the phone, they will open apps, like just
[51:11.140 --> 51:17.580]  kind of crazy from my perspective. They would then do the extraction with the iPhone,
[51:17.700 --> 51:20.900]  they plug it straight into the computer, extract it straight into the computer,
[51:20.900 --> 51:25.160]  then they process it through the software program into the readable report.
[51:28.950 --> 51:40.030]  So in this particular case, he was describing how in 2017, when he had the phone,
[51:45.500 --> 51:53.080]  there was basically just one method, one extraction method that Celebrite would offer.
[51:53.080 --> 52:00.620]  This got a little bit confusing in the testimony because he was describing on the one hand,
[52:00.780 --> 52:07.800]  there are three methods for extraction, but then there's also three extraction types.
[52:08.360 --> 52:16.360]  There is a logical extraction, an advanced logical extraction, and a physical extraction.
[52:17.540 --> 52:25.520]  And so these are just kind of all different ways for Celebrite to get into the phone and
[52:26.800 --> 52:34.980]  get information. But that's different from the method one, two, and three, or at least
[52:35.440 --> 52:40.820]  it sounds like it was. It got confusing, it wasn't entirely clear what he was trying to
[52:40.820 --> 52:47.400]  say there. So in 2017, there were only these two methods, and it wasn't until later that method
[52:47.400 --> 52:54.640]  three became available. That will become important in a moment. So we saw all the
[52:54.640 --> 52:59.260]  photos that he took of the phone and the SIM card and the screen lock and the picture
[52:59.260 --> 53:05.760]  of the home page. The battery was dead at the time that he received it, so they plugged
[53:05.760 --> 53:09.940]  it into the charger and turned it on. They were provided the code to be able to get into
[53:09.940 --> 53:16.340]  the phone. Didn't do anything to modify the data before they extracted it, you know,
[53:16.340 --> 53:19.920]  didn't go in and delete stuff. He pinky swears they didn't do anything like that.
[53:21.260 --> 53:27.900]  Photo of the settings opened with the name of the phone is Libby's iPhone, Liberty's iPhone.
[53:29.940 --> 53:34.360]  The iCloud account in the settings, the Apple ID associated with the phone,
[53:35.280 --> 53:42.340]  iMessage on the settings, Snapchat settings, settings general app, like showing the time
[53:42.340 --> 53:47.540]  zone setting, like so many things they caught into in this phone without doing the extraction.
[53:48.080 --> 53:54.980]  No, no, just do it in the extraction. They didn't. We'll get to why that matters.
[53:56.100 --> 54:01.780]  But mainly they wanted to establish there that the time zone was set to be Eastern
[54:01.780 --> 54:06.500]  Standard Time, which is what we're on here in Indiana, which I didn't know before I came
[54:06.500 --> 54:09.680]  here. I thought it would be on Central. Chicago's on Central and it's right there,
[54:09.700 --> 54:14.840]  but now they're like on Eastern here. So I had an hour less than I thought I was going
[54:14.840 --> 54:20.720]  to have. That's okay. So just establishing that for purposes of what is on her phone,
[54:21.000 --> 54:26.240]  specifically the video, that the timestamp associated with that is accurate. It wasn't
[54:26.240 --> 54:31.000]  like inadvertently set to Pacific Time or, you know, Japan Time or something like that.
[54:43.840 --> 54:50.300]  So they did the extraction on February 15th, the day after the victims had been found.
[54:51.060 --> 54:56.540]  This was quick. This was a quick and dirty, he said, because time was of the essence. They
[54:56.540 --> 55:01.560]  needed to get the report like right away. So the trooper who brought him the phone
[55:01.560 --> 55:07.100]  sat there and waited until the analysis was done so that they could get the report right
[55:07.100 --> 55:15.700]  off the bat. They looked, got into the camera roll, which is the app that stores the photos
[55:15.700 --> 55:20.920]  and the videos. And so he saw that the timeline in the camera roll showed a video
[55:20.920 --> 55:27.220]  had been taken in the last day or two. He found the video that was taken at 2.13 p.m.
[55:27.280 --> 55:35.220]  on February the 13th, 2.13 on 2.13. There was a moment in here, finally,
[55:35.220 --> 55:40.660]  Jennifer O'Shea, who handled this cross examination. She objected to leading questions
[55:40.660 --> 55:47.160]  and that was sustained appropriately. Ms. O'Shea did much better with her objections
[55:47.860 --> 55:54.380]  and just overcoming objections than any of the other attorneys did. I found that notable.
[55:56.740 --> 56:01.500]  So we had the video. The video was extracted. It is exhibit number 200.
[56:01.500 --> 56:07.200]  Not that it matters at this point in time since we don't get them. We don't get access to them.
[56:07.540 --> 56:13.660]  I'll follow up on that when we get to the end. But so we saw the video. The video was
[56:13.660 --> 56:20.520]  played in court. So the video is not at all what has been publicly released. The publicly
[56:20.520 --> 56:29.220]  released video is that short clip of the man walking on the bridge and the voice saying
[56:29.220 --> 56:34.020]  girls downhill. There's a whole big thing about you don't see the man's lips move
[56:34.020 --> 56:40.420]  while the sound is going on and stuff. So maybe there's more people. Just kind of an open
[56:40.420 --> 56:47.860]  question. The video itself, you barely even see that man. They actually showed this video
[56:47.860 --> 56:53.840]  twice in court and the first time they showed it, I couldn't even see him in it because
[56:53.840 --> 57:00.020]  he's so far in the background. So what the video shows, it was described as about a 43 second
[57:00.020 --> 57:05.380]  video. It wasn't that long. What they played in court was in the ballpark of about 30 seconds.
[57:06.180 --> 57:13.800]  So I'm not sure where the 43 seconds comes from. It starts with the phone pointed down
[57:13.800 --> 57:19.900]  towards the bridge. It comes up and it turns back. It's like from the far end of the
[57:19.900 --> 57:28.660]  bridge turns back towards Abby and you see Abby walking on the bridge and you first,
[57:28.740 --> 57:34.940]  at first you don't see a man. You don't see a man there. And the video is kind of shaky
[57:34.940 --> 57:41.840]  and it's like she's holding it in her hand and just kind of walking or not really paying
[57:41.840 --> 57:48.580]  a lot of close attention to where she's pointing it. The phone kind of then comes up
[57:50.680 --> 57:58.860]  towards the direction of the end of the bridge and you see Abby in her red shirt
[57:59.340 --> 58:05.100]  run past the end, run past the phone across the end of the end of the bridge.
[58:07.040 --> 58:13.480]  And you hear Libby say, at least it sounds like it's Libby, hear a young girl,
[58:13.480 --> 58:20.300]  young female voice say there's no path down and there's something else that she says
[58:20.300 --> 58:27.160]  I wasn't able to decipher there in the courtroom. So that's the video.
[58:29.520 --> 58:48.210]  That's the video. They sent it to the officer who's trained in doing the enhancements. They
[58:48.210 --> 58:56.510]  showed how in the first glimpse of Abby in the frame you don't see the man behind him
[58:56.510 --> 59:04.710]  but as they advance through the frame, the frames, later ones, you can see the man.
[59:05.730 --> 59:13.230]  But he's very, very small. So they examined the phone initially, remember, on February
[59:13.230 --> 59:19.710]  15th. They did a second examination, a second extraction on February 21st.
[59:21.170 --> 59:26.450]  The explanation was because the first one was quick and dirty, the get what they can because
[59:26.450 --> 59:34.550]  time is of the essence. The second one was to just use more of the tools, do a more thorough
[59:34.550 --> 59:40.130]  job. So they used some of these other extraction mechanisms that they have besides
[59:40.130 --> 59:49.670]  Celebrite. So they really didn't get anything that was significant from those other extractions.
[59:50.250 --> 59:59.130]  Did a third one on September the 15th of 2017. This was when Celebrite had released,
[59:59.790 --> 01:00:05.330]  I guess, okay, so I guess before they only had method one. By September 5th of 2017,
[01:00:05.390 --> 01:00:10.110]  they had released method two and method three. He didn't explain what these methods are in
[01:00:10.110 --> 01:00:13.950]  this is where he then went into explaining they have different levels of extractions,
[01:00:13.990 --> 01:00:18.230]  the logical, which is advanced, the advanced logical, which is a file extraction and
[01:00:18.230 --> 01:00:24.970]  the physical extraction, which is like everything off of the phone. But he didn't describe
[01:00:24.970 --> 01:00:31.130]  what the methods were and how that, you know, differs from the levels.
[01:00:33.770 --> 01:00:41.210]  So the method two produced minimal new information, according to him. Their lab did not
[01:00:41.210 --> 01:00:46.330]  have the capability to do the method three extraction. So they sent the phone to their
[01:00:46.330 --> 01:00:50.930]  partners, their federal partners at the Department of Homeland Security. And they ran
[01:00:50.930 --> 01:00:58.610]  the method three extraction in a, in their DC lab. And so that then created a new report
[01:00:58.610 --> 01:01:05.250]  with the new data. So we're at three so far, right? We're at February 15th,
[01:01:06.810 --> 01:01:15.850]  February 21st, September 5th. They did it again. Fourth one in 2019. That was done by a new,
[01:01:15.850 --> 01:01:19.370]  a different examiner in the office, because at this point,
[01:01:22.590 --> 01:01:26.710]  Trooper Bunner had been promoted to be the supervisor. So he doesn't, he doesn't do the
[01:01:26.710 --> 01:01:34.890]  homework anymore. That's what we got on direct examination. Ms. Auger handled the cross. She
[01:01:34.890 --> 01:01:40.730]  is clearly quite knowledgeable about the the ins and outs of cell phone extraction. She knew
[01:01:40.730 --> 01:01:45.830]  a lot of the lingo, knew a lot of the details about how it worked when the witness was
[01:01:45.830 --> 01:01:52.550]  wanting to be tight lipped and not really spell things out or whatever. She was able
[01:01:52.550 --> 01:01:56.690]  call him out on it. She's familiar enough with it that she's able to
[01:01:57.730 --> 01:02:02.810]  let him know that she knows what she's asking here. She's not just, she's not just reading
[01:02:02.810 --> 01:02:18.610]  a script or something like that. She has the ability to follow up. So the extraction they did
[01:02:18.610 --> 01:02:28.290]  on February the 15th was an advanced logical extraction. We know that. But at least that's
[01:02:28.290 --> 01:02:34.790]  what he said. But then on their actual report of the extraction, it just said that it was a
[01:02:34.790 --> 01:02:42.210]  logical, a logical extraction. So unclear. I assume the report is better and the witness
[01:02:42.210 --> 01:02:48.050]  just didn't remember. But the logical he did testify that is the most basic form of extraction.
[01:02:48.290 --> 01:02:55.190]  So we didn't get an explanation for why you would do that. Given the circumstances here,
[01:02:55.190 --> 01:02:59.310]  you would think you would want all of the information in the phone as much as possible.
[01:02:59.670 --> 01:03:03.730]  And you would also assume that they had consent. They had been given the passcode to be able to
[01:03:03.730 --> 01:03:07.470]  enter the phone. You would think they would have consent to get everything in it. It wasn't a
[01:03:07.470 --> 01:03:13.410]  situation. So sometimes the reason why you'll do different types of extractions is because
[01:03:13.410 --> 01:03:17.850]  you're limited in what you're supposed to be looking at on the phone. Warrants, in particular,
[01:03:17.970 --> 01:03:23.010]  search warrants have to be particularized. You don't get to just broadly, I'm going to go pick
[01:03:23.010 --> 01:03:26.890]  anything and everything on your phone. There needs to be something specific that they're
[01:03:26.890 --> 01:03:30.710]  looking for on their phone and that's what they're authorized to search for in the warrant.
[01:03:31.090 --> 01:03:36.170]  And so if they have methods that enable them to get to that without exposing a whole lot of
[01:03:36.170 --> 01:03:39.950]  extraneous information, that's really what they need to do. Or you're going to have
[01:03:39.950 --> 01:03:45.130]  a defense lawyer saying you exceeded the bounds of your warrant by pulling all of this
[01:03:45.130 --> 01:03:50.090]  data that you didn't need and that wasn't necessary for you to be able to get what you
[01:03:50.090 --> 01:03:56.310]  were looking for. So the logical is the most basic. Seems weird to me that that's what they
[01:03:56.310 --> 01:04:00.830]  did, but maybe it's the fastest. Maybe the others would have taken a lot longer. I don't
[01:04:00.830 --> 01:04:04.990]  know. He didn't give us an explanation. That seems like a logical explanation for me,
[01:04:04.990 --> 01:04:12.390]  but I can't say for sure. They could not do the full file system extraction in 2017,
[01:04:12.390 --> 01:04:22.870]  he said, but you did that in October of 2017. And so then he backpedaled and said,
[01:04:22.890 --> 01:04:27.750]  well, that was the method three extraction. So this was just the example of her kind of
[01:04:27.750 --> 01:04:42.880]  catching him out trying to be tricky. They talked about what's called the knowledge C
[01:04:42.880 --> 01:04:50.700]  database. And so the knowledge C database, according to this witness, they did not know
[01:04:50.700 --> 01:04:58.060]  that it existed as of October of 2017. And so what the knowledge C database is, is it's a
[01:04:58.060 --> 01:05:05.980]  function that Apple has created. That's where they basically get they data mine all kinds of
[01:05:05.980 --> 01:05:12.440]  different things. And then they use that to serve up your ads or make suggestions to you,
[01:05:12.440 --> 01:05:20.540]  stuff like that. They help tailor the phone to you. And so that includes things like the
[01:05:20.540 --> 01:05:28.980]  health information, the steps, your searches, when your apps are on and off, the power on log,
[01:05:29.040 --> 01:05:36.540]  when the phone is on, what the battery level is, all kinds of things like that are in this
[01:05:37.490 --> 01:05:47.380]  in this knowledge C database. So they didn't know about that. And it was the method three
[01:05:47.380 --> 01:05:55.020]  extraction that that method that now makes that makes that visible to them. So it existed,
[01:05:55.020 --> 01:06:02.580]  but they weren't able to see it through the previous celebrite, celebrite versions.
[01:06:06.020 --> 01:06:13.580]  When he looked at the camera roll, the camera roll app, the photo of Abby on the bridge,
[01:06:13.600 --> 01:06:21.420]  it was not in the camera roll. That I thought has the potential to be significant.
[01:06:22.120 --> 01:06:27.240]  The obvious alternative explanation is if she took the photo in Snapchat,
[01:06:27.880 --> 01:06:32.380]  which I think she did, she was posted to Snapchat. So it's certainly possible if she
[01:06:32.380 --> 01:06:38.460]  taken it in Snapchat, would that save it to her camera roll? I don't know. It could very
[01:06:38.460 --> 01:06:44.740]  well be that it just saves it in the Snapchat app. I know on my Android phone that if I
[01:06:44.740 --> 01:06:49.800]  take pictures like that in an app, it will still save to Google Photos. It might be
[01:06:49.800 --> 01:06:55.260]  in like a special folder, but Google is definitely going to track that. Don't know
[01:06:55.260 --> 01:07:01.600]  if Apple is the same. So the absence of that photo on the camera roll,
[01:07:01.880 --> 01:07:12.420]  yeah, that's intriguing. May or may not be meaningful. There is metadata associated with
[01:07:12.420 --> 01:07:19.400]  the video, including the latitude and longitude. So Celebrite has the ability to map
[01:07:19.400 --> 01:07:26.880]  that information and he prepared a map of that. And so the map went into evidence and as it
[01:07:26.880 --> 01:07:32.280]  turns out, the coordinates that were produced are nowhere near the bridge. They are just
[01:07:32.280 --> 01:07:42.820]  about a mile away in the general area of Delphi, Indiana. There was an objection at
[01:07:42.820 --> 01:07:49.800]  point because Ms. O'Shea asked the witness to circle on the map where the
[01:07:52.600 --> 01:07:56.460]  longitude, where the coordinates were, like where that location was on the map.
[01:07:56.700 --> 01:08:00.220]  He had pointed it out to her and she said, would you go ahead and circle that right
[01:08:00.220 --> 01:08:05.520]  there? So she indicated where. So Mr. McClellan objects to her telling him where to circle it.
[01:08:07.200 --> 01:08:13.180]  And so Ms. O'Shea is kind of dumbfounded and she's like, it's the coordinates.
[01:08:14.000 --> 01:08:18.840]  So the judge said that one goes to wait for the jury to consider. That's what I mean when
[01:08:18.840 --> 01:08:23.420]  I said Ms. O'Shea did a little bit better with dealing with the objections, responses from
[01:08:23.420 --> 01:08:28.300]  the judge and so forth. That was overruled. He gets to circle. He gets to circle it.
[01:08:29.440 --> 01:08:38.260]  He did not look at the GPS investigators and did not point out like the discrepancy
[01:08:38.260 --> 01:08:44.320]  or the specific location data to the investigators, but he did prepare this map.
[01:08:46.120 --> 01:08:52.180]  I don't know. The photos, she made a point to point out that the photos that he had
[01:08:52.180 --> 01:08:57.460]  taken of the phone screen, they were in landscape mode. They were not in portrait
[01:08:57.460 --> 01:09:01.340]  mode, you know, upright. They were in landscape mode. And so because of that,
[01:09:01.660 --> 01:09:08.560]  there was information on the bottom of the screen that wasn't captured. Oh, my Lord,
[01:09:08.560 --> 01:09:14.620]  you mess with the phone and then you don't even photograph it right. Die in here.
[01:09:16.700 --> 01:09:22.780]  She talked about iMessaging. So iMessaging is specific to Apple phones and to Apple users.
[01:09:22.780 --> 01:09:32.620]  And it had some it provides some additional features with when both users have iPhones
[01:09:32.620 --> 01:09:38.300]  with in that situation, they can use the Apple servers for their messaging through
[01:09:38.300 --> 01:09:43.720]  iMessaging. That is more secure. It's encrypted. And at least ostensibly,
[01:09:43.820 --> 01:09:49.980]  Apple doesn't crack that for for the feds. Or I say the feds, but you know, for the police,
[01:09:49.980 --> 01:09:56.620]  they won't provide access to that. There was an objection again in all of this to
[01:09:56.620 --> 01:10:03.680]  foundation because she's asking him about the how the Apple stuff works. And he says he's
[01:10:03.680 --> 01:10:08.240]  familiar with the operating system, but he has some limited understanding of iMessaging.
[01:10:08.420 --> 01:10:12.020]  So Mr. McClellan objects to the foundation as OJ is like, if he doesn't know,
[01:10:12.020 --> 01:10:15.580]  he doesn't know and he can say he doesn't know. So that one was also overruled.
[01:10:16.460 --> 01:10:18.280]  Very common sense response.
[01:10:20.840 --> 01:10:27.460]  They talked about the other thing that Apple provides is the find my iPhone. And so
[01:10:27.460 --> 01:10:34.720]  that allows location sharing and particularly between between devices like on the same plan
[01:10:34.720 --> 01:10:41.380]  or parents might use that or something like that. Liberty had find my iPhone enabled on
[01:10:41.380 --> 01:10:46.660]  her phone. That was an interesting detail, of course, because that would be a potential
[01:10:46.660 --> 01:10:50.740]  investigative tool during the search. You could just, you know, try to track the
[01:10:50.740 --> 01:10:58.060]  phone using the using the find my iPhone. We didn't get a lot more information about that.
[01:10:58.060 --> 01:11:04.080]  But I think the implication is the iPad that we heard about that was connected with the
[01:11:04.080 --> 01:11:10.280]  phone because they were able to look at the call history from the iPad and call the
[01:11:10.280 --> 01:11:16.000]  numbers and verify those that had come from from Libby's grandparents sister and so forth
[01:11:16.000 --> 01:11:21.440]  from Libby's relatives. So an implication that the iPad is, you know, has a connection
[01:11:21.440 --> 01:11:28.200]  with the iPhone potentially could have been used to track the iPhone with the find my iPhone
[01:11:28.200 --> 01:11:43.460]  app. So now some important, some important stuff, some very important stuff. We had another
[01:11:43.460 --> 01:11:49.300]  objection to Do you agree? Do you agree? Do you agree that every time you extract the phone,
[01:11:49.300 --> 01:11:54.500]  you lose data? It's a factual proposition. Nothing opinion about it all. It's perfectly
[01:11:54.500 --> 01:12:00.500]  proper in question. Never, never enough. Nevertheless, it's sustained. So she's,
[01:12:00.520 --> 01:12:05.280]  she's, she's a sharp one. And she's already, you know, seen what happened with Mr. Rosie and,
[01:12:05.280 --> 01:12:10.460]  you know, been befuddled by it, just like the rest of us, everybody is scratching their
[01:12:10.460 --> 01:12:14.780]  heads about, about that particular, that particular, if you agree is being objectionable.
[01:12:15.560 --> 01:12:20.020]  So she just very quickly modifies it to, is it true? Is it true that every time you extract
[01:12:20.020 --> 01:12:26.520]  the phone, you lose data? And the witness says, well, we know that now in 2024,
[01:12:26.520 --> 01:12:31.020]  we didn't know that then. I dispute that as well. They certainly knew that in 2017,
[01:12:31.020 --> 01:12:36.960]  because it goes to the basic function of how the, how the storage works on the iPhone.
[01:12:37.550 --> 01:12:43.380]  And so what happens is that anytime you power on and off the phone,
[01:12:44.340 --> 01:12:51.580]  there's just processes that happen in the phone. And so a lot of files, deleted files,
[01:12:52.020 --> 01:12:56.820]  temporary files, things like caches, internet caches, and stuff like that,
[01:12:57.100 --> 01:13:04.630]  that are temporary, they are stored in certain places on the phone that it will stay there
[01:13:05.270 --> 01:13:10.950]  until that space is needed. And then it is overwritten. So that's how a lot of times
[01:13:10.950 --> 01:13:15.290]  deleted items can be recovered from a phone through an extraction like this, because they
[01:13:15.290 --> 01:13:22.250]  are in those temporary, temporary files and have not yet been overwritten. But when you
[01:13:22.250 --> 01:13:28.490]  power the phone on and off and it engages in other activities, and then you are also doing
[01:13:28.490 --> 01:13:34.970]  things with the phone, like opening apps and stuff, it's overwriting that old data.
[01:13:35.690 --> 01:13:43.470]  So that's been known for a long time. That was known well before 2017. I want to say,
[01:13:43.890 --> 01:13:48.110]  I mean, I'm trying to think of like, when was the first time I had heard about that
[01:13:48.990 --> 01:13:58.570]  when I did, when I did a trial, 2011, 2012, you know, somewhere in there, this,
[01:13:58.570 --> 01:14:04.870]  it's not novel information. They've known how the phone storage like that works for a long time.
[01:14:05.110 --> 01:14:10.610]  Nevertheless, he says they knew that now in 2024, they didn't know it back then.
[01:14:12.670 --> 01:14:19.610]  So it's very possible that they lost data when they did all of these different extractions.
[01:14:19.810 --> 01:14:25.380]  You wouldn't know what you're losing. You would know because it's overwritten and it's
[01:14:25.380 --> 01:14:33.720]  just gone and you can never get that data back. And the jury will never know what that data is.
[01:14:34.320 --> 01:14:39.720]  I thought that was I thought that was pretty significant. It sounded there was a bit of a
[01:14:39.720 --> 01:14:45.500]  confusing line of questioning that it wasn't entirely clear. If he was just saying in
[01:14:45.500 --> 01:14:50.480]  general, we know now that that data is lost, but they had been there was a specific reference
[01:14:50.480 --> 01:14:58.600]  the power off log. And it seemed to me that he was saying that has been lost,
[01:14:58.760 --> 01:15:07.420]  the power off log for this phone. It's no longer available, which is really unfortunate,
[01:15:07.620 --> 01:15:13.580]  really unfortunate if that's the case, because that's what we would want to know.
[01:15:13.600 --> 01:15:19.160]  That would give us a piece of information about why this phone suddenly went dark
[01:15:19.680 --> 01:15:27.200]  in the afternoon of February 13th. Really unfortunate that that's not available.
[01:15:31.760 --> 01:15:37.440]  Mr. McLeiland then did the redirect. There had been some challenge to certifications.
[01:15:37.820 --> 01:15:43.140]  You can get certified by Celebrite, but you don't have to. It's something that the vendor
[01:15:43.140 --> 01:15:49.960]  offers. And so McLeiland just established because this guy doesn't have any certifications
[01:15:49.960 --> 01:15:56.120]  that it's basically a choice of ISP to not do that. The training isn't any different.
[01:15:56.580 --> 01:16:00.880]  It's just basically whether you want to pay to have some letters, some credentials,
[01:16:01.040 --> 01:16:06.260]  some formal credentials after your name. It's probably a lot more common for people who are
[01:16:06.260 --> 01:16:12.660]  private. People who are private practitioners of these types of forensics would get those
[01:16:12.660 --> 01:16:17.960]  types of certifications just to show that they're qualified. With law enforcement, they
[01:16:17.960 --> 01:16:22.040]  have your personnel record. They already know what trainings you've been to and stuff.
[01:16:28.600 --> 01:16:36.520]  On redirect, Mr. McLeiland really focused on the issue with the coordinates. And so what
[01:16:38.560 --> 01:16:46.780]  this trooper explained was that the way he described it was that when the location
[01:16:48.800 --> 01:16:58.340]  system basically is first triggered because a video, like say a video is started, it first
[01:16:58.340 --> 01:17:07.120]  hits a very general area, a very broad area. And then as time passes, it will begin to narrow
[01:17:07.120 --> 01:17:16.240]  down into a more specific and more focused point. And they use the example that that's
[01:17:16.240 --> 01:17:23.000]  Find My iPhone will do, that if you use it, it will initially show a big circle of where
[01:17:23.000 --> 01:17:30.460]  the thing could be, but it won't pinpoint the accuracy until much later when it hones in more
[01:17:30.460 --> 01:17:39.480]  specifically. So he seems to be implying that's what happens, that it's first getting these...
[01:17:43.540 --> 01:17:47.180]  I mean, I don't know specifically where it's drawing the information from, honestly,
[01:17:47.180 --> 01:17:53.800]  far as which source, but what it does is it improves its information, depending on what
[01:17:53.800 --> 01:17:58.300]  it has access to. So it can triangulate through the towers, it can pull from satellite,
[01:17:58.420 --> 01:18:03.200]  it can pull from other sources of data. And so that's what helps it get more specific to
[01:18:03.200 --> 01:18:15.540]  be able to pinpoint as it goes through those types of processes. So in his opinion, the
[01:18:15.540 --> 01:18:20.220]  reasonable to show it generally in Delphi with about a mile range that for something
[01:18:20.220 --> 01:18:26.260]  short, that would be expected. Now short, though, is the question. The video was, again,
[01:18:26.380 --> 01:18:35.620]  like 30 some seconds long. So how long does it take to get more specific? I mean,
[01:18:35.620 --> 01:18:43.920]  I guess it just depends on what's available, like they said. Seems like the phone was capable
[01:18:43.920 --> 01:18:51.260]  of cell service in the area for at least a period of time. It only lost service at a certain
[01:18:51.260 --> 01:18:55.740]  point and then service was restored. So at least intermittently should have been able to
[01:18:55.740 --> 01:19:03.940]  ping to the tower, get that information. I don't know. So Mr. McClelland, I just did it.
[01:19:03.960 --> 01:19:09.660]  Mr. McClelland always does this thing with his questioning where he will ask a bunch of
[01:19:09.660 --> 01:19:15.940]  questions and then he will repeat the answer that he likes. He will say, so
[01:19:17.880 --> 01:19:24.620]  you testified that blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. He'll repeat it or so. The data goes from
[01:19:24.620 --> 01:19:30.840]  general to specific after the witnesses just said the data goes from general to specific. So
[01:19:30.840 --> 01:19:38.020]  Ms. Auger did object to that, is asked and answered, and that was sustained. It was
[01:19:38.020 --> 01:19:54.830]  objection. It's happened. It's on record. Ms. Auger did hint in redirect that later in 2024
[01:19:54.830 --> 01:20:01.610]  they were able to find additional coordinates, but this witness said he didn't know about that
[01:20:01.610 --> 01:20:07.390]  because that is the other analyst. So this sounds like 2024, like just recently. We're
[01:20:07.390 --> 01:20:13.870]  now on a fifth, a fifth analysis of this phone. I don't know if it's the actual phone
[01:20:13.870 --> 01:20:23.950]  or if it's a re-analysis of some of the old data. Really not sure. A lot of jury questions
[01:20:23.950 --> 01:20:29.470]  about this phone. And as you will see, these are questions that to me implied at least
[01:20:29.470 --> 01:20:35.550]  somebody on the jury is familiar with cell phones, networks, stuff like that.
[01:20:37.910 --> 01:20:42.650]  So first question, what was the 213 time when the latitude and longitude was taken on the
[01:20:42.650 --> 01:20:47.370]  video? That was just a clarification question. It was 2.13 PM. That was confusing because
[01:20:47.370 --> 01:20:57.310]  both the time and the date are 2.13. What info is on the Knowledge C database? So we got
[01:20:57.310 --> 01:21:04.650]  more specific detail about that. It includes the health data, the steps, the frequent,
[01:21:04.650 --> 01:21:11.150]  like frequent locations that you've gone to, elevation, things like that, that
[01:21:11.150 --> 01:21:16.730]  the power logs the screen on and off that basically there is a second by second log
[01:21:16.730 --> 01:21:24.090]  of activity on the phone. So Knowledge C database sounds really important. I'm going
[01:21:24.090 --> 01:21:28.390]  to get back to that in just a second. But so they didn't know according to him that it
[01:21:28.390 --> 01:21:36.750]  existed in 2017. It was probably 2018 or 2019 that they found out about it. Possibly
[01:21:36.750 --> 01:21:41.170]  information in Knowledge C has been lost with the powering on and off as well.
[01:21:41.550 --> 01:21:45.830]  Photos and videos have not been lost according to him if they were not deleted.
[01:21:48.750 --> 01:21:55.930]  Question, what was the report? Was the report from October 2017 from the Idaho State Police
[01:21:55.930 --> 01:22:00.530]  or the Department of Homeland Security? So he clarified they did the extraction,
[01:22:00.870 --> 01:22:04.450]  Department of Homeland Security did the extraction and gave him the extraction.
[01:22:05.090 --> 01:22:10.750]  He put it in the physical analyzer with all three of the extractions that had been done
[01:22:10.750 --> 01:22:16.530]  at that point in time and got it to spit out one report based on all of that information.
[01:22:17.910 --> 01:22:24.490]  A very intriguing question here. Is the Knowledge C database produced by Department
[01:22:24.490 --> 01:22:31.570]  of Homeland Security? Is it produced by them? He says we believe so now. That's a little
[01:22:31.570 --> 01:22:36.830]  alarming if that's true. I'm wondering if I misunderstood that question or if they
[01:22:36.830 --> 01:22:46.930]  misunderstood that question because that would be alarming. I'm pretty sure that it was
[01:22:46.930 --> 01:22:52.670]  produced by Apple. I think they mean the Knowledge C database, like the extraction,
[01:22:53.110 --> 01:23:00.370]  was that extracted through what DHS did to the phone? Not like was the Knowledge C
[01:23:00.370 --> 01:23:07.210]  itself actually developed? That was confusing. I'm pretty sure Apple developed it because it's
[01:23:07.210 --> 01:23:10.970]  all about, like I said, being able to feed you ads and send you to the right location
[01:23:10.970 --> 01:23:16.670]  and stuff like that. He said it was in the Method 3 extraction but they didn't know about
[01:23:16.670 --> 01:23:24.010]  it and Celebrite didn't parse it. The October 2017 report had no information indicating that
[01:23:24.010 --> 01:23:28.850]  the Knowledge C database existed and so it might have been in the extraction but it wasn't
[01:23:28.850 --> 01:23:34.730]  made visible to them and so they didn't know that it was there. Here is my question. Nobody
[01:23:34.730 --> 01:23:40.570]  asked and I would really like to know. I know there have been some folks in the chat before
[01:23:40.570 --> 01:23:45.770]  who are familiar with Celebrite with cell phone extractions. Maybe if you're out there
[01:23:45.770 --> 01:23:55.010]  you will know this. My question was why would they not go then and take the extraction,
[01:23:55.920 --> 01:24:06.270]  the Method 3 extraction that they had done, and rerun it through perhaps the updated version
[01:24:06.270 --> 01:24:15.950]  of Celebrite? Would that give them the Knowledge C database and the ability to parse it?
[01:24:16.210 --> 01:24:20.150]  Because the implication is that Celebrite now can reveal that.
[01:24:22.650 --> 01:24:28.230]  So why wouldn't we just rerun one of these to be able to get that information?
[01:24:29.270 --> 01:24:34.650]  I don't know if it's possible but he just described. Okay, DHS did the extraction,
[01:24:34.750 --> 01:24:39.570]  gave him the extraction, he ran it through the analyzer. Why don't we do that with like
[01:24:39.570 --> 01:24:43.890]  an updated version of the analyzer that can give us Knowledge C? And I'm wondering because
[01:24:43.890 --> 01:24:51.210]  there's this implication of more analysis done in 2024. Is that it? Is that what they did?
[01:24:51.530 --> 01:24:57.330]  To try to get at all of this detailed second by second log of the phone's activity because
[01:24:58.330 --> 01:25:04.770]  that is going to be a critical piece of information if we can establish what made
[01:25:04.770 --> 01:25:10.570]  that phone go dark on February 13th and what made it come back on the following morning.
[01:25:10.570 --> 01:25:15.470]  Was it a power on and off? Was it a loss of signal? Sounds like this database might hold
[01:25:15.470 --> 01:25:23.710]  that information. Question, as of February 15th, 2017, were you aware of any deleted
[01:25:23.710 --> 01:25:30.390]  photos or video? No. So here was the question, do Snapchat photos save to a person's phone?
[01:25:30.390 --> 01:25:34.730]  That's what I was asking before. If it's not in the photo roll, is that in the camera roll,
[01:25:34.850 --> 01:25:40.050]  is that necessarily? Does that mean it didn't originate on the phone or just it wasn't
[01:25:40.050 --> 01:25:44.670]  stored there? He did not know. He said it might save in the Snapchat database,
[01:25:44.770 --> 01:25:49.150]  but he would have to look into that. Why did he not already look into that?
[01:25:50.070 --> 01:25:56.670]  Why did he not already look into that? This photo was posted. Don't you want to know
[01:25:56.670 --> 01:26:00.770]  the origin of this photo and the timing of this photo? You just know it was posted on
[01:26:00.770 --> 01:26:07.090]  Snapchat. And that's the metadata that you have for it is when it was posted. But the
[01:26:07.090 --> 01:26:12.610]  important piece of information is when it was taken as far as being able to establish
[01:26:12.610 --> 01:26:19.330]  the precise location and movement of the girls. Why didn't they do that before?
[01:26:20.770 --> 01:26:28.630]  Unbelievable. Would the iPad associated with the iCloud account pull the location data used
[01:26:28.630 --> 01:26:32.910]  in the map? This was, I thought, a very good question. They were kind of getting at could
[01:26:32.910 --> 01:26:38.930]  be the reason for distorting the location data that was associated with that video.
[01:26:39.470 --> 01:26:44.110]  He said it would not. The location would have been pulled from where the video was taken.
[01:26:44.390 --> 01:26:49.590]  But he did say if the iPhone iPad had been synced up with the iPhone, they would have
[01:26:49.590 --> 01:26:54.410]  been able to track the phone location in Find My iPhone. And it does sound like it
[01:26:54.410 --> 01:27:02.030]  was synced up. So it's just unfortunate that that was not not pursued at the time.
[01:27:04.470 --> 01:27:12.290]  Was there software in September or October 2017 that could take the Method 3 knowledge export
[01:27:12.290 --> 01:27:17.170]  to a readable report? This was the question that I was like, that's technical language.
[01:27:17.510 --> 01:27:21.830]  That sounds like somebody that knows what they're talking about. So he said no,
[01:27:22.030 --> 01:27:27.330]  Celebrite could not parse that database at that point in time. But like I said,
[01:27:27.330 --> 01:27:35.590]  sounds like they can now. Here's another great question. Do you ever document or photograph
[01:27:35.590 --> 01:27:44.510]  the locked screens to show the notifications before the access onto the phone? He said,
[01:27:44.510 --> 01:27:50.970]  I don't believe I did. I try to, but I don't think I did in this case. Another brick in
[01:27:50.970 --> 01:27:56.870]  that wall of woulda, coulda, shoulda. Would have been helpful maybe to see those notifications.
[01:27:56.870 --> 01:28:01.530]  Maybe there wouldn't be anything there, but just more information really would have been better.
[01:28:03.030 --> 01:28:08.590]  We had our lunch break after this. And guys, we've been shown a small amount of mercy. We
[01:28:08.590 --> 01:28:14.730]  are now allowed to bring food and drink into the courthouse. We simply may not consume it
[01:28:14.730 --> 01:28:19.830]  in the courtroom. We will be at risk of being ejected from the courtroom if we do that.
[01:28:20.330 --> 01:28:23.330]  But we can have it in the courthouse. So that means when we go out for our breaks,
[01:28:23.330 --> 01:28:27.570]  go out for lunch, we can have our snacks. We can have our lunch. We can have some water.
[01:28:29.150 --> 01:28:32.510]  At least until probably somebody makes a big old mess, leaves crumbs everywhere,
[01:28:32.650 --> 01:28:36.430]  or something ruins it for the rest of us. And then we don't get to do it anymore. So
[01:28:36.430 --> 01:28:40.490]  fingers crossed. Everybody throw your trash away. When we came back in after lunch,
[01:28:40.630 --> 01:28:44.450]  there had been, or after the morning break, there was some trash on the floor
[01:28:44.450 --> 01:28:48.770]  in the courtroom. There was a plastic cup and a couple of little candy wrappers.
[01:28:48.770 --> 01:28:53.790]  I know where they came from, by the way. I'm not going to snitch, but I know. And you know.
[01:28:55.910 --> 01:28:59.990]  So the girl that was sitting next to me was like, you know, I really feel like I should
[01:28:59.990 --> 01:29:03.330]  go and throw these away because I don't want, you know, what if the guards see them? And
[01:29:03.330 --> 01:29:07.710]  they're like, those people in the back row were, you know, trashing. I'm like, great
[01:29:07.710 --> 01:29:15.150]  idea. Please, please do. So she did. Hopefully somebody doesn't get us all busted. But yeah,
[01:29:15.150 --> 01:29:18.750]  we got to have a little bit of lunch today. So that certainly helps with
[01:29:18.770 --> 01:29:22.450]  getting through these exceptionally long days.
[01:29:25.070 --> 01:29:33.310]  Next witness was Jeremy Chapman. He is also a forensic examiner and an audio visual tech.
[01:29:33.470 --> 01:29:40.590]  He is also with the Idaho State Police. Mr. McClellan announced, I've done a really
[01:29:40.590 --> 01:29:45.970]  poor job of this so far. Yeah, you have. So would you please spell your last name?
[01:29:46.530 --> 01:29:54.170]  Did Mr. McClellan watch my video? Did he catch that little bit of criticism? Because he hasn't
[01:29:54.170 --> 01:29:58.090]  done it consistently, but he caught it this time and did it. Good job, Mr. McClellan.
[01:29:58.390 --> 01:30:05.130]  Keep it up. That's good lawyering right there. I've said before, and I will repeat, Mr.
[01:30:05.250 --> 01:30:09.890]  McClellan is quite a good lawyer, in my opinion. He is quite good at what he does.
[01:30:09.890 --> 01:30:17.310]  He may be the most skilled one in the courtroom there. He's very good at being able to
[01:30:17.910 --> 01:30:25.910]  control the witness. He's very able to rapid fire his questions, to move very quickly through
[01:30:25.910 --> 01:30:31.290]  his questions to get through his point. His questions are brief. His questions are targeted
[01:30:31.870 --> 01:30:37.690]  without being leading. He doesn't have that tendency that a lot of lawyers do because
[01:30:37.690 --> 01:30:44.650]  they're thinking about what is it that I'm trying to get to that they ask these really long,
[01:30:47.030 --> 01:30:52.070]  convoluted questions. They're throwing in every detail of where they're trying to get.
[01:30:52.710 --> 01:30:57.030]  He doesn't do any of that. He's exceptionally skilled as a questioner. I'm going to give
[01:30:57.030 --> 01:31:03.990]  him his kudos for that. So Mr. Chapman is the one who did the enhancement of the video.
[01:31:03.990 --> 01:31:14.850]  He is the one who brought us the photo that was produced, the publicly produced photo,
[01:31:14.990 --> 01:31:20.570]  the screenshot of a bridge guy. He described how he did that, the software that he uses,
[01:31:20.710 --> 01:31:32.490]  the processes and so forth. He used primarily Axon 5 for the video forensics. For audio,
[01:31:32.490 --> 01:31:40.750]  he uses an Adobe Suite. For most of the sound enhancement, what he's doing is using filters
[01:31:40.750 --> 01:31:46.490]  to do things like eliminate background noise and change levels and improve sound quality that
[01:31:46.490 --> 01:31:53.830]  way. He had been sent the video that Bunner had recovered from Libby's phone that showed
[01:31:53.830 --> 01:31:59.570]  the two girls and a guy walking on the railroad bridge. This is when we got to see it,
[01:31:59.570 --> 01:32:09.310]  and here you see the tiny little man in that video. So what he had to do is basically walk
[01:32:09.310 --> 01:32:14.930]  through the process. They extract the video, run it through this program, and it breaks it
[01:32:14.930 --> 01:32:19.790]  down frame by frame. So then you're able to go through and identify and select out individual
[01:32:19.790 --> 01:32:26.650]  frames that you think are going to be particularly suitable for enhancement. So he ultimately
[01:32:26.650 --> 01:32:39.640]  picked out three to enhance and described the process. He captured it, he rotated it,
[01:32:39.720 --> 01:32:44.640]  cropped it, resized it, and changed the levels, changed the sharpness. Sometimes he
[01:32:44.640 --> 01:32:50.820]  tried re-blurring just all these different Photoshop-y kinds of things that you do to
[01:32:50.820 --> 01:32:59.420]  to make the image more visible, dry out what you're trying to look for, like the features,
[01:32:59.820 --> 01:33:04.640]  and minimize the stuff that you don't want, like sun glare and things like that.
[01:33:09.490 --> 01:33:16.850]  Mr. McClelland, there was some stuff today that was, again, a little odd to me,
[01:33:16.870 --> 01:33:20.970]  because very different from how we do things in Washington. Mr. McClelland was trying to get
[01:33:20.970 --> 01:33:27.670]  law enforcement police reports into evidence. Very much not a thing in Washington for all
[01:33:27.670 --> 01:33:33.550]  kinds of different reasons. In this particular case, Ms. Auger, he was trying to get in
[01:33:33.550 --> 01:33:41.110]  the report that this gentleman had produced. The report contained the original photograph and
[01:33:41.110 --> 01:33:46.930]  then the frame that he pulled from the video and then the finished product after he
[01:33:46.930 --> 01:33:52.630]  done all of these modifications. And so that the defense was fine with coming in,
[01:33:52.650 --> 01:33:57.510]  but there's other parts of the report that I guess she didn't want in.
[01:33:59.370 --> 01:34:07.250]  I just found it interesting because she had Ms. Auger objected on several grounds,
[01:34:07.250 --> 01:34:10.170]  including foundation. And
[01:34:12.950 --> 01:34:20.830]  the judge sort of... she didn't take that well. She said, what foundation? He said it's his
[01:34:20.830 --> 01:34:31.060]  report. Just because it's his report doesn't mean that there is a foundation for what he
[01:34:31.060 --> 01:34:35.940]  has said in his report. See, this is the bottom line problem, which is an objection that
[01:34:35.940 --> 01:34:41.400]  get raised. But the bottom line problem with introducing a police report is it's hearsay.
[01:34:41.780 --> 01:34:45.540]  It's an out of court statement that is being offered for the truth of the matter asserted.
[01:34:48.200 --> 01:34:52.360]  Live testimony is what you do when you have a witness on the stand. That's what's preferred.
[01:34:52.440 --> 01:34:56.640]  You don't bring in their prior statement. You have them testify live. You can use
[01:34:56.640 --> 01:35:01.780]  their past stuff to refresh them. You can bring it up if it's a prior inconsistent
[01:35:01.780 --> 01:35:06.880]  statement. You can impeach them with it. But in and of itself, that report does not come in
[01:35:06.880 --> 01:35:11.100]  because it is their testimony that is the evidence. But she didn't object on hearsay
[01:35:11.100 --> 01:35:16.440]  grounds, so they didn't address that. But this foundation, this befuddlement from the judge,
[01:35:16.500 --> 01:35:20.540]  the befuddlement from the judge was befuddling for me because to me it's very obvious
[01:35:20.540 --> 01:35:26.700]  that if there are statements, claims made in a report, there needs to be a foundation for
[01:35:26.700 --> 01:35:33.280]  claims if that report is going to come into evidence for the truth of what those claims say.
[01:35:34.900 --> 01:35:42.800]  But that was her concern. They ultimately settled on, they would admit the five pages of the
[01:35:42.800 --> 01:35:47.060]  report that had the actual photos on it, and there would be some language associated with that
[01:35:47.060 --> 01:35:54.540]  that I think the defense ultimately just didn't really care about. But other parts of the
[01:35:54.540 --> 01:36:03.540]  shown. And then we got the audio enhancement. He explained that process where he put some
[01:36:03.540 --> 01:36:09.960]  filters on it. And we then played that audio section where it sounded like the man said
[01:36:09.960 --> 01:36:17.380]  guys downhill. And this, by the way, is at the very end of the video. It's at around the
[01:36:17.380 --> 01:36:31.580]  point where the female voice is saying there's no path here. So they played it. Everybody in
[01:36:31.580 --> 01:36:38.920]  the audience heard it. And then Mr. McClellan asked the witness what he believed the man was
[01:36:38.920 --> 01:36:45.420]  saying. This was an awkward moment for Ms. Auger because she objected. She said it's
[01:36:47.540 --> 01:36:55.240]  it's suggestive that it needs to be if the jury hears him say his opinion before they hear it
[01:36:55.240 --> 01:36:59.460]  for themselves, it's going to taint their perspective of it. Well, but the jury had already
[01:36:59.460 --> 01:37:04.220]  heard it. And the judge said they just played it. The jury has just heard it. Ms. Auger was
[01:37:04.220 --> 01:37:11.540]  like, oh, oops. Yeah, my bad. They did. So anyway, he answered. He said guys downhill.
[01:37:17.500 --> 01:37:22.220]  The only real substantive thing that Ms. Auger brought up in the cross examination
[01:37:22.220 --> 01:37:30.300]  is this concept of interpolation. And these programs that he was using for this audio
[01:37:30.300 --> 01:37:36.440]  enhancement, they use interpolation. And so what that is, is it's a process where they
[01:37:36.440 --> 01:37:44.700]  have known information and they use that to extrapolate, like predict what is not there,
[01:37:44.700 --> 01:37:56.000]  what would be there. And so that's part of how the enhancement helps improve the quality
[01:37:56.000 --> 01:38:03.140]  is by essentially guessing what should be there in a better quality information.
[01:38:04.780 --> 01:38:12.320]  So he said you use that specifically in the resizing the software, like the resizing of the
[01:38:13.100 --> 01:38:20.420]  software gives him a few different choices for interpolation. So basically she elicited that
[01:38:20.420 --> 01:38:28.240]  when he is going through and producing that bridge guy, because bridge guy is tiny, he's
[01:38:28.240 --> 01:38:36.080]  tiny in the video, and they wanted that full screen capture of him, that isolation of him
[01:38:36.720 --> 01:38:42.680]  focused in on him. That's part of why it's such poor quality. It's pixelated almost.
[01:38:44.320 --> 01:38:51.300]  But it used an interpolation process to be able to produce that when they resized it
[01:38:51.300 --> 01:38:57.960]  into the full size. So it guessed, it guessed how to fill in some of the detail
[01:38:57.960 --> 01:39:05.440]  of what bridge guy looked like. They didn't hammer it home solid at this point. It
[01:39:05.440 --> 01:39:11.460]  came out a little bit technical, but that is really important. And so it's something that I
[01:39:11.460 --> 01:39:15.860]  hope they make a note to focus on in closing, make sure that they mention that.
[01:39:18.160 --> 01:39:23.460]  The next witness, the next three witnesses actually were the eyewitnesses. So the first
[01:39:23.460 --> 01:39:29.980]  was Rayleigh Voorhees. She was a student at Delphi High School in 2017 in her sophomore
[01:39:29.980 --> 01:39:37.060]  year. She knew Abby and Libby. She was out at the trail that day with two of her sisters
[01:39:37.060 --> 01:39:44.080]  and her friend. And she is like a hobby hobby photographer, an amateur photographer,
[01:39:44.380 --> 01:39:49.240]  has a nice Nikon camera. And so she was going out to the trail to take pictures,
[01:39:49.520 --> 01:39:54.680]  but they also took pictures on their phones for social media. She was familiar with the
[01:39:54.680 --> 01:40:00.120]  area, would often go out there alone, but a lot of times also with her friends and her sisters
[01:40:00.120 --> 01:40:09.320]  and so forth. So they described her path, basically the path she would walk from her home,
[01:40:09.800 --> 01:40:16.440]  how she would get to the trail. They would basically come in from the side, cross the
[01:40:16.440 --> 01:40:21.120]  Freedom Bridge and follow the entire High Bridge Trail all the way down to the bridge.
[01:40:22.220 --> 01:40:27.920]  She did not go across the bridge all the way. She just went to the first platform. I will note
[01:40:27.920 --> 01:40:34.000]  this witness was so quiet. She had to be told several times, speak up, nobody can hear you,
[01:40:34.040 --> 01:40:38.340]  the jury can't hear you. I mean, if the jury can't hear her and the jury is right next to
[01:40:38.340 --> 01:40:43.240]  her, there's no way we in the gallery are going to be able to hear what she said. So
[01:40:43.240 --> 01:40:49.560]  there were quite a few details that we were not just were not clear at all, like some names
[01:40:49.560 --> 01:40:59.600]  like her sisters names and stuff, the ages. Yeah, very various points where we just couldn't
[01:40:59.600 --> 01:41:06.260]  hear. But ultimately what we got from it, they went all the way down to the High Bridge.
[01:41:06.500 --> 01:41:09.960]  Like I said, she didn't go all the way across. She went to the first platform,
[01:41:10.060 --> 01:41:16.580]  they were taking pictures, nobody else went out onto the bridge. Her friend Bree went out
[01:41:16.580 --> 01:41:23.100]  a couple of steps onto a couple of the ties. So they had left home at around 1130. They got
[01:41:23.100 --> 01:41:29.540]  to the bridge around noon. According to her, after they went off the bridge, they went down
[01:41:29.540 --> 01:41:36.780]  beneath the bridge by going down the right-hand side. She said there's an area where there is
[01:41:36.780 --> 01:41:42.180]  a little bit, there's not as much brush or trees. There's no path down, but there's just
[01:41:42.180 --> 01:41:47.640]  a clear area that you can see other people have gone down there. And it is still very steep,
[01:41:47.880 --> 01:41:53.080]  but you are able to get down all the way to the water. So they went down there and took
[01:41:53.080 --> 01:41:58.880]  some photos down by the water, then came back up and were walking back towards the Freedom
[01:41:58.880 --> 01:42:07.420]  Bridge. She said it was 47 degrees that day. And the reason why she knew is because she
[01:42:07.420 --> 01:42:11.600]  had gone out in a light jacket and her dad had been worried about it being too cold,
[01:42:11.600 --> 01:42:16.280]  about her being too cold out there. And so her stepmom had checked the temperature,
[01:42:16.280 --> 01:42:22.580]  and that's how she had known and filed away it was 47 degrees. So she says they saw,
[01:42:22.620 --> 01:42:29.100]  they didn't see anybody on the high bridge. They were walking back towards home and they
[01:42:29.100 --> 01:42:35.900]  were almost all the way back to the Freedom Bridge when a man walked by them and she said,
[01:42:35.900 --> 01:42:46.360]  Hi. And he didn't say hi back and he glared a little bit and didn't seem like a nice person.
[01:42:46.640 --> 01:42:54.030]  So she got kind of a creepy type of impression from him. She didn't recognize him.
[01:42:55.740 --> 01:43:00.200]  Later on learned that Abby and Libby had gone to the trail and that they'd gone missing. And
[01:43:00.200 --> 01:43:05.820]  so she instantly thought, oh, maybe it was that unfriendly man. And the whole thing had
[01:43:05.820 --> 01:43:11.980]  kind of been unsettling. She had made a comment to her friends, oh, he seems happy, obviously
[01:43:11.980 --> 01:43:17.640]  being sarcastic, but they didn't really seem to notice him according to her. So she was
[01:43:17.640 --> 01:43:22.700]  asked to give a statement about the man the next day, or not the next day, but the day
[01:43:22.700 --> 01:43:33.960]  after the girls were found. So she described him as being overdressed for the weather,
[01:43:34.580 --> 01:43:40.880]  like in layers in darker clothes, his face was covered up to his nose. He had like a mask on
[01:43:42.280 --> 01:43:51.000]  and he had white skin. He was Caucasian. He had a hat and a hood and a hat on.
[01:43:53.060 --> 01:43:57.240]  You couldn't, his hands were in his pocket.
[01:44:02.840 --> 01:44:10.100]  And you could just tell basically like you could see about this much and that he had
[01:44:10.100 --> 01:44:17.380]  he had white skin. So then a couple days after the bodies were discovered was when the
[01:44:17.380 --> 01:44:21.780]  image of bridge guy was publicly released, that enhanced image that we just heard about
[01:44:21.780 --> 01:44:27.780]  how that was created. So that was publicly released and she saw it on Facebook and
[01:44:27.780 --> 01:44:34.520]  instantly she knew that was the man that I had waved out on the trail who didn't respond to me.
[01:44:36.240 --> 01:44:41.980]  There are a few red flags with this as I think will potentially become evident.
[01:44:43.160 --> 01:44:49.220]  So Ms. Auger cross-examined. First off, kind of from a timeline perspective, she knew
[01:44:49.220 --> 01:44:56.980]  that she had needed to be home at 2 30 because she or her sister had cheer practice that day.
[01:44:56.980 --> 01:45:03.280]  It was a day off from school but at the same time the squad was still like a they'd had a
[01:45:03.280 --> 01:45:06.560]  makeup day so you didn't they didn't have to go to class but the cheer squad was still
[01:45:06.560 --> 01:45:11.900]  doing their practice. So whoever was on the cheer team needed to do that and it was some
[01:45:11.900 --> 01:45:15.580]  some distance to get from from the trails back to the home.
[01:45:17.440 --> 01:45:24.200]  So they had gotten to Bree's house around 2 20 and based on that she estimated that they
[01:45:24.200 --> 01:45:34.420]  had seen the man out by the Freedom Bridge at around 2 15. And so she pointed out 2 15 is just
[01:45:34.420 --> 01:45:43.880]  two minutes after 2 13. Right? 2 13 is the timestamp of Libby's video. The man is supposed
[01:45:43.880 --> 01:45:49.000]  to be all the way down there at the bridge at that point in time. But now this witness is
[01:45:49.000 --> 01:45:55.960]  she saw Bridge Guy two minutes later down at Freedom Bridge walking towards the high bridge.
[01:45:56.440 --> 01:46:05.120]  So that would not fit in terms of a timeline. Ms. Auger walked her through a few different
[01:46:05.120 --> 01:46:11.200]  statements that she had made giving descriptions of this man and so the problem is they are not
[01:46:12.160 --> 01:46:21.620]  really all that consistent with Bridge Guy. So she had described him as being
[01:46:22.320 --> 01:46:28.860]  he had black jeans. Basically everything was in black. Her explanation was that her memory of
[01:46:28.860 --> 01:46:35.300]  him being unhappy being kind of mean or whatever had distorted maybe her memory so that she
[01:46:36.080 --> 01:46:43.400]  projected that onto his clothing as being dark. She was receptive to the idea that her memory
[01:46:43.400 --> 01:46:48.840]  was altered. At the same time she was also very certain that the man she saw was Bridge Guy.
[01:46:51.940 --> 01:46:56.920]  So she had described him previously as wearing a black jeans, black coat, black boots,
[01:46:56.940 --> 01:47:03.460]  the mask, had the hat on, had his hands in his pocket. He was in his early 20s or 30s.
[01:47:03.980 --> 01:47:09.620]  He had a bigger build but she said it could have just been heavier clothing but she did think he
[01:47:09.620 --> 01:47:19.820]  had a heavier build. Then on February 17th she said that the man was muscular, that he had dirty
[01:47:19.820 --> 01:47:25.220]  blonde hair, that there was just enough of it coming out of the hoodie that she was able to
[01:47:25.220 --> 01:47:34.900]  see it and that it was curly. She told him he had brown eyes, a wrinkly kind of face,
[01:47:34.900 --> 01:47:40.500]  a square jaw which she now says she doesn't know how she would know that because he had the mask
[01:47:40.500 --> 01:47:54.200]  covering his face. Then in 2021 she also made a statement and at that point she had indicated
[01:47:54.200 --> 01:48:01.100]  that she herself is 5'7 and that the man they passed was taller than her. She estimated him
[01:48:01.100 --> 01:48:14.940]  as being about 5'10. This doesn't sound, definitely doesn't sound like Richard Allen
[01:48:14.940 --> 01:48:19.960]  but it doesn't even sound like bridge guy, like the bridge guy that we can see with our eyes,
[01:48:19.960 --> 01:48:27.800]  bridge guy. So to me these were like real telltale. I'm glad that she acknowledged
[01:48:27.800 --> 01:48:35.340]  possibility that her memory was altered because to me this is telltale. This is kind of
[01:48:35.340 --> 01:48:41.640]  common denominator with with false identifications. One of the things that's really common is the
[01:48:41.640 --> 01:48:49.740]  flash, the snap recognition, and the certainty. These are both really really common with false
[01:48:49.740 --> 01:48:54.960]  identifications. You see somebody and you're instantly that face. You just make that connection.
[01:48:57.320 --> 01:49:04.760]  The book Lucky by... what's her name? I'm spacing her name right now who also wrote
[01:49:04.760 --> 01:49:11.840]  Lovely Bones. She's come under a little bit of fire lately because she falsely accused a man
[01:49:11.840 --> 01:49:20.040]  of committing a really horrible crime against her. It's a situation that to me does not sound
[01:49:20.040 --> 01:49:24.980]  like she was deliberately trying to falsely accuse him but it was one of these situations
[01:49:24.980 --> 01:49:34.580]  where she had this snap false recognition and then was basically coached and suggested
[01:49:34.580 --> 01:49:39.080]  by prosecutors and police, the people that she was trusting to bring her justice,
[01:49:39.960 --> 01:49:45.800]  that even though she originally could not pick the same guy out of a lineup,
[01:49:46.560 --> 01:49:52.100]  that her original identification that she was so certain of that that was correct.
[01:49:56.220 --> 01:50:02.220]  And so she identified him at trial as the perpetrator. He was convicted. He went away
[01:50:02.220 --> 01:50:10.640]  for 30 some years. He was ultimately exonerated. So it's really a terrible story in many ways.
[01:50:10.720 --> 01:50:17.340]  It's like a tragedy on all sides for me because obviously this poor man who was innocent
[01:50:17.340 --> 01:50:23.320]  and lost a significant part of his life. His family was torn apart. He was traumatized.
[01:50:23.320 --> 01:50:30.760]  You never get that back. Really terrible. At the same time, she herself, no question
[01:50:30.760 --> 01:50:35.620]  whatsoever, she had been the victim of an absolutely horrifying, horrifying crime.
[01:50:36.880 --> 01:50:43.180]  And she had PTSD. And these are just all of these different kinds of circumstances that
[01:50:46.720 --> 01:50:52.820]  are conducive to this type of experience where basically the suggestion, the implication
[01:50:52.820 --> 01:51:00.620]  is she saw this man. He reminded her enough of her perpetrator that she basically had this
[01:51:01.500 --> 01:51:08.020]  false association. And that manifested as recognition and identification and that
[01:51:08.020 --> 01:51:13.300]  certainty. But it was temporary because just days later when she's trying to identify him
[01:51:13.300 --> 01:51:20.280]  in a lineup, she can't. So anyway, that was a bit of a... it's Alice Siebold is her name.
[01:51:20.900 --> 01:51:25.760]  I was trying to remember that. And it's very sad in part because she's a wonderful author.
[01:51:26.420 --> 01:51:30.440]  The Lovely Bones. It's an amazing book. I just love it. It's like one of the best
[01:51:31.740 --> 01:51:37.200]  depictions of grief and trauma and loss and recovering from a seriously violent crime.
[01:51:37.200 --> 01:51:44.480]  It's very, very moving. She's one of these artists who I see as just having this amazing
[01:51:44.480 --> 01:51:50.000]  capacity to take this absolutely terrible, terrible trauma and turn it into something
[01:51:50.000 --> 01:51:56.880]  amazing. It's like the best art, this transformative quality. And so that's now been
[01:51:56.880 --> 01:52:00.780]  I think Lucky, you can't. Lucky is the true story of the crime that occurred to her,
[01:52:00.780 --> 01:52:05.120]  the true story from her perspective. And I don't think it's even... they pulled it
[01:52:05.120 --> 01:52:10.020]  like you can't buy it anymore. It's no longer in release because of this whole
[01:52:10.020 --> 01:52:13.500]  the false identification on the fact that the guy was in fact innocent.
[01:52:14.240 --> 01:52:19.360]  It's very, very sad all around. That was a bit of a sideline to just talk a little bit
[01:52:19.360 --> 01:52:25.900]  about false identification and how this... when I was hearing her describe it, it really shared
[01:52:25.900 --> 01:52:32.060]  some of these hallmarks because you have this incongruence, this incongruity between
[01:52:32.060 --> 01:52:37.980]  what she's describing in these physical characteristics and the person we can see with
[01:52:37.980 --> 01:52:48.320]  our own eyes in the bridge guy photo. And then just the sudden recognition and the certainty,
[01:52:48.400 --> 01:52:52.700]  those are very, very common. You hear that a lot of the time in these cases,
[01:52:53.160 --> 01:52:58.340]  a lot of exonerations involve false identifications, a lot like Innocence Project
[01:52:58.340 --> 01:53:02.700]  cases, they involve false identifications. And so it's just a very, very common theme.
[01:53:05.360 --> 01:53:12.720]  So Ms. Diener redirected to kind of reestablish the timeline and also the
[01:53:12.720 --> 01:53:19.560]  directions that everybody was moving in. So she wanted to clarify. They had run into a
[01:53:19.560 --> 01:53:25.040]  who was walking his dog when they were on the way out to the high bridge. He was walking back
[01:53:25.040 --> 01:53:28.840]  towards the Freedom Bridge. So that was an additional person that they had seen out in
[01:53:28.840 --> 01:53:36.200]  the area. On the way back, they had stopped to take pictures at a bench. And the bench was
[01:53:36.200 --> 01:53:43.120]  on the map kind of just before it was past where the Mears Trail entrance comes in,
[01:53:43.120 --> 01:53:51.560]  it was before they get to the Freedom Bridge. They were able to identify the location because
[01:53:51.560 --> 01:53:55.860]  in the background of the photo, there's a building with a green roof and it is a farmhouse
[01:53:55.860 --> 01:53:59.480]  that's off in the distance. So they're able to locate the farmhouse on the map and from
[01:53:59.480 --> 01:54:06.180]  there figure out the general area of where this bench was. So they stopped to take some
[01:54:06.180 --> 01:54:12.040]  pictures at that bench. And it was after that when they were going back towards the parking
[01:54:12.040 --> 01:54:20.260]  that they saw who they thought was bridge guy. She said that she had never given a police
[01:54:20.260 --> 01:54:24.420]  statement before. She was obviously young, you know, teenager, 17 years old, had never been
[01:54:24.420 --> 01:54:30.140]  asked to estimate height, age, things like that. So kind of, you know, I think excusing
[01:54:31.280 --> 01:54:39.200]  her description, her maybe lack of accuracy, the discrepancies between what she said she saw
[01:54:39.200 --> 01:54:46.000]  and then what she identified as the person that she said she saw, reiterated that she was
[01:54:46.000 --> 01:54:53.060]  certain that it was him. But at the same time, when she looks at bridge guy, there's nothing
[01:54:53.060 --> 01:54:58.900]  about, like she can't point to anything on that picture of bridge guy to say, you know,
[01:54:58.900 --> 01:55:06.320]  this is why I think that's who I saw. So that incongruity, it's just, it's very,
[01:55:06.320 --> 01:55:14.200]  very peculiar. She did acknowledge that it was possible that seeing that picture of a bridge guy
[01:55:14.200 --> 01:55:21.500]  influenced her memory, like I said. The next witness was Breanne Wilbur, who was also
[01:55:21.500 --> 01:55:26.320]  out there on the trail with them. She was also, she was 16 and also in 10th grade.
[01:55:26.880 --> 01:55:31.580]  Kelsey was one of her best friends, so she knew Libby and Libby was friends with her on
[01:55:31.580 --> 01:55:36.240]  Snapchat. So she reiterated that they had gone out to the high bridge trail,
[01:55:36.800 --> 01:55:42.680]  that they went out, she went out with her friends Raylee and Anna. She would not go across
[01:55:42.680 --> 01:55:47.640]  the bridge, like this girl thinks like me, she's going to go out maybe one or two steps,
[01:55:47.640 --> 01:55:55.840]  but not all the way, she's not one of those people. She said they saw a few people while
[01:55:55.840 --> 01:56:01.100]  they were out walking and they were just taking pictures out at the high bridge and chatting
[01:56:01.100 --> 01:56:08.200]  and that she posted some of their pictures on Snapchat. When they were leaving, they took
[01:56:08.200 --> 01:56:14.340]  the same path back and they also saw people there. So she had provided police with the
[01:56:14.340 --> 01:56:24.040]  photos taken from her Snapchat that had the timestamps on them. On exhibit 211 was copies
[01:56:24.040 --> 01:56:28.820]  of her Snapchat photos. So the first one that she provided was a photo of high bridge
[01:56:28.820 --> 01:56:34.860]  that was taken at 1243 p.m. And then the photo that they had described taking at the
[01:56:34.860 --> 01:56:43.430]  benches on the way back, that was taken at 126. So this is the state's way of trying to
[01:56:44.020 --> 01:56:50.880]  move back the timeline, to undo the damage that Ms. Voorhees had done to the timeline
[01:56:50.880 --> 01:56:59.020]  by saying it was 2215 when they saw bridge guy down at freedom bridge when Libby's video was
[01:56:59.020 --> 01:57:03.820]  at 213 over on high bridge and the man is supposed to be there. And that is just it's
[01:57:03.820 --> 01:57:14.010]  not feasible. It's way more than a two minute distance away. But they didn't really establish
[01:57:15.070 --> 01:57:22.810]  how did the timing of the photo relate to when they then continued on the walk home.
[01:57:23.420 --> 01:57:30.330]  Did they hang out at this bench for a while? Did they walk slowly, you know, so that they
[01:57:30.330 --> 01:57:36.550]  got to the home at 220? These points didn't really get reconciled. There still seems to
[01:57:36.550 --> 01:57:45.410]  be room to kind of work with either timeline. She said the man caught that they passed caught
[01:57:45.410 --> 01:57:49.850]  her attention because it was a warmer day but he was dressed in many layers with what
[01:57:49.850 --> 01:57:56.350]  she described as a deer jacket. And she said he was walking with a purpose. Really had been
[01:57:56.350 --> 01:58:00.790]  saying hi to everybody that they passed on the trail because it's a small community like that
[01:58:00.790 --> 01:58:04.430]  and people are friendly and they say hi to each other. It's not at all like California
[01:58:04.430 --> 01:58:08.190]  where you walk past people and they don't even look at you like if you said hi to
[01:58:08.190 --> 01:58:11.970]  somebody on the sidewalk in California they might think you were gonna rob them or something.
[01:58:12.530 --> 01:58:16.350]  Not friendly at all. This is not that type of community. People say hi to each other.
[01:58:16.350 --> 01:58:23.530]  This guy however did not say hi back and they got creepy weird vibes from him.
[01:58:24.830 --> 01:58:28.510]  So she had learned that Libby was going out to the high bridge because Libby had
[01:58:28.510 --> 01:58:34.530]  messaged her on snapchat after seeing her photo of the high bridge and so asked if they
[01:58:34.530 --> 01:58:39.210]  were still out there. They were still on the trail when she got that message and she
[01:58:39.210 --> 01:58:44.530]  responded that they had just left the high bridge about 10 minutes ago. Later on they learned
[01:58:44.530 --> 01:58:51.350]  they were missing. She was at home and was with Kelsey and Kelsey's grandma had called
[01:58:51.350 --> 01:58:57.750]  to let Kelsey know and that is how she found out. She spoke to the police later that evening
[01:58:57.750 --> 01:59:02.210]  because she had been on the high bridge that day and gave a statement about the people
[01:59:02.210 --> 01:59:07.270]  that she had seen on the trail. So her description was that she had seen a man
[01:59:07.270 --> 01:59:13.050]  walking with a purpose. He had something covering his mouth and nose but it's possible his head
[01:59:13.050 --> 01:59:18.510]  was down and that that you know maybe she's suggesting he had a high collar or something
[01:59:18.510 --> 01:59:24.290]  like that but not necessarily a mask just something covering his head or nose. She
[01:59:24.290 --> 01:59:29.890]  could not really see his hair said the jacket was blue or black and maybe had a hat or a
[01:59:29.890 --> 01:59:36.970]  hood on. Later learned that Abby and Libby were deceased then she saw the image of bridge
[01:59:36.970 --> 01:59:41.170]  guy and the first thing that came into her mind is it was the guy we saw on the trail
[01:59:41.170 --> 01:59:49.510]  and she identified him in court as the same as exhibit 210. The last photo in the area is
[01:59:49.510 --> 01:59:54.530]  the one that was near the farmhouse where they were still in the woods and when they passed
[01:59:54.530 --> 02:00:01.110]  bridge guy he was walking towards high bridge and she confirmed that the time stamp on her
[02:00:01.110 --> 02:00:08.310]  snapchat photo was accurate. Mr. Baldwin did the cross-examination of this witness
[02:00:09.970 --> 02:00:16.310]  and he started by going to the the big photo of bridge guy that's being displayed in court
[02:00:16.310 --> 02:00:21.250]  and pointing to it saying this is the guy who creeped you out right this guy here on
[02:00:21.250 --> 02:00:29.490]  exhibit 210. Yes it was. She had previously described the guy as she stood as tall as
[02:00:29.490 --> 02:00:39.390]  upper forearm so she is describing a much taller man said that he was muscular he was
[02:00:39.390 --> 02:00:45.330]  a younger guy believed that she might have told police that he was in his early 30s but
[02:00:45.330 --> 02:00:49.650]  she was saying but that was three years later she's kind of making making some
[02:00:49.650 --> 02:00:55.670]  excuses for for what she had told police before she said he had something on his head
[02:00:55.670 --> 02:01:10.950]  So she wasn't able to see the hair. And then the last time that the last question that he asked her was if she had seen a guy around 20 with brown, poofy hair, and she had not.
[02:01:11.050 --> 02:01:23.430]  This is going to another description. Ms. Diener on redirect just established that nobody else on the trail looked like the bridge guy photo, nobody else that she saw.
[02:01:24.110 --> 02:01:44.650]  So the final witness of the day... no, it was not the final witness of the day. The second to last witness of the day was Betsy Blair. We heard about Betsy Blair in the defense opening because the defense is very bullish on Betsy Blair in what she saw, specifically the description of a vehicle that she saw parked in the CPS lot.
[02:01:46.450 --> 02:02:14.630]  So Betsy Blair testified that she regularly went to the Monon High Bridge Trail in 2016. She had a regular route that she would walk and basically she would go in the Mears Trail, she would walk down to the High Bridge, turn around, walk back to the end of the... she would turn and walk down to the end of the Mears Trail, walk back to the bridge trail, walk across Freedom Bridge all the way down to the end of the Mears Trail.
[02:02:15.710 --> 02:02:42.290]  And then walk back and that was her loop and that it was her routine to walk this loop three times. So that was her regular exercise. On February 13th, it was a little bit chilly. She had a Fitbit. So that was in part how she was able to track time and know where she was and what she was doing when she saw different things.
[02:02:42.290 --> 02:02:59.530]  So her Fitbit kept track of this data for her and she provided the Fitbit data to police. She parked at the parking lot across from the Mears Barn. She went down to the trail intersection, went down to the bridge. She turns around at the barricade. She's just describing the trail.
[02:02:59.530 --> 02:03:17.630]  So on February 13th, she did her first two loops and she didn't see anybody. She took a break at which point she drove downtown. She went to the Delphi Library and used the restroom and then came back to do her third loop.
[02:03:18.540 --> 02:03:42.750]  So on loop three, when she went down to the high bridge, she saw somebody. She saw a man out on the bridge. He was out on a platform on the right-hand side. She estimated he was about 50 feet away and she described him as if he was looking for somebody because he was looking away.
[02:03:42.750 --> 02:03:55.010]  And then when you saw her approach, she turned turned and looked at her. They had, you know, momentary kind of contact and she just got the impression that he was like waiting for somebody or looking for somebody.
[02:03:56.990 --> 02:04:08.930]  On the way. So she saw the man thought nothing of it turned around was walking back and on her way back on her loop. She saw two girls who she later learned were Abby and Libby.
[02:04:08.930 --> 02:04:20.010]  And she passed them between the high bridge and the mirrors parking lot. They were just walking and chatting quietly and didn't seem to really notice her or pay attention to her.
[02:04:20.750 --> 02:04:31.310]  She continued on to freedom bridge didn't see anybody there got back to her car and she left the area. So her husband called her because he was at work.
[02:04:31.310 --> 02:04:38.510]  Saw on the news that Abby and Libby were missing. He knew that she walked out there a lot and so called her and let her know.
[02:04:38.770 --> 02:04:56.530]  So she contacted the law enforcement and reported to them that she had seen Abby and Libby and a man on the bridge and she knew it was Abby and Libby because she also saw the news when they were missing and they had shown their photographs. So she recognized them from the trail.
[02:04:57.490 --> 02:05:16.250]  The next day she learned that the girls were deceased. She saw the image of bridge guy. She says I recognized him as the one I saw on the bridge. So again, she was contacted by law enforcement and shared her Fitbit data with them and gave them a description of what she had seen.
[02:05:19.580 --> 02:05:41.460]  They had the copy of her Fitbit data and it had lines showing and she explained how, you know, certain lines represented her first two laps. And then there were shorter lines for when she was basically when she was on her break. And then the last time was on on her third loop.
[02:05:43.360 --> 02:06:00.960]  So bridge guy on that she would have seen towards the beginning of the green line of her third loop and on her Fitbit data that would have given them a time estimate. I of course didn't get to see the exhibit so I don't know what it shows as far as the time estimate. The jury will however be able to see that.
[02:06:00.960 --> 02:06:28.780]  She said that she was not able to see his face super clearly. He was out on one of the one of the platforms and white male. She said they had asked her to do a sketch. So when Diener, Ms. Diener asked her, did you did police? Did you get police a description? She said I was asked to do a sketch.
[02:06:31.020 --> 02:06:45.220]  Well, that's the door open, isn't it? The jury has now heard the jury has now heard about the sketch. Jury's heard about the sketch. And it was not the defense that opened the door. The defense did not elicit this. It came out on direct examination.
[02:06:50.180 --> 02:07:13.900]  Mr. Baldwin did the cross examination established that she had an unobstructed view of the man on the platform. Her description was that he was in his 20s or 30s and had brown poofy hair. And that that's the description she gave to the person making the sketch. The sketch is coming out again.
[02:07:15.080 --> 02:07:41.980]  She described the young man as young and more boyish, and she described him as beautiful in his appearance. Beautiful in his appearance. That's not how I would describe bridge guy from that photo. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. But that is not how I would describe the man in that photograph.
[02:07:41.980 --> 02:08:00.170]  Beautiful in his appearance. She described him as average height, not short, no facial hair. She did not see a hat. When she he started to ask when she left the area had she seen a car parked at the CPS lot.
[02:08:01.350 --> 02:08:12.790]  Ms. Baldwin objects to this as being beyond the scope of direct examination. This objection is sustained. Mr. Baldwin indicates they'll bring her back.
[02:08:14.910 --> 02:08:19.290]  This was real telling to me. It just was real telling to me.
[02:08:20.530 --> 02:08:37.830]  Judges have an enormous amount of discretion over the manner and the timing and the order of the presentation of the evidence. The general rule is you don't get to ask questions on cross examination that are beyond the scope of what is asked on direct.
[02:08:40.670 --> 02:08:55.790]  However, as long as the defense has also identified and subpoenaed this witness, they will always be able to call her to have their own direct examination and to be able to elicit whatever they want.
[02:08:56.650 --> 02:09:20.350]  So when a judge is concerned with efficiency and moving things along and being considerate of everybody's time, including the witnesses and the juries, the most expedient thing to do is to simply waive this formality when they have that witness on call and simply allow them to do their direct in the course of their cross.
[02:09:20.350 --> 02:09:29.930]  And then allow the state to go in and do its cross examination in the course of its redirect. That is the sensible thing to do.
[02:09:29.930 --> 02:09:50.990]  It is a very hyper-technical thing to do, to say no, we're going to force this, we're going to break up this testimony, and we are going to make this witness leave and come back another day to answer these questions about this separate issue.
[02:09:54.570 --> 02:10:14.110]  This judge is ostensibly so concerned about efficiency and timeline that we are having long days in court. It's six o'clock yesterday. We are having court on Saturdays. We are rushing this through. It's so important to get this thing done.
[02:10:14.110 --> 02:10:34.910]  But we're going to enforce extremely hyper-technical stuff like this. And for what reason? Seems like it's because the state wants it that way. That's the only reason. There's no good reason. There's no good reason. It's mind-boggling. Why don't you just let them do it now?
[02:10:35.910 --> 02:10:54.310]  They're going to get it out anyway. But it's almost like, you know, the state has an interest in deferring it until later because they are hoping that the jury will already have reached their conclusion by the time you get to the defense case. Right? That they won't wait like Mr. Baldwin asked them to do in his opening statement.
[02:11:00.580 --> 02:11:25.960]  Just very, very, very telling, I thought. No reason not to do it. It's not unfair. It's not a surprise. You know it's coming. You just don't want it right now because you think you get an advantage if you don't have it right now. And the judge is sacrificing the time and efficiency of everybody involved, particularly this witness, so that the state can have that advantage. Let that sit for a minute.
[02:11:28.200 --> 02:11:55.940]  Ms. Diener had her redirect then. She established that she had been interviewed multiple times. She had been asked for additional information each time, but she had only seen him for a moment. When she asked, why did you draw the connection with the bridge guy photo, Betsy said, I just knew immediately it was the same guy before I spoke with law enforcement. So again, that same snap recognition. I knew it was him right away at the same time.
[02:11:55.940 --> 02:12:23.160]  The person you're describing doesn't sound a lot. It doesn't sound like the person we can see with our eyeballs looks like bridge guy. Mr. Baldwin clarified in 2017, you haven't changed the description. She said, I have consistently recognized him as the guy in the photo. And she then said, when I gave that description, I was comparing him to two different sketches.
[02:12:24.020 --> 02:12:50.160]  So again, we have the sketches being pulled into it. And this is not something that the defense is asking for. This is not being elicited on purpose. This is something the witness is volunteering throughout the course of her testimony. And so the jury has now heard so much about these sketches multiple times. They've heard references, not just to a sketch now, but to multiple sketches.
[02:12:51.520 --> 02:13:09.480]  So I have a great big note. I mean, the very first time she said it, I have this great big note here in my margin door open door. It's backwards, I guess, because of the camera door open. The door has been opened. I don't see how the door has not been opened.
[02:13:09.480 --> 02:13:38.500]  And the problem is that now that the jury knows these sketches exist, the jury will expect to see them. And you have no control. You cannot assume what kind of inference the jury is going to draw if they don't see the sketches. The problem is the likelihood that they could assume, oh, the defense got the sketches excluded because they look too much like Bridge. They look, you know, look too much like Richard Allen. The sketches look like Richard Allen. They make him look like Bridge guy.
[02:13:38.500 --> 02:14:08.160]  That's why we're not seeing them. And that's not true. That's not true. It's the state that's keeping them out. And they don't look like Richard Allen. I mean, arguably that first one, the first one, it's not really the first one. It was just the first one publicly released, the one with the guy with the hat. That's the one that, from my perspective, it looks the most like him. I still don't think it looks a lot like him, but I can certainly see some similarities, mostly in the nose and kind of the shape of the cheeks and the face.
[02:14:08.500 --> 02:14:41.300]  That that cheek structure looks a little bit like Mr. Allen. But certainly the one from the Betsy Blair sketch, the brown poofy hair 20s guy looks absolutely nothing. Nothing like Richard Allen. Yeah, it's a problem. It's a problem. Jury is going to have questions. They've heard about it. They're going to want to see it. They're going to want to know why aren't we seeing it.
[02:14:42.740 --> 02:14:57.580]  Jury's questions. What was your distance to the man on the bridge? She clarified it was about 50 feet in that distance. How could you determine he was looking for someone? She said by his posture, how he was standing, he was facing upstream and turned.
[02:14:57.580 --> 02:15:21.560]  And it just seemed like he was expecting somebody to be there and looked and saw that she was not the person that he was looking for. Question. You stated the man on the bridge had brown poofy hair. Could you have mistaken a hat for hair at that distance? And she said yes, she could have.
[02:15:21.560 --> 02:15:46.680]  So that's interesting. That's an interesting twist. I hadn't really thought about that. But yeah, if it's at some distance, possible, possible, poofy, poofy kind of hat could look like poofy kind of hair. So she acknowledged that that was possible. Now, what's the common thread between all three of these witnesses? What's the common thread between all three of them?
[02:15:47.900 --> 02:16:14.520]  Nobody asked. Is that man sitting right there at the defense table, Richard Allen? Is that the man you saw on the trail? Nobody asked this question. I was kind of mind blown. Now, I can understand both the prosecutor and the defense, why they would not ask that question, because it is a extremely high risk question.
[02:16:14.520 --> 02:16:34.120]  You wouldn't want to ask it in the deposition because the other party is there. They're going to know the answer. If she says, yes, it's him. The defense case just got a lot harder. If she says, no, it's not. The prosecution just fell apart. Very, very high risk question for either of the parties to ask.
[02:16:35.080 --> 02:16:55.810]  But I'm kind of shocked the jury didn't ask it. I'm really kind of shocked the jury didn't ask it. They've asked such good questions. And to me, it's such an obvious one. He's the guy on trial. Is that the guy you saw? He's supposed to be bridge guy. You saw bridge guy. Is he bridge guy? Nobody asked that question.
[02:16:58.530 --> 02:17:19.010]  The defense is satisfied with this because they're happy with the descriptions that they elicited. That the guy was tall, that he was muscular, that he was young. I mean, the descriptions aren't all identical, but there's a lot of commonalities between them and the youth. The age of the man is a big commonality between them.
[02:17:19.010 --> 02:17:43.380]  Two of them say he's tall. One of them says he's average. Richard Allen is short. He's very short. Muscular. Two of them said he's muscular. Rick? He does not look like a muscular guy. Even back at the time he was arrested. I don't think we would characterize him as muscular.
[02:17:44.720 --> 02:18:06.320]  The defense is satisfied because Richard Allen doesn't match the verbal descriptions. But they're saying he's bridge guy. And if you look at bridge guy, it's hard to get details from bridge guy. You can really project a lot of what you want to see onto bridge guy. You can see him looking like Richard Allen. You can see him not looking anything like Richard Allen.
[02:18:09.930 --> 02:18:34.650]  Very strange. Not a single person asked for an in-court identification. The last witness of the day was Steve Mullen. He's a prosecuting office investigator, works there with the county. So he is the one who got the videos from the Hoosier Harvest Store the following day on February 14th.
[02:18:35.230 --> 02:18:53.650]  So they were looking for records of the vehicles that were going by on that county road. County Road 300 North. That's the road that leads to the Mears Trailhead. It follows all the way down to Main Street. You can get downtown from there. You can get onto the...
[02:18:55.230 --> 02:19:13.890]  Forget the name of the big highway there. Hoosier Heartland. Hoosier Heartland Highway, I think it's called. So he just basically established that he acquired a long section of video, watched it, and from that was able to identify some of the vehicles here.
[02:19:13.890 --> 02:19:37.090]  So he saw, for example, we got several exhibits. So we got Betsy Blair's vehicle going eastbound, which would be going towards the trailhead at 1222. He then got her vehicle going westbound, which would have been when she left to go downtown to go to the Delphi Library. That was at 115.
[02:19:37.090 --> 02:19:58.930]  Her vehicle going eastbound again, coming back from the library to do her third loop. This was at 146 p.m. Then Kelsey German's vehicle going westbound. This would be right after she dropped Abby and Livy off on the trails. This was at 149 p.m.
[02:19:58.930 --> 02:20:17.750]  Betsy Blair's vehicle then going westbound at 2 18 p.m. This would have been after she had she had seen the man on the high bridge. She passed Abby and Libby on the trail. She then continued and finished her loop and then would have gotten her car and left.
[02:20:18.710 --> 02:20:34.690]  And then an exhibit that showed Sarah Carbaugh, who we haven't heard from yet, but she will be coming up as a witness. I'm expecting probably tomorrow. Her vehicle going eastbound at 3 56 p.m.
[02:20:34.690 --> 02:20:55.370]  So we heard from opening that Betsy Blair and Sarah Carbaugh are the bookends because Betsy Blair is at the early the early part of the of the timeline and then Sarah Carbaugh is at the far end of the timeline. She's the one who saw the man on the road that she described as muddy and bloody clothing.
[02:20:57.130 --> 02:21:03.510]  Again, there was an interesting thing here with the report with the police report.
[02:21:07.650 --> 02:21:22.850]  The FBI is who recovered the video. The this particular officer, you know, local officer, they didn't go out and get it was the FBI that went out and and did like a video canvas. And as part of that, they got this video provided it to him.
[02:21:22.850 --> 02:21:37.270]  So they had a report and an affidavit of a custodian of records and basically where they described all of this process, retrieving the video and identifying the vehicles and so forth.
[02:21:37.270 --> 02:22:02.570]  So Mr. McClelland offered the report into evidence. Again, this is not the norm in my state, especially a police report like this, because it isn't just hearsay, it's testimonial hearsay and testimonial hearsay gets its special protection because that's what triggers the confrontation clause.
[02:22:02.570 --> 02:22:17.610]  Like it's a pretty absolute bar that if somebody has made an out of court statement for the purpose of assisting with a prosecution or investigation of somebody, you have an absolute right to cross examine that person.
[02:22:17.650 --> 02:22:22.970]  They can't just bring in bring in their out of court statement. They need to be there personally in court.
[02:22:22.970 --> 02:22:44.450]  So there's like never in a million years would would a law enforcement report like this come in, in my state on my watch, that would be a no brainer. I think, however, maybe the defense likes this evidence, they might like it in terms of how it establishes the timeline because they didn't object to it.
[02:22:46.350 --> 02:23:14.430]  And on cross examination, Mr. Baldwin, he did this this very clever thing. He asked the witness, so these are what you think are Betsy Blair's car, right? These these photos and the witness, he's he's kind of suggesting to the witness that he doesn't, you know, what you think is Betsy Blair's car, you know, like, like, I'm going to try to undermine the fact of this being Betsy Blair's car.
[02:23:14.430 --> 02:23:28.530]  The witnesses own. Well, she I did it. It wasn't just mine. It was based on based on her description. And in fact, she I did it. Mr. Baldwin was like, and in fact, all of these witnesses ID their vehicles, didn't they? Yeah, yeah, they did. He actually wanted it all in.
[02:23:29.550 --> 02:23:36.450]  So that's what that's what leads me to think that he probably did want this in. And that's that's why they didn't object to this report.
[02:23:37.510 --> 02:23:44.450]  Nevertheless, it just it makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up, seeing a report being police report coming in as evidence in a criminal trial.
[02:23:45.690 --> 02:24:00.150]  Hey, if it's more if it works, then then go ahead and do it. That was it for the evidence for the day. At the very end, Mr. Baldwin simply addressed the court. We are going to have to address the opening of the door to the sketches.
[02:24:00.830 --> 02:24:04.810]  It sounded like he was saying that he intends to file something written.
[02:24:06.130 --> 02:24:20.850]  Because they really didn't get into it. They would have had the opportunity once the jury was was excused. And it's just the attorneys and the judge in the courtroom. They would have had the opportunity to bring it up, then argue it if they wanted to do it at that point in time.
[02:24:22.130 --> 02:24:33.310]  They didn't. So I think they're going to they're going to file something in writing on on the opening of the door to the sketches. I've already said I think that door was opened.
[02:24:33.310 --> 02:24:36.310]  We will see what Judge Gold thinks about that.
[02:24:38.290 --> 02:24:53.310]  I stuck around a little bit at the end of the day, because from where I was seated. Well, two reasons. So from where I was seated, I could not see the big blown up picture of bridge man bridge guy that they were showing to the jury.
[02:24:53.310 --> 02:25:04.510]  And I just wanted to see number one, is this the same one? Are they using the same one now that's been, you know, publicly out there and is like on the website like the FBI's website or whatever?
[02:25:05.890 --> 02:25:17.170]  Everyone has seen it. Is it the same one? And is it any better quality? The problem was from my vantage point in the courtroom, they had it displayed up on a easel and I'm staring straight at the back. I can't see it.
[02:25:17.170 --> 02:25:30.010]  And Ms. Diener is positioning it so that it faces the bench when it's not shown to the jury. So it's never displayed in the direction of the gallery. Never got a view of it.
[02:25:30.570 --> 02:25:40.950]  There were also several other paper exhibits that were admitted today. And so when they published those, they would make copies of them and provide those copies to the jury.
[02:25:40.950 --> 02:25:56.290]  So they're able to flip through it and see it for themselves. But I myself, it's not displayed in court. I myself am not able to see it. I would need to be able to go up to that council table where the media are going to go look at them to be able to see them.
[02:25:57.070 --> 02:26:08.870]  So I waited around a little bit after court just to kind of eyeball this process, see what's going to happen. Kind of just hoping somebody is going to flip around the big picture of Bridge Guy.
[02:26:09.390 --> 02:26:20.490]  And they did. The judge did. The judge is out laying out the... she's taking her robe off. She's out there in the well, laying out the exhibits for the inspection. She turns the Bridge Guy picture around.
[02:26:20.490 --> 02:26:31.590]  So I am able to see Bridge Guy and see that, yes, it is the same photo that everybody has seen a million times. No, the quality is not any better, even this big, you know, blown up placard that they presented.
[02:26:32.450 --> 02:26:46.610]  But all of the paper items are on the table behind the well. So it's about 5.15 at this point. Court finished about five o'clock. I've just been chit chatting with some of the folks from the press that I've gotten familiar with over the past few days.
[02:26:46.610 --> 02:26:52.890]  But I'm the only person in the public that's left in the courtroom. Everybody else is in the press.
[02:26:54.310 --> 02:27:05.290]  And so several of them are gathered there at the well. Judge is laying out the exhibits. When she finished, she goes over to the bar and she says, OK, show me your credentials.
[02:27:07.150 --> 02:27:14.210]  So she literally stood there at the gate to check their credentials as they went through the well.
[02:27:16.770 --> 02:27:24.310]  She saw me there and I just I just left at this point. I, you know, saw her and I just turned and left.
[02:27:25.050 --> 02:27:34.870]  She saw me and she was looking, I think, like she was expecting. Am I going to walk forward to present my credentials or what exactly am I? No, I don't have credentials to present.
[02:27:36.730 --> 02:27:39.310]  So don't get that special access.
[02:27:40.970 --> 02:27:45.090]  Anyway, I don't know if she's seen my motion yet. Obviously, she hasn't ruled on it at this point.
[02:27:45.110 --> 02:27:51.910]  Like I said before, I'm expecting her to not rule on it probably until the trial is over because she doesn't have to.
[02:27:52.130 --> 02:28:00.430]  And it would be the smart thing to do, frankly, because as soon as she rules on it, that's what sets the stage for me to take it to the next level.
[02:28:00.430 --> 02:28:08.870]  And she knows that. But I did wonder, you know, has she put two and two together? Does she now know, you know, me, the person who was there late in court?
[02:28:09.150 --> 02:28:13.790]  I'm the person who also filed this motion and so forth. I don't know. But I did wonder.
[02:28:15.250 --> 02:28:18.390]  So that was the day. I didn't tell you much about the morning.
[02:28:20.590 --> 02:28:26.030]  I didn't tell you much about the morning. These days are getting quite long.
[02:28:26.030 --> 02:28:32.330]  I don't know how sustainable it's going to be in the long term again. I think it's that's very potentially by design.
[02:28:33.070 --> 02:28:39.050]  I got there at two thirty this morning. I got about four hours of sleep in in my bed last night, which was nice.
[02:28:39.050 --> 02:28:48.610]  And I enjoyed that thoroughly. But I did get up, got up about one thirty and got myself ready to go and got down there to Delphi at about two thirty.
[02:28:48.610 --> 02:28:57.070]  I did have I, you know, did make it there in plenty of time to be sure that I was going to get in, but couldn't have really waited a whole lot longer.
[02:28:58.230 --> 02:29:00.910]  Couldn't have waited a whole lot longer. Wouldn't have had a lot of guarantees.
[02:29:01.010 --> 02:29:03.890]  We're still having people show up that aren't making it into the courtroom.
[02:29:07.410 --> 02:29:14.910]  So we got to get there early. I, you know, was able to get some sleep out there on the steps.
[02:29:14.910 --> 02:29:27.230]  I have my my little camp chair. When I flew back to Washington last weekend, I was able to get some things to like improve my situation because it gets it gets cold overnight there.
[02:29:28.330 --> 02:29:32.030]  It's it's it's damp here. You know, I'm from a very arid climate.
[02:29:32.110 --> 02:29:38.050]  So if it gets down to, you know, forty five degrees or whatever, it's really not that it's not that uncomfortable.
[02:29:38.050 --> 02:29:43.450]  It's just it's dry. You put a coat on and everything is fine, but it's it's more damp here.
[02:29:43.450 --> 02:29:47.470]  And so it's that cold that just kind of seeps seeps into you.
[02:29:47.770 --> 02:29:52.110]  I had on my my regular clothes. I had on two pairs of socks.
[02:29:52.170 --> 02:30:05.270]  I had on a sweater. I had on my big I have this big long down jacket and I have a down sleeping quilt that I brought back when I when I came back when I came back from my trip.
[02:30:06.790 --> 02:30:11.270]  And I was still cold. My feet, my feet are freezing.
[02:30:11.450 --> 02:30:13.330]  You just it's just it just gets cold.
[02:30:14.030 --> 02:30:25.250]  But I was able to sit in my chair and pull my quilt over my head because they now have a big spotlight that's run by a generator over on the corner pointed at the courthouse.
[02:30:25.270 --> 02:30:31.650]  So this massive like prison light prison prison yard light on us at all times.
[02:30:32.230 --> 02:30:37.870]  It's buzzing. It's just this awful this environment is awful.
[02:30:39.110 --> 02:30:46.050]  So I had the quilt over my head and and you know so it was dark and I was able to get a little very poor quality sleep.
[02:30:46.110 --> 02:30:49.230]  Nevertheless, I was able to get some sleep out there on the steps.
[02:30:50.290 --> 02:30:55.610]  But yeah, this is this is this is probably not going to be sustainable in the long run.
[02:30:56.530 --> 02:31:03.350]  I continue to be hopeful that as time passes, people will lose interest in coming.
[02:31:03.910 --> 02:31:12.830]  We do seem to be kind of narrowing down who is the core audience that's, you know, really there every day.
[02:31:13.090 --> 02:31:15.070]  That's that's that's really committed to it.
[02:31:15.270 --> 02:31:22.410]  The problem is, is there does still seem to be slightly more of the core people showing up than there are than there are seats.
[02:31:25.070 --> 02:31:26.570]  So we'll just see how it goes.
[02:31:27.490 --> 02:31:33.290]  We might have to figure out some kind of alternative way to get this covered.
[02:31:34.110 --> 02:31:35.510]  I'm OK so far, by the way.
[02:31:35.810 --> 02:31:37.150]  I've gotten a lot of messages.
[02:31:37.230 --> 02:31:38.250]  People very concerned.
[02:31:38.430 --> 02:31:39.990]  Andrew, you're going to, you know, take care of your health.
[02:31:40.030 --> 02:31:41.850]  You're going to mess yourself up and stuff like that.
[02:31:41.890 --> 02:31:43.190]  I agree. It's not healthy.
[02:31:43.290 --> 02:31:45.170]  This is not a healthy way to go.
[02:31:46.210 --> 02:31:47.530]  But I'm not suffering.
[02:31:48.110 --> 02:31:50.110]  This is it's it's mildly unpleasant.
[02:31:50.110 --> 02:31:54.750]  And, you know, the reality is that life is sometimes mildly unpleasant.
[02:31:54.870 --> 02:31:56.070]  That's just how it is.
[02:31:56.070 --> 02:31:58.870]  And you can't let that stop you from enjoying it.
[02:31:58.930 --> 02:32:00.070]  It will pass.
[02:32:00.710 --> 02:32:09.510]  This is probably this might be the best opportunity that I will have on my channel to share with you the Sutra of the Two Arrows.
[02:32:09.670 --> 02:32:16.230]  This is a story that has a lot of meaning to me since I since I first heard of it.
[02:32:16.310 --> 02:32:17.830]  I'm just going to paraphrase.
[02:32:17.830 --> 02:32:22.250]  I'm not going to like tell it to you literally, but it's a Buddhist story.
[02:32:22.430 --> 02:32:28.050]  It's from the Pali Canon, which is kind of like the Bible for Buddhists.
[02:32:28.050 --> 02:32:33.830]  It contains stories of the Buddhist teachings and conversations that he had and things like that.
[02:32:34.830 --> 02:32:39.650]  So the Sutra of the Two Arrows is the parable that explains the nature of suffering.
[02:32:40.010 --> 02:32:41.990]  And it goes essentially like this.
[02:32:41.990 --> 02:32:45.110]  There is a battlefield and on the battlefield.
[02:32:45.310 --> 02:32:55.190]  There is a wise old man and there is a foolish young man and they are charging the enemy's castle and the enemy's archers are on the walls.
[02:32:55.510 --> 02:32:56.310]  They draw their arrows.
[02:32:56.490 --> 02:33:03.230]  They let them fly and arrows pierce the chest of both the old man and the young man.
[02:33:03.690 --> 02:33:10.230]  And both of them, when the arrows hit these fatal fatal wounds have landed.
[02:33:10.230 --> 02:33:12.450]  They feel the rending of the flesh.
[02:33:12.690 --> 02:33:17.830]  They feel the pain and the heat, the searing of the arrow entering them.
[02:33:18.630 --> 02:33:34.390]  But there is a critical difference between the wise old man and the foolish young man in that the foolish young man pierces himself with a second hidden arrow.
[02:33:34.990 --> 02:33:37.110]  And that is the wish that it were different.
[02:33:39.810 --> 02:33:41.750]  That's just the story of the nature of suffering.
[02:33:42.010 --> 02:33:45.250]  You just, you know, you accept, you got to accept things the way that they are.
[02:33:45.250 --> 02:33:46.370]  They're not going to change.
[02:33:46.770 --> 02:33:50.490]  Being upset about them isn't going to, isn't going to make them go away.
[02:33:51.430 --> 02:33:54.150]  It's just going to make you suffer.
[02:33:56.890 --> 02:34:01.090]  So that's just the attitude I'm trying to bring to this whole experience.
[02:34:01.690 --> 02:34:04.070]  You know, so far I feel like it's been fine.
[02:34:04.210 --> 02:34:05.390]  Yes, it's been uncomfortable.
[02:34:05.390 --> 02:34:07.890]  I was very uncomfortable today.
[02:34:08.570 --> 02:34:24.190]  I was I was telling Jeff, the worst part so far has been, you know, that feeling when you're so sleepy, you're just like everything in your body is screaming to just close your eyes and turn off your brain and go to sleep.
[02:34:24.190 --> 02:34:28.910]  And you have to just fight to stay alert and to stay awake.
[02:34:28.910 --> 02:34:34.830]  And it's like it's like trying to stay above water and, you know, in like a riptide or something.
[02:34:35.810 --> 02:34:36.930]  So unpleasant.
[02:34:37.290 --> 02:34:43.650]  I've had a few of those moments over the past couple days in that courtroom.
[02:34:47.470 --> 02:34:48.650]  But it'll pass.
[02:34:49.570 --> 02:34:50.170]  It'll pass.
[02:34:50.430 --> 02:34:52.710]  It's just, it's just part of the experience that we're getting.
[02:34:52.930 --> 02:34:53.770]  It's part of the story.
[02:34:53.770 --> 02:34:58.830]  And, yeah, part of the process.
[02:34:59.530 --> 02:35:01.550]  So we will get through it.
[02:35:01.830 --> 02:35:07.910]  All right, guys, I'm going to take the opportunity now to go ahead and go through some of your comments and questions.
[02:35:08.350 --> 02:35:10.410]  BeagleMom7, I'm so glad to find your channel.
[02:35:10.610 --> 02:35:11.710]  Andrea, keep up the good work.
[02:35:11.810 --> 02:35:13.050]  Thank you so much.
[02:35:13.550 --> 02:35:14.990]  I plan to.
[02:35:15.750 --> 02:35:18.530]  Benona Judd, I like that name, became a YouTube member.
[02:35:18.590 --> 02:35:19.050]  Welcome.
[02:35:19.230 --> 02:35:20.190]  Welcome to the channel.
[02:35:20.390 --> 02:35:21.870]  Joy Daily became a member.
[02:35:21.870 --> 02:35:24.290]  Jojo gifted five memberships.
[02:35:24.550 --> 02:35:26.010]  Thank you so much, Jojo.
[02:35:26.930 --> 02:35:28.850]  Gianna became a new member.
[02:35:29.090 --> 02:35:29.710]  Wonderful.
[02:35:31.830 --> 02:35:36.190]  Simone9937, did anyone say where the large tree branches came from yet?
[02:35:36.530 --> 02:35:41.210]  Ever since David Kam was tried three times and eventually got a payout from the state.
[02:35:41.550 --> 02:35:44.090]  I don't trust the Indiana State Police anymore.
[02:35:44.650 --> 02:35:45.450]  Thanks for going.
[02:35:45.450 --> 02:35:56.470]  The only tree branch that they indicate they gave us any indication that they knew where it came from was the extremely large one that was on on Libby.
[02:35:57.050 --> 02:36:05.290]  And they indicated there was a depression in the ground that looked like that had been where the branch had laid and it had been moved from there and placed on her.
[02:36:05.310 --> 02:36:07.190]  So it was it was local.
[02:36:07.390 --> 02:36:11.170]  I mean, it had been there in the in the near area.
[02:36:11.170 --> 02:36:19.290]  But the rest of them know so far we haven't heard anything about any kind of efforts to trace the provenance of those branches.
[02:36:20.830 --> 02:36:21.870]  Truth and transparency.
[02:36:22.030 --> 02:36:23.210]  This one is for the mods.
[02:36:23.410 --> 02:36:26.050]  I know how much I love mine and you guys are great here.
[02:36:26.070 --> 02:36:27.510]  Thank you for being amazing.
[02:36:27.590 --> 02:36:28.490]  They are great.
[02:36:28.530 --> 02:36:31.290]  I am so grateful to them for all of their help.
[02:36:31.710 --> 02:36:35.050]  We are getting more and more eyes on these recaps every day.
[02:36:35.310 --> 02:36:37.050]  And the more eyes are on.
[02:36:37.210 --> 02:36:37.730]  We love it.
[02:36:37.730 --> 02:36:39.530]  It's a wonderful problem to have.
[02:36:39.530 --> 02:36:45.550]  But it just does require a little more attention from the mod team to make sure that things are running smoothly.
[02:36:45.950 --> 02:36:50.390]  So I really am grateful to have all of these fabulous wrenches here in the chat.
[02:36:50.570 --> 02:36:56.610]  Helping me keep things keep things moving smoothly so that everyone gets to have a great experience.
[02:36:58.610 --> 02:37:01.130]  Procosent, please hit the like button.
[02:37:01.390 --> 02:37:02.490]  Well, thank you.
[02:37:03.670 --> 02:37:04.990]  People have been doing that.
[02:37:05.010 --> 02:37:07.530]  There have been a lot of people hitting the like button lately.
[02:37:07.530 --> 02:37:09.470]  So I do appreciate that.
[02:37:09.630 --> 02:37:14.470]  Crime Cafe, thank you so much for your excellent and concise updates on this tragic case.
[02:37:14.530 --> 02:37:16.510]  Hashtag justice for Libby and Abby.
[02:37:16.630 --> 02:37:17.590]  Well, thank you very much.
[02:37:17.750 --> 02:37:21.770]  We're nine and what three and a half hours in two and a half hours in.
[02:37:22.410 --> 02:37:25.070]  So concise is maybe being a little bit generous.
[02:37:25.270 --> 02:37:26.950]  I do take a lot of notes.
[02:37:27.430 --> 02:37:32.730]  I am willing to consider that my notes might be a little bit overkill.
[02:37:32.870 --> 02:37:36.410]  But, you know, it works for me and it seems to work for everybody here.
[02:37:36.410 --> 02:37:38.510]  The detail is important.
[02:37:38.650 --> 02:37:42.590]  The detail, especially in a case like this, is really important.
[02:37:42.590 --> 02:37:47.070]  So I do want to do what I can to capture as many of those details as possible.
[02:37:48.030 --> 02:37:49.630]  Simcha with a super sticker.
[02:37:49.750 --> 02:37:51.390]  Thank you so much for that.
[02:37:51.750 --> 02:37:56.010]  Jessica Pinkymingo, thank you for being the eyes and ears of the public.
[02:37:56.110 --> 02:37:57.570]  What you're doing is invaluable.
[02:37:57.690 --> 02:37:59.370]  I hope you get some rest.
[02:37:59.470 --> 02:38:02.410]  Well, I do intend to get some more rest tonight.
[02:38:02.470 --> 02:38:05.090]  It will probably be similar to last night.
[02:38:06.490 --> 02:38:08.410]  But we'll just keep getting through it.
[02:38:08.650 --> 02:38:11.570]  I did get a shower tonight, you know, by the way.
[02:38:12.130 --> 02:38:14.590]  That was... I feel good about that choice.
[02:38:14.630 --> 02:38:17.850]  I got home a little bit early, had the choice, like I said, nap, shower.
[02:38:18.090 --> 02:38:19.310]  I'm going to have the choice of shower.
[02:38:20.030 --> 02:38:21.950]  So I'll get to the sleep.
[02:38:21.990 --> 02:38:23.330]  Don't you worry about that.
[02:38:23.950 --> 02:38:24.550]  Sixth estate.
[02:38:24.730 --> 02:38:27.730]  How are the juries reacting to each of the attorneys so far?
[02:38:27.750 --> 02:38:30.050]  Which attorneys engage the jurors?
[02:38:30.610 --> 02:38:35.070]  It's hard for me to tell because I've been sitting from different vantage points
[02:38:35.070 --> 02:38:40.170]  in the courtroom and so where I prefer to sit is in the court,
[02:38:40.370 --> 02:38:43.130]  like the far corner that's behind the defense table
[02:38:43.130 --> 02:38:47.630]  because I have the best view of the screen that shows the exhibits
[02:38:47.630 --> 02:38:51.210]  when they're displaying, like when they played the video the first time.
[02:38:52.610 --> 02:38:55.090]  All those digital exhibits are being played on the screen.
[02:38:55.110 --> 02:38:56.710]  I have the best view of it from there.
[02:38:56.730 --> 02:38:59.350]  You really can't see it from the other side of the courtroom.
[02:38:59.790 --> 02:39:04.570]  The problem is, is that from this position, I don't have a very good eye on the jurors.
[02:39:04.570 --> 02:39:08.950]  This afternoon I was over on the opposite side,
[02:39:09.230 --> 02:39:12.090]  so I did have a little bit better view of the jurors.
[02:39:12.390 --> 02:39:14.930]  They frankly all seem quite engaged.
[02:39:14.970 --> 02:39:18.150]  I don't see a whole lot of interaction and reaction.
[02:39:18.270 --> 02:39:21.150]  There are a couple of jurors who take extensive notes.
[02:39:22.510 --> 02:39:27.510]  There is one juror that I noticed during jury selection.
[02:39:28.250 --> 02:39:32.490]  I saw just the reaction, the body language, the expressions,
[02:39:32.490 --> 02:39:37.610]  and my thought, my reaction was, this juror hates Jennifer Auger.
[02:39:37.990 --> 02:39:40.170]  She hates her. She really doesn't like her.
[02:39:40.550 --> 02:39:45.910]  And I saw some of a little bit more of that today, just expressions of, you know,
[02:39:45.950 --> 02:39:50.890]  like the long, blank, little hint of eye roll in it.
[02:39:51.030 --> 02:39:53.090]  I don't think she likes Ms. Auger.
[02:39:53.470 --> 02:39:59.330]  So that's really the only reaction that I've seen that's specific to a particular attorney.
[02:39:59.330 --> 02:40:06.490]  I had seen one of the jurors I mentioned during jury selection during that process.
[02:40:07.110 --> 02:40:10.750]  She was infatuated with Mr. McLeiland.
[02:40:10.770 --> 02:40:16.550]  She was just, like, gazing. He brought such a smile to a face.
[02:40:16.590 --> 02:40:19.830]  He lit her up. She was following everything he said.
[02:40:19.870 --> 02:40:23.930]  She was mirroring him. She really loved him.
[02:40:23.930 --> 02:40:29.910]  I'm not seeing, you know, so much of that direct kind of reaction in the courtroom,
[02:40:30.050 --> 02:40:33.170]  but, you know, that initial impression was there.
[02:40:33.330 --> 02:40:38.330]  I have to think that there is still some hint of that going on.
[02:40:38.750 --> 02:40:40.070]  So that's really all I've seen.
[02:40:40.130 --> 02:40:48.070]  I've mentioned before that because I take a lot of notes, a lot of notes, this is today.
[02:40:48.070 --> 02:40:56.070]  So today, for the notepad count, I'm once again not quite a full notepad of my notepad.
[02:40:57.610 --> 02:40:59.430]  Here is what I filled with my notes.
[02:40:59.630 --> 02:41:04.210]  So there's probably 10 to 12 pages I did not fill with notes.
[02:41:04.510 --> 02:41:07.130]  I'm really focused on my paper and on my writing.
[02:41:07.430 --> 02:41:11.070]  That's part of what makes it very difficult when these witnesses are so quiet
[02:41:11.070 --> 02:41:15.070]  and they're hard to hear because I have to stare at them to try to lip read
[02:41:15.070 --> 02:41:19.370]  and try to get visual cues about what is being said.
[02:41:19.990 --> 02:41:23.770]  And then I'm staring at them, so I can't write.
[02:41:24.030 --> 02:41:27.190]  I have to stare and try to listen and then go ahead and write it down.
[02:41:27.270 --> 02:41:31.070]  And then while I'm writing it down, they're saying more and I have to stare again.
[02:41:31.310 --> 02:41:34.930]  So this is how it ends up being very easy to miss things
[02:41:34.930 --> 02:41:37.310]  with those witnesses who are very soft spoken.
[02:41:38.410 --> 02:41:44.290]  So I've said before, I'm not really the best channel to watch for updates on that type of thing
[02:41:44.290 --> 02:41:48.270]  like jury reactions and stuff. I just I can't be focused on them.
[02:41:48.270 --> 02:41:52.470]  I'm really far more focused on taking notes of what's being said.
[02:41:53.990 --> 02:41:58.170]  Jason Sorensen, he had time to cover them with sticks and redress them,
[02:41:58.230 --> 02:42:03.130]  but he didn't have time to essay them or cover them better or am I missing something?
[02:42:03.610 --> 02:42:06.690]  The story of this, it just really doesn't make a lot of sense.
[02:42:06.710 --> 02:42:10.190]  And in so many ways he ran out of time, but he arranged them.
[02:42:10.190 --> 02:42:16.030]  And they're clearly not in the position or location where they were killed.
[02:42:16.330 --> 02:42:20.110]  And I don't necessarily mean, you know, I said yesterday,
[02:42:20.210 --> 02:42:25.010]  I'm not convinced that they were killed at this at this location.
[02:42:26.570 --> 02:42:29.870]  I'm not saying it's impossible. It's just it doesn't it doesn't look right to me.
[02:42:29.870 --> 02:42:33.230]  I want to hear more. I want to hear more of an explanation of the scene
[02:42:33.230 --> 02:42:36.110]  and kind of what the, you know, not to be gruesome,
[02:42:36.110 --> 02:42:40.170]  but what the death process would have been looked would have looked like in terms of the blood loss
[02:42:40.170 --> 02:42:45.070]  and, you know, how it would have come out in volume and so forth.
[02:42:46.810 --> 02:42:55.590]  Because at the very least, I'm thinking, OK, somebody somebody somebody has their throat cut.
[02:42:57.030 --> 02:43:01.150]  What I'm going to expect to happen, assuming they die from blood loss,
[02:43:01.170 --> 02:43:05.410]  which is, you know, how I'm expecting that these girls died, we will find out.
[02:43:05.410 --> 02:43:08.870]  But that that would be my expectation. What happens?
[02:43:09.070 --> 02:43:13.410]  You have you have a loss of blood pressure that eventually prevents your heart
[02:43:13.410 --> 02:43:15.530]  from being able to get blood to your brain.
[02:43:15.570 --> 02:43:19.870]  So you will lose consciousness. So you will pass out. You will fall down.
[02:43:20.650 --> 02:43:24.810]  And so you will fall down and the blood will, you know,
[02:43:25.030 --> 02:43:28.510]  while your heart is still pumping, it will be pumping the blood out of you.
[02:43:28.530 --> 02:43:32.710]  When your heart stops pumping, you may still have some gravity action
[02:43:32.710 --> 02:43:35.890]  that is that is flowing the blood out of your out of your body.
[02:43:35.930 --> 02:43:39.850]  So it will pool around the area of this incision.
[02:43:39.850 --> 02:43:43.070]  And that's what you would expect to see. That's not this crime scene.
[02:43:43.490 --> 02:43:48.670]  There's a very small amount of blood behind the heads of both of the girls.
[02:43:48.850 --> 02:43:53.570]  But the larger blood like puddles are down near their feet.
[02:43:55.750 --> 02:44:00.990]  So, however, you know, whatever everything else being equal,
[02:44:01.550 --> 02:44:04.290]  these girls, you know,
[02:44:05.550 --> 02:44:09.910]  these girls are not in the position that they were in when they were killed.
[02:44:10.050 --> 02:44:14.850]  So they were moved. They appear to have been put in in these kind of postures.
[02:44:15.110 --> 02:44:17.820]  Yes, talked about Abby being being redressed,
[02:44:18.150 --> 02:44:21.130]  whether she did that herself or whether the killer did that.
[02:44:21.130 --> 02:44:23.290]  You know, we don't we don't know at this point.
[02:44:23.290 --> 02:44:26.290]  I'm not sure if we are going to find that out.
[02:44:30.300 --> 02:44:33.400]  We just we don't know the story. We don't know the story.
[02:44:33.780 --> 02:44:38.300]  But yes. And then and then the placement, the placement of the branches that are not really
[02:44:38.300 --> 02:44:40.720]  they're not concealing anything. Right.
[02:44:40.760 --> 02:44:42.480]  And they're not the natural concealment,
[02:44:42.480 --> 02:44:46.120]  which would be to use the leaves that are down there on the ground and put the leaves,
[02:44:46.140 --> 02:44:48.680]  put the leaves on them that would conceal them.
[02:44:49.800 --> 02:44:52.660]  Had all that time to do it in this hurry.
[02:44:52.660 --> 02:44:55.440]  And the whole thing took 20 minutes or whatever.
[02:44:55.480 --> 02:44:59.360]  It's just it's it's a it's a very it is it's a very difficult story.
[02:45:00.100 --> 02:45:01.960]  It's a very difficult story.
[02:45:03.080 --> 02:45:05.840]  Donna Brack with just the straight five dollars super chat.
[02:45:05.980 --> 02:45:08.820]  Thank you so much. Starlight Selenite.
[02:45:08.940 --> 02:45:11.160]  Thank you so much, Andrea. I appreciate you.
[02:45:11.200 --> 02:45:13.840]  Well, I appreciate all of you being here with me.
[02:45:13.940 --> 02:45:17.980]  Does mean a lot that you are so interested in.
[02:45:19.520 --> 02:45:21.760]  My report and my take on this stuff.
[02:45:22.680 --> 02:45:25.380]  It's really, really very encouraging.
[02:45:25.520 --> 02:45:28.340]  You help keep me going through this whole experience.
[02:45:28.740 --> 02:45:31.360]  Kim neighbor. How does Mr. Allen appear to be holding up?
[02:45:31.380 --> 02:45:35.580]  He actually kind of looked better today than I think I've seen him so far.
[02:45:36.320 --> 02:45:40.360]  He looked a bit more engaged. He looked a bit more alert.
[02:45:40.820 --> 02:45:45.440]  I mentioned you may remember if you watched my videos on the jury selection,
[02:45:45.440 --> 02:45:49.400]  there was a moment during jury selection where he was entirely alone,
[02:45:49.580 --> 02:45:51.160]  like all the attorneys had.
[02:45:51.360 --> 02:45:53.020]  They were just elsewhere.
[02:45:53.220 --> 02:45:57.440]  So he was sitting there at his table all by himself and he looked almost panicked.
[02:45:57.820 --> 02:46:00.700]  He looked really he looked very anxious.
[02:46:01.960 --> 02:46:06.160]  There was a moment like that today where he was alone and it was it was completely different.
[02:46:06.420 --> 02:46:11.240]  He was more relaxed. He's looking around. He's he's looking into the into the audience.
[02:46:11.340 --> 02:46:13.660]  He doesn't appear to be like wired.
[02:46:13.660 --> 02:46:17.620]  He just looks more relaxed and kind of kind of softer.
[02:46:18.000 --> 02:46:22.880]  If that if that makes sense, it probably helps having his family there.
[02:46:22.880 --> 02:46:30.280]  And I bet I would be willing to bet that a big piece of it is not being in prison anymore.
[02:46:33.420 --> 02:46:39.920]  I I've I've told a story before about this this gentleman that I went and visited in prison.
[02:46:39.920 --> 02:46:43.720]  He's a former client. He was convicted of two counts of murder.
[02:46:43.860 --> 02:46:47.020]  I went and visited him. Oh, gosh.
[02:46:47.240 --> 02:46:55.920]  A few months ago, he had been on the other side of the state in maximum security for years.
[02:46:56.000 --> 02:47:00.340]  I mean, several years. He recently had his security downgraded.
[02:47:00.360 --> 02:47:01.980]  So now he's in a minimum facility.
[02:47:01.980 --> 02:47:07.680]  He's much closer to my area. So I went in to just go visit him, see how he's doing and stuff like that.
[02:47:07.680 --> 02:47:20.540]  And so I remember for like the first 15 minutes of our visit, he was very anxious because being in this more liberated environment, it was so new to him.
[02:47:20.560 --> 02:47:22.320]  He was very uncomfortable with it.
[02:47:22.320 --> 02:47:32.880]  He's used to being under constant watch by the guards and just it just it just being alert because he's in Max.
[02:47:32.880 --> 02:47:37.760]  And, you know, Max is where dangerous people are in Max.
[02:47:37.840 --> 02:47:41.640]  So you're kind of always watching your back. You don't know who's going to be there.
[02:47:42.460 --> 02:47:47.840]  Don't typically, you know, have have as many problems like that in the lower security levels.
[02:47:48.480 --> 02:47:58.320]  So he was still very much adjusting to this this this new environment of not really having to feel like you're in danger all the time.
[02:47:58.320 --> 02:48:02.740]  And so I wouldn't be surprised if Mr. Allen is having some of that by this point.
[02:48:02.740 --> 02:48:23.980]  He's kind of decompressing from that that experience of being being in the prison, being in the prison setting, let alone being in solitary, being in there with with some some pretty dangerous offenders and some guards that maybe, you know, look like they could be risky to him.
[02:48:23.980 --> 02:48:29.460]  So he does appear to be holding up pretty well at this point.
[02:48:30.340 --> 02:48:35.540]  Nile Enteret, thank you for your integrity and for sticking to your professional ethical standards.
[02:48:35.700 --> 02:48:40.840]  I hope the community comes together to organize stand in lines for you and lawyer Lee as they did in depth.
[02:48:41.040 --> 02:48:44.500]  He heard, you know, it would be nice. I'm really not expecting anything.
[02:48:44.500 --> 02:48:47.260]  I'm not, you know, we're not we're not entitled to anything.
[02:48:47.260 --> 02:48:53.960]  This is a small town and, you know, we're pretty far from from big population centers.
[02:48:55.060 --> 02:48:57.820]  It's different, you know, different from Duffy heard in that way.
[02:48:57.880 --> 02:49:04.240]  Duffy heard Fairfax was was relatively accessible to some pretty, you know, pretty high population places.
[02:49:04.840 --> 02:49:08.440]  I'm not expecting it. Sure, it would be great. I'm not going to lie.
[02:49:09.480 --> 02:49:12.380]  But, yeah, I don't expect anything like that.
[02:49:12.500 --> 02:49:16.780]  I'm fully prepared that this is just what we have to endure to get it.
[02:49:16.780 --> 02:49:20.000]  You know, this is the challenge that Judge Goal has given us.
[02:49:20.360 --> 02:49:22.460]  Do you think I'm going to let her beat me?
[02:49:22.460 --> 02:49:24.600]  Do I seem like that kind of person?
[02:49:25.200 --> 02:49:30.280]  No, no, I will win that challenge. I promise you that.
[02:49:31.460 --> 02:49:34.840]  Peggy. Oh, what a great name. I love that song.
[02:49:35.560 --> 02:49:40.540]  Do you see consistent jurors asking questions or are the questions equally distributed?
[02:49:40.760 --> 02:49:43.200]  If consistent, where are those jurors seated?
[02:49:43.460 --> 02:49:46.900]  Thank you for making so many sacrifices so we can get information.
[02:49:46.900 --> 02:49:52.940]  I can't really tell the source of the questions because I don't have such a good view of the jury.
[02:49:53.520 --> 02:49:59.360]  What I've been I've been trying to even track how many questions are going to the judge
[02:49:59.360 --> 02:50:03.520]  so that I can then compare how many does she ask?
[02:50:03.780 --> 02:50:06.480]  And then I can see our questions. They're not being asked.
[02:50:06.780 --> 02:50:11.060]  But even that is getting hard to see from from this particular perspective.
[02:50:11.380 --> 02:50:13.040]  So I really can't tell.
[02:50:13.040 --> 02:50:20.620]  I would speculate that probably questions are coming from the same people, like not all of them, obviously,
[02:50:20.680 --> 02:50:26.880]  but that there are certain jurors who are going to be more inquisitive than others.
[02:50:27.540 --> 02:50:29.520]  But I don't know for sure.
[02:50:29.540 --> 02:50:34.080]  And at this point, I'm not I'm not able to identify any patterns like that.
[02:50:34.280 --> 02:50:37.960]  So maybe we is or maybe maybe Bob Mata is.
[02:50:38.940 --> 02:50:40.760]  I'm just not sure.
[02:50:40.760 --> 02:50:44.540]  Simone 9937, I don't have Apple products.
[02:50:45.300 --> 02:50:53.580]  What could the PO with the iPad do to the iPhone remotely that first evening potentially?
[02:50:53.640 --> 02:50:55.160]  Is that a problem?
[02:50:57.560 --> 02:51:00.780]  I don't I don't think so.
[02:51:02.060 --> 02:51:03.180]  The iPad.
[02:51:04.180 --> 02:51:10.560]  Now I'm trying to remember what the testimony was about the iPad, because, yes, the testimony that was that the police were in the jail.
[02:51:11.500 --> 02:51:15.560]  Trying to unlock it and looked at the numbers.
[02:51:16.900 --> 02:51:18.900]  Yeah, so I remember that testimony.
[02:51:19.020 --> 02:51:24.000]  And so then they got the numbers and called them and verified they had come from they had come from Libby's family.
[02:51:25.700 --> 02:51:34.620]  The impression I got, they didn't ask specifically, but the impression I got from the cell phone guy, the witness.
[02:51:37.120 --> 02:51:39.480]  Banner, I think his name was Banner.
[02:51:42.540 --> 02:51:51.860]  He had indicated that, like, for example, the iPhone, the iPad wasn't going to be able to like mess with the location data for that for that for that phone.
[02:51:52.140 --> 02:52:02.200]  But I would expect it would be possible if they're both on the same iCloud account that they could interact with the cloud.
[02:52:02.920 --> 02:52:05.720]  The storage, the things that are on the phone.
[02:52:07.960 --> 02:52:14.720]  Otherwise, I don't think there would probably be much much that they would affect each other.
[02:52:16.320 --> 02:52:21.120]  Can't say it didn't happen, you know, can't say it did, for sure, but can't say it didn't happen.
[02:52:21.540 --> 02:52:25.260]  Hopefully we'll hear more about that as we get more.
[02:52:26.940 --> 02:52:31.660]  More expert testimony and hopefully a defense expert as well.
[02:52:31.820 --> 02:52:41.720]  Maybe has done kind of a, you know, follow up on some of these areas that the ISP seemed to not prioritize things like this iPad.
[02:52:42.700 --> 02:52:45.420]  SV with a super sticker. Thank you so much for that.
[02:52:45.440 --> 02:52:51.160]  And CBC Florida court reporter with a super sticker. Awesome. Thank you so much.
[02:52:51.160 --> 02:52:57.120]  Laurie Lee Annie. I appreciate all your time, care, attention, consideration and sleep deprivation.
[02:52:57.280 --> 02:53:00.400]  Yay for food and water in the courthouse. I agree.
[02:53:01.260 --> 02:53:05.400]  It's such a small thing, but it just feels like a glorious gift.
[02:53:06.200 --> 02:53:11.440]  Also a brilliant filing. Thank you for that. It was like I said, it was one I really enjoyed.
[02:53:11.560 --> 02:53:13.520]  I actually enjoyed writing that.
[02:53:14.120 --> 02:53:19.340]  You don't often get a situation where the law is pretty, pretty clearly.
[02:53:20.600 --> 02:53:22.280]  On your side.
[02:53:24.000 --> 02:53:29.020]  So, Dr. Tiny Toff. Andrea Burkhart. Really can't thank you enough for doing this for all of us.
[02:53:29.020 --> 02:53:34.440]  Your notes are so detailed and organized and your dedication to the law and the public is admirable and appreciated.
[02:53:34.540 --> 02:53:38.440]  Well, that's such a kind thing to say, and I really appreciate it.
[02:53:38.680 --> 02:53:42.000]  Ashley Hesson with a super sticker. A to Z.
[02:53:42.020 --> 02:53:46.320]  They kept out key evidence in Rittenhouse based on this same theory.
[02:53:46.320 --> 02:53:51.440]  Is this which theory? I don't remember. See, I didn't watch Rittenhouse.
[02:53:51.440 --> 02:53:55.520]  I might be one of the only people that didn't, but I didn't.
[02:53:55.760 --> 02:54:01.460]  I remember it was I was very busy at work when that trial was happening, so I didn't really get to follow it.
[02:54:02.640 --> 02:54:06.000]  I remember I remember some forensic stuff being an issue.
[02:54:06.000 --> 02:54:18.580]  Do I definitely remember the the the point and point and point and drag or point and click or point and something to do with the modifying the the image when it's displayed?
[02:54:18.580 --> 02:54:25.520]  They're definitely doing that in this courtroom, but, you know, nobody seems to complain about it.
[02:54:27.020 --> 02:54:28.120]  Not third party culprit.
[02:54:29.900 --> 02:54:32.780]  Yeah, I don't know the theory. If somebody knows the theory, let me know.
[02:54:32.780 --> 02:54:39.060]  Amanda Jones with a super sticker. Thank you so much. Sue Kandel. Thank you. Well, thank you, Sue. Appreciate your support.
[02:54:39.700 --> 02:54:45.820]  Lisa Shelton. Are we to assume no witness lineup with Richard Allen? If one was done, would they be forced to share the info?
[02:54:46.180 --> 02:55:01.740]  I think we can safely assume there has been no lineup with Richard Allen because these certainly with these witnesses, they would have been asked about it by whichever side benefited from that information being brought out at trial, just like an in court identification.
[02:55:01.740 --> 02:55:08.980]  If they knew what the witness was going to say, the person who that benefits, they would have asked. So that just leads me to think nobody's asked them.
[02:55:09.360 --> 02:55:16.660]  Nobody wants to ask because they're afraid of the answer. That's what I think. That's why I was hoping the jury would ask it.
[02:55:17.640 --> 02:55:24.860]  Freedom ring. Did defense move to suppress in court identification? I don't believe so. I don't recall seeing that.
[02:55:26.340 --> 02:55:37.320]  I would not expect that to be granted anyway. They might argue it. There have been arguments made to not allow in court identification. It's suggestive.
[02:55:37.420 --> 02:55:42.780]  You know, obviously you're going to pick the guy who's sitting there at council table because you know he's the one that you're supposed to identify.
[02:55:44.180 --> 02:55:55.760]  But by and large, courts allow this. They say that essentially the opportunity to tailor the identification goes to the weight that the jury should give it and not the ability to do it in the first place.
[02:55:56.180 --> 02:56:00.790]  So even if they had brought that motion, I do not think Judge Kenoni would have granted it.
[02:56:05.500 --> 02:56:11.100]  I do. I think the exclusion of the third party culprit evidence is a big mistake. I do.
[02:56:11.100 --> 02:56:21.780]  I think they had more than enough to meet the standard. I think the standard itself is questionable under constitutional grounds. But even if you apply that standard, I think they met it.
[02:56:22.020 --> 02:56:30.420]  I think that if you require a direct a direct connection, a confession of somebody to it, that's a connection. That's a direct connection.
[02:56:30.880 --> 02:56:39.080]  Somebody implicating themselves and their associates in it. That's a pretty direct connection. So yeah, I think he's got a good chance on appeal.
[02:56:39.980 --> 02:56:48.760]  The squid could classifying your YouTube channel as an independent media outlet and print out your own badge. Get around the court's arbitrary definition of media.
[02:56:48.960 --> 02:57:07.340]  No, it would not. Their definition is very specific and it requires an association, a relationship of some kind, either a representative or an employee, a very specific category of news organizations, a newspaper, a periodical, a wire service, things like that.
[02:57:07.340 --> 02:57:18.340]  So I do not have that relationship. I don't intend to get or have that relationship because, frankly, I don't want to be beholden to those outlets. So I will not get a press pass.
[02:57:18.820 --> 02:57:32.280]  And that's fine. Frankly, the press pass is only getting people in approximately every other day anyway, because just like the public, there's so many members of the media that want to attend that they have to allocate the badges among themselves.
[02:57:32.280 --> 02:57:38.740]  So they have basically a drawing for them. And the way that it has worked out is basically you get to be there every other day.
[02:57:39.340 --> 02:57:48.680]  So I suppose, you know, best case scenario is you got the assured seat every other day so that you can sleep in and then you just go sit in the public line on the days that you can't.
[02:57:48.680 --> 02:57:56.960]  It might be a little bit of a break, but I don't know. I don't know that it really matters at this point. Honestly, I will be sleeping in the line and that's totally fine.
[02:57:57.660 --> 02:58:07.600]  Catherine Joy with a super sticker. Thank you so much. St. Simon Trent. There are people in our Delphi docs offering to sit there overnight to save your spot. Contact mod. Okay.
[02:58:08.240 --> 02:58:14.360]  Well, I will look into that. I will maybe check that out while I'm sitting there in the line tomorrow morning.
[02:58:15.100 --> 02:58:25.140]  It's about the only time I get a moment to look at my phone and check my notifications and stuff. So I will reiterate, by the way, I've had so many people reach out.
[02:58:25.140 --> 02:58:32.920]  People email me, people tagging me and things, people sending me direct messages, and I cannot possibly keep up with all of them.
[02:58:33.400 --> 02:58:41.280]  I hope nobody is getting the impression that I'm not interested or don't care or I'm blowing people off. I just honestly don't have time to keep up with all of it.
[02:58:41.280 --> 02:58:46.160]  So I do apologize for that, but it's just the nature of what we are going through right now.
[02:58:46.480 --> 02:58:50.860]  But anyway, I might check that out while I'm sitting there overnight and see if I can set something up.
[02:58:50.860 --> 02:58:55.840]  Jessica Pinkymingo, put the hand warmers in your socks. Amazon in bulk. That is a great idea.
[02:58:56.040 --> 02:59:06.960]  Honestly, that's a great idea. I have a little mental list of things I might go try to pick up this weekend if I'm going to continue this sleeping outside venture.
[02:59:07.880 --> 02:59:13.700]  I was thinking I need to find like a mini hammock, you know, like a little tripod stand hammock.
[02:59:13.700 --> 02:59:24.980]  That would be it would just be so much more comfortable for sleeping purposes than a little a little camp chair that like has no neck rest and you're stuck upright and that kind of thing.
[02:59:25.100 --> 02:59:28.400]  Big old box of the hand warmers is also a great idea.
[02:59:29.260 --> 02:59:33.860]  Krabb, thank you for being there for us. It is my pleasure to be there.
[02:59:34.060 --> 02:59:37.140]  Claude Simeon, mild discomfort leads to boxing conditioning.
[02:59:37.140 --> 02:59:47.980]  You know, my that's really my only like grievance about the loss of sleep and then not being able to eat and so forth is it's going to affect my conditioning very badly.
[02:59:48.040 --> 02:59:57.260]  In fact, I had a moment this this this morning that kind of brought home to me like, OK, I don't feel really that bad, you know, subjectively.
[02:59:57.380 --> 03:00:00.440]  But it is certainly having an impact on me.
[03:00:01.120 --> 03:00:04.740]  When we go into the courthouse in the morning, we clear security.
[03:00:05.040 --> 03:00:11.040]  Everybody kind of sprints up to the third floor where the courtroom is because the line reforms outside the courtroom.
[03:00:11.080 --> 03:00:16.780]  We always have to wait 30, 45 minutes or so before they will open the courtroom and let us in.
[03:00:17.740 --> 03:00:22.740]  So there's a sprint up the stairs. It's these two flights of these curved marble stairs.
[03:00:23.320 --> 03:00:27.220]  So this morning I get in and I'm, you know, getting my way up the stairs.
[03:00:27.220 --> 03:00:36.580]  And look, running stairs, not a problem for me. OK, like this is not like when I'm when I'm when I'm in good boxing shape,
[03:00:36.720 --> 03:00:43.240]  my conditioning is certainly good enough to handle that without, you know, breaking a sweat, having an issue.
[03:00:43.680 --> 03:00:46.380]  I was huffing and puffing at the top. I was short of breath.
[03:00:46.460 --> 03:00:52.300]  And that's when I realized, oh, my Lord, you know, this this is really this is really affecting me.
[03:00:52.300 --> 03:00:57.940]  So that's really my only concern about it is that I keep this up for a month.
[03:00:57.940 --> 03:01:00.740]  I go home and go to the gym. I'm going to get my ass kicked.
[03:01:00.740 --> 03:01:03.560]  Guys, the first time I get back in there.
[03:01:04.340 --> 03:01:08.540]  But that's just part of the nature of all that as well.
[03:01:08.540 --> 03:01:13.860]  That is boxing for you. Amaranta Arcadia Castillo Gomez.
[03:01:14.220 --> 03:01:18.720]  Thank you so much for the super chat. Martha Davis with a super sticker.
[03:01:18.720 --> 03:01:20.020]  Thank you for that.
[03:01:20.340 --> 03:01:23.440]  Gianna found a couple offers to sit in line for you on Reddit.
[03:01:23.720 --> 03:01:27.520]  Also wool socks with boots are essential. I am wearing my wool socks.
[03:01:27.660 --> 03:01:29.340]  I'm actually I'm wearing two pairs of socks.
[03:01:29.400 --> 03:01:34.680]  I'm wearing the thin it's not wool, but it's not cotton.
[03:01:34.960 --> 03:01:37.440]  It's like the it's like the synthetic wool type sock.
[03:01:37.480 --> 03:01:42.020]  And then over that, my nice, thick wool hiking socks.
[03:01:42.180 --> 03:01:44.740]  Still cold, still cold.
[03:01:45.060 --> 03:01:47.500]  I think part of it is just because, you know, when you sleep,
[03:01:47.500 --> 03:01:49.620]  your body temperature goes down anyway.
[03:01:50.720 --> 03:01:54.860]  And the temperature trends here are that it gets colder.
[03:01:55.100 --> 03:01:57.740]  Like the coldest point is like seven in the morning, you know,
[03:01:57.780 --> 03:01:59.280]  right before the sun comes up.
[03:02:00.720 --> 03:02:05.560]  So the temperature management has been such an issue because we're so cold overnight.
[03:02:05.560 --> 03:02:07.000]  So got all these layers on.
[03:02:07.500 --> 03:02:11.120]  And then, like, for example, when I left court today this afternoon,
[03:02:11.180 --> 03:02:13.020]  we finished about five, you know, five o'clock.
[03:02:13.020 --> 03:02:14.320]  I stayed till about five fifteen.
[03:02:14.640 --> 03:02:16.560]  It was seventy seven degrees outside.
[03:02:16.560 --> 03:02:17.740]  So it's real warm.
[03:02:18.200 --> 03:02:20.720]  And we have these points over the course of the day
[03:02:20.720 --> 03:02:24.080]  where you just you can't quite tell if you're cold or if you're hot.
[03:02:25.420 --> 03:02:27.040]  It's it's disconcerting.
[03:02:27.460 --> 03:02:30.670]  But we're, you know, we're getting we're getting it figured out.
[03:02:31.540 --> 03:02:32.980]  Sarita Banana with a super sticker.
[03:02:33.180 --> 03:02:34.800]  Thank you so much for that.
[03:02:34.940 --> 03:02:35.800]  Law Kong Express.
[03:02:35.880 --> 03:02:39.420]  Ground zero is the mailboxes, mailboxes, mailboxes of this trial.
[03:02:39.520 --> 03:02:41.760]  See Zachariah in the mailboxes in his trial.
[03:02:41.920 --> 03:02:44.790]  Yeah, yeah, I suspect it probably is.
[03:02:45.590 --> 03:02:48.870]  Nick Stero gifted five Andrea Burkhart memberships.
[03:02:48.950 --> 03:02:50.310]  Well, thank you so much for that.
[03:02:50.490 --> 03:02:52.930]  Thanks on behalf of everybody who got one of those.
[03:02:53.810 --> 03:02:55.550]  That's a shame. Thank you, Andrea.
[03:02:55.710 --> 03:02:56.950]  Is there any way we can help?
[03:02:57.010 --> 03:02:59.330]  Can we send snacks, blankets, legal pads?
[03:02:59.670 --> 03:03:00.590]  You guys are good.
[03:03:00.630 --> 03:03:04.210]  I honestly just appreciate the support, the eyes.
[03:03:04.430 --> 03:03:06.110]  The encouragement is awesome.
[03:03:06.910 --> 03:03:08.870]  You know, I'm big into moral support.
[03:03:08.950 --> 03:03:11.090]  So you guys give me a lot of that.
[03:03:11.090 --> 03:03:15.310]  That's a big boost and helps me get through it all.
[03:03:16.050 --> 03:03:17.130]  Elizabeth with a super sticker.
[03:03:17.430 --> 03:03:18.450]  Thank you so much.
[03:03:18.590 --> 03:03:21.650]  Priscilla Stevenson with just a 1999 super chat.
[03:03:21.750 --> 03:03:23.070]  Thank you so much.
[03:03:23.450 --> 03:03:24.690]  Really appreciate that.
[03:03:25.070 --> 03:03:25.690]  Michelle C.
[03:03:25.930 --> 03:03:32.670]  Andrea, do you think that Abby and or Libby's families know that you are there because you have a lot of doubt about R.A.'s guilt?
[03:03:32.910 --> 03:03:35.070]  If so, does anyone react to you?
[03:03:35.070 --> 03:03:36.470]  Thank you for all that you're doing.
[03:03:37.330 --> 03:03:38.990]  I really don't know.
[03:03:38.990 --> 03:03:41.370]  I don't know if they know who I am.
[03:03:41.430 --> 03:03:43.290]  I don't know if they've watched any of my stuff.
[03:03:43.310 --> 03:03:47.170]  I don't know if they have thoughts about what they think I think.
[03:03:47.370 --> 03:03:50.750]  You know, I'm a skeptic by nature.
[03:03:52.070 --> 03:03:53.930]  I consider that scientific.
[03:03:54.070 --> 03:03:55.790]  That is a scientific perspective.
[03:03:56.650 --> 03:03:59.490]  Be skeptical and tell something something can be proven.
[03:04:00.570 --> 03:04:06.010]  So it's not really an unusual perspective for me to take to a criminal case to be skeptical.
[03:04:06.950 --> 03:04:18.170]  But it is true that in this particular case, I just I feel like there is a lot of reason to be skeptical because the evidence seems so thin and so much of it doesn't seem to add up.
[03:04:19.270 --> 03:04:24.710]  You know, all the things we've gone over many, many times just with what's come out in the evidence so far.
[03:04:25.510 --> 03:04:30.470]  I have not had any kind of like negative reaction with anybody in the family.
[03:04:30.470 --> 03:04:38.470]  Today, when I was sitting on the side of the courtroom in the afternoon, the side of the courtroom, I don't really like because you don't have the view of the screen.
[03:04:38.810 --> 03:04:43.010]  I am directly behind the the rows that are allocated to family there.
[03:04:43.370 --> 03:04:48.050]  I had a brief interaction with somebody and it was fine.
[03:04:48.230 --> 03:04:51.290]  You know, you run into them in the halls and in the restrooms and stuff.
[03:04:51.590 --> 03:04:53.750]  I really haven't had any any indication.
[03:04:53.970 --> 03:04:56.390]  So I'm not in a position to say.
[03:04:56.390 --> 03:05:06.730]  I certainly hope that they don't take my being there or my position personally or, you know, wrong.
[03:05:06.830 --> 03:05:10.110]  I'm there to find out what happened to their loved ones.
[03:05:10.110 --> 03:05:12.610]  I want to know. I want justice for them.
[03:05:12.630 --> 03:05:14.470]  I think just like everybody does.
[03:05:14.710 --> 03:05:19.490]  And I want to be sure that if this guy is going to be punished for it, that he's the one that did it.
[03:05:19.490 --> 03:05:23.010]  And so so far, you know, I'm skeptical of that.
[03:05:23.010 --> 03:05:29.390]  And therefore, I don't think it would be particularly justice for their loved ones.
[03:05:29.510 --> 03:05:36.190]  At this point, based on what I've seen, if if he's convicted of it, there's still a lot of trial to go and everything can change.
[03:05:36.250 --> 03:05:39.370]  So I'm going to continue to have an open mind about it.
[03:05:39.950 --> 03:05:48.750]  The big thing that I've said, you know, many times is that this whole argument that if you knew details about the crime that he confessed to, like Mr.
[03:05:48.750 --> 03:05:50.690]  McClellan said, that's a big problem.
[03:05:51.210 --> 03:06:03.430]  If those are if those are real details, specific details, not things that he could have guessed and not things that were just ultimately prompted to him, then then that's a very difficult hurdle to overcome.
[03:06:03.870 --> 03:06:07.850]  So I am waiting to see more information about that.
[03:06:08.030 --> 03:06:11.090]  But ultimately, I feel like my perspective is what the law requires.
[03:06:11.090 --> 03:06:14.330]  I'm supposed to go in and assume he is and to be skeptical.
[03:06:14.330 --> 03:06:17.890]  And once the state proves it, I'll change my mind.
[03:06:19.050 --> 03:06:22.050]  Catastrophe K8. Have you heard anything go about your motion?
[03:06:22.130 --> 03:06:24.190]  Nothing at all. Not a peep.
[03:06:24.950 --> 03:06:27.670]  And like I said, I'm not necessarily expecting that.
[03:06:28.090 --> 03:06:31.250]  Yvonne McLaren became a member. Thank you so much. Welcome.
[03:06:31.750 --> 03:06:35.150]  Cromley Lux Re corporation with the Super Chat. Thank you for that.
[03:06:35.290 --> 03:06:38.510]  Muzzy Bear is a YouTube member. Welcome, Muzzy. Welcome back.
[03:06:38.670 --> 03:06:41.410]  Good to see you here. Muzzy is a big supporter.
[03:06:41.410 --> 03:06:43.570]  She's on my sub stack.
[03:06:44.610 --> 03:06:48.630]  She's here on YouTube and really, really happy to see you here.
[03:06:49.910 --> 03:06:52.930]  Shell Urba. Andrea, you are so beautiful inside and out.
[03:06:53.090 --> 03:06:56.970]  I usually hate the sentiment and think it's trite, but it's just so true when it comes to you.
[03:06:57.050 --> 03:06:59.590]  Well, thank you. And I especially appreciate that.
[03:06:59.590 --> 03:07:05.970]  When you are getting me at about as casual as as humans ever see me on this planet.
[03:07:07.970 --> 03:07:11.070]  That's just, you know, that's just how it's going to be with this one.
[03:07:11.070 --> 03:07:14.790]  You guys are forgiving. I appreciate it. Thank you so much.
[03:07:15.090 --> 03:07:18.110]  You really make me you really make me feel good about that.
[03:07:18.290 --> 03:07:24.470]  Every woman has their insecurities, you know, and so so it's really nice to hear things like that.
[03:07:24.750 --> 03:07:30.770]  Lisa Shelton, did they do any testing of that area and tell about it with the blood of one victim or both there?
[03:07:30.790 --> 03:07:33.950]  So they did swab it. That's all we've learned so far.
[03:07:33.950 --> 03:07:40.810]  I expect that we won't get any more details until we start getting into the the analysts,
[03:07:40.990 --> 03:07:45.750]  the DNA analysts and the other forensic analysts and the testing that they did.
[03:07:45.750 --> 03:07:48.490]  They will be the ones that communicate the results of that.
[03:07:48.670 --> 03:07:51.870]  So we know that they have swabs to get that information.
[03:07:51.930 --> 03:07:54.730]  What the results are, we have not heard yet.
[03:07:55.330 --> 03:07:57.610]  Elizabeth, do you think Richard Allen is guilty?
[03:07:57.610 --> 03:08:03.930]  I personally do not. At this point, based on what I have seen, I am a vote to acquit.
[03:08:05.310 --> 03:08:08.090]  But like I've said, there is still a lot of trial to go.
[03:08:08.130 --> 03:08:11.550]  I have not closed that door by any by any means.
[03:08:12.610 --> 03:08:18.970]  But I do think there are a lot of hurdles the state is going to have to overcome so far to convince me.
[03:08:19.650 --> 03:08:21.110]  Sally, impressive recaps.
[03:08:21.190 --> 03:08:23.970]  So many of us appreciate you being our eyes and ears.
[03:08:23.970 --> 03:08:28.510]  Well, I appreciate that. I'm happy to do it.
[03:08:29.490 --> 03:08:33.270]  It's a it's a great adventure. This whole this whole experience.
[03:08:33.910 --> 03:08:39.730]  Jason Sorensen, on a scale of corrupt versus absolutely corrupt, do you rate Judge Dole?
[03:08:39.830 --> 03:08:45.210]  Judge Goll. The only reason not to stream trials is they want to cover up their corruption.
[03:08:45.490 --> 03:08:47.250]  I don't want to assume she's corrupt.
[03:08:47.470 --> 03:08:53.050]  You know, I'm one of those people that I typically am going to assume
[03:08:53.050 --> 03:09:00.270]  there is a more like non malicious reason for for people for people's behavior.
[03:09:00.270 --> 03:09:02.530]  I like to give people the benefit of the doubt.
[03:09:02.530 --> 03:09:07.330]  I'm typically going to assume incompetence over malice, for example.
[03:09:09.670 --> 03:09:12.110]  I'm not I'm not going to jump to corruption.
[03:09:12.450 --> 03:09:19.850]  I am concerned that she seems to have a perspective that the law is advisory,
[03:09:19.850 --> 03:09:28.410]  that her judgment, her opinion, her views about how things should be done.
[03:09:29.130 --> 03:09:31.690]  Trump, what the law says needs to be done.
[03:09:31.710 --> 03:09:38.690]  And I feel that this concern is just borne out specifically by the pattern of behavior
[03:09:38.690 --> 03:09:41.490]  that relates to the publicly accessible stuff.
[03:09:42.490 --> 03:09:46.590]  She wants this under wraps. I don't know if she wants it under wraps for corrupt reasons.
[03:09:46.590 --> 03:09:48.090]  I'm not going to assume that.
[03:09:48.650 --> 03:09:54.030]  Or if she wants it under wraps, she could be, you know, she could have a good faith reason,
[03:09:54.070 --> 03:09:59.550]  a good faith belief that it's better for better for the process, more fair to Mr.
[03:09:59.790 --> 03:10:02.370]  Allen, better for the community, all that.
[03:10:02.710 --> 03:10:09.550]  If everything is just limited to inside that courtroom and the outside exposure is minimized.
[03:10:09.590 --> 03:10:13.990]  The problem is that the law does not feel the same way.
[03:10:13.990 --> 03:10:17.790]  So she doesn't get to override that.
[03:10:18.150 --> 03:10:21.770]  That's the problem that I have with with Judge Gull.
[03:10:22.810 --> 03:10:27.410]  Twelve feet travels. I'm a former big law attorney attorney. LinkedIn message for help.
[03:10:27.470 --> 03:10:30.470]  Oh, I'll check that out. I am almost never on LinkedIn.
[03:10:30.470 --> 03:10:35.330]  I kind of forgot that I was on it for a long time, so I will have to go check that out.
[03:10:35.330 --> 03:10:36.990]  Thanks for giving me the heads up.
[03:10:37.910 --> 03:10:41.210]  Michigan Farm Boy, appreciate all the effort you were putting in for us.
[03:10:41.210 --> 03:10:43.970]  Well, thank you. I appreciate all of your support.
[03:10:44.750 --> 03:10:47.590]  People in court, what did you file? Where to watch this?
[03:10:47.810 --> 03:10:52.950]  I filed a motion for public access to the exhibits that are being filed.
[03:10:53.190 --> 03:11:00.250]  I want us in the courtroom to be able to go in and look at them the same way that the credentialed media is being allowed to go in and look at them.
[03:11:00.410 --> 03:11:05.690]  Because there is no basis in the law for distinguishing between the media and the public at large.
[03:11:06.050 --> 03:11:09.510]  Public access is public access. It is for all of us.
[03:11:09.510 --> 03:11:14.670]  And then I am also requesting access to the audio recordings of the trial.
[03:11:15.670 --> 03:11:19.490]  I sincerely believe that this whole process would be better.
[03:11:19.490 --> 03:11:22.270]  It would be more dignified. It would be healthier.
[03:11:22.670 --> 03:11:31.970]  Fewer people would be competing for these limited public seats in this courtroom if we were simply able to listen to what was happening remotely.
[03:11:32.010 --> 03:11:34.890]  Just like they did with the Daybell trial.
[03:11:35.450 --> 03:11:40.170]  Didn't have the cameras in there, but they would release the audio recording at the end of the day.
[03:11:40.530 --> 03:11:42.450]  Everybody could then go in and listen to it.
[03:11:42.650 --> 03:11:50.070]  That is a good middle ground of providing access while at the same time not having the full circus, the cameras on people.
[03:11:51.210 --> 03:12:01.610]  The evidence that I can understand not wanting, for example, all the terrible photographs that we saw yesterday up on YouTube.
[03:12:01.730 --> 03:12:04.870]  Of course nobody would want that. I can sympathize with that.
[03:12:04.870 --> 03:12:07.350]  So that to me seems like a good middle ground.
[03:12:07.510 --> 03:12:14.590]  But more importantly, the law says those audio recordings are a court record and that court records are available to the public.
[03:12:14.730 --> 03:12:18.010]  So we are entitled to them. We should get them.
[03:12:18.170 --> 03:12:22.690]  That's the motion I filed. If you go to my sub stack, I posted it all there.
[03:12:23.450 --> 03:12:28.870]  My sub stack you can just find by putting my name in. It's andreaberkhart.substack.com.
[03:12:29.490 --> 03:12:32.410]  I've got the link also in my channel description.
[03:12:33.210 --> 03:12:38.310]  That's where you can go look for it. Run the world. You're the only coverage that I trust on this case.
[03:12:38.370 --> 03:12:40.830]  So glad I found this channel. Thanks. Well, thank you.
[03:12:41.070 --> 03:12:44.290]  I will say there are a lot of good people covering this case.
[03:12:44.610 --> 03:12:47.130]  Lawyer Lee has been doing a wonderful job.
[03:12:47.210 --> 03:12:52.470]  I mentioned I counted on her recap for Saturday when I wasn't able to attend the court.
[03:12:52.870 --> 03:12:55.050]  It was wonderful, very thorough.
[03:12:55.350 --> 03:13:01.850]  We are often in communication in the courtroom, like sharing, sharing our thoughts and what we see in our notes and so forth.
[03:13:02.610 --> 03:13:06.590]  So she's doing a wonderful job. Bob and Ali Mata have been in and out of court.
[03:13:06.630 --> 03:13:11.170]  They've been on this case for a long time and know a lot of the details inside and out.
[03:13:11.350 --> 03:13:13.930]  So they are very good sources as well.
[03:13:14.510 --> 03:13:20.030]  I just want to encourage people to, by all means, check out alternative stuff.
[03:13:20.850 --> 03:13:26.810]  Like part of the problem we're having with the scheduling, too, is because we have limited time to stream.
[03:13:26.850 --> 03:13:28.530]  We have to do it all at the same time.
[03:13:28.530 --> 03:13:31.270]  So I'm sure Lee is streaming at the same time that I am streaming.
[03:13:31.270 --> 03:13:32.890]  It means you can't really watch us both.
[03:13:33.170 --> 03:13:37.910]  I'd encourage you if you're really interested in this case, you know, and you're watching my channel, go watch.
[03:13:38.030 --> 03:13:39.130]  Go watch hers on replay.
[03:13:39.270 --> 03:13:43.150]  You know, she's going to have very good, very good input as well.
[03:13:43.810 --> 03:13:50.510]  So we are fortunate in this case to have several good eyes on on this particular case.
[03:13:52.590 --> 03:13:57.310]  KP, could they estimate Bridge Guy's height based on where he's standing in the photo?
[03:13:57.410 --> 03:13:59.030]  I wondered about this, too.
[03:13:59.030 --> 03:14:00.470]  I don't know.
[03:14:00.750 --> 03:14:02.510]  It seems like they should be able to.
[03:14:02.550 --> 03:14:06.850]  And I wonder if the defense is going to be able to to present something like that.
[03:14:07.310 --> 03:14:13.630]  My only concern is if this photo is is high quality enough to really be able to do that.
[03:14:14.030 --> 03:14:17.130]  But what they what they have is they have the height of the rail.
[03:14:18.230 --> 03:14:24.530]  They have the ties that go across and then the rail that runs the length of the bridge.
[03:14:24.550 --> 03:14:28.010]  And so that extends a certain height above the ties.
[03:14:28.010 --> 03:14:30.230]  They would be able to go out and measure that.
[03:14:30.370 --> 03:14:32.690]  And that would then give them a scale for this photo.
[03:14:32.710 --> 03:14:36.770]  And they can then see how many railroad ties high is Bridge Guy.
[03:14:37.450 --> 03:14:40.070]  So it seems to me like it would be possible.
[03:14:40.330 --> 03:14:42.690]  I just don't know if it's been done.
[03:14:42.690 --> 03:14:55.030]  I don't know if it can be done with what's available in a way that is, you know, sufficiently rigorous to to to be the kind of thing that should be admitted in court.
[03:14:55.030 --> 03:15:02.250]  You know, I'm a big advocate for what is in court as scientific evidence should actually be scientific.
[03:15:02.390 --> 03:15:09.310]  So I would want to be sure that, you know, this this method is legitimate and we're not just thrown thrown out, you know, thrown out junk.
[03:15:09.350 --> 03:15:10.930]  There's enough junk in the courtrooms.
[03:15:12.390 --> 03:15:15.590]  But yes, theoretically, it seems to me like that should be possible.
[03:15:15.590 --> 03:15:19.390]  And I will be looking forward to seeing if we get something like that.
[03:15:20.410 --> 03:15:23.510]  All right, guys, it is late. It is ten fifteen.
[03:15:23.510 --> 03:15:27.090]  I'm going to get a little bit less sleep in my bed tonight.
[03:15:27.210 --> 03:15:40.650]  But I am going to be hopping straight into it so that I can get back out onto that courthouse step and try to get a little bit better at at the outside sleeping and get back in there in the courtroom for tomorrow.
[03:15:41.110 --> 03:15:44.130]  So Wednesday, we're halfway through the week, almost.
[03:15:44.130 --> 03:15:45.250]  We will be tomorrow.
[03:15:45.510 --> 03:15:46.950]  We're going to get through this, guys.
[03:15:47.590 --> 03:15:48.750]  We're going to get through it.
[03:15:49.270 --> 03:15:51.450]  I'm confident we're going to make it work.
[03:15:51.450 --> 03:16:01.150]  And yes, I might take a little a little bit of a little bit of some biological wear and tear, but it's it won't hurt my attitude.
[03:16:02.030 --> 03:16:03.230]  It won't hurt my attitude.
[03:16:03.370 --> 03:16:09.750]  I still feel good about this whole process, about what we're doing here and the importance of having eyes on this trial.
[03:16:09.810 --> 03:16:11.190]  I am undeterred.
[03:16:12.490 --> 03:16:15.270]  So thank you again, everybody, for being here.
[03:16:15.370 --> 03:16:16.610]  Thank you for your support.
[03:16:17.430 --> 03:16:20.750]  I'm going to go check out that Reddit page tomorrow.
[03:16:20.750 --> 03:16:23.910]  See if maybe we can we can make that a little bit easier.
[03:16:24.270 --> 03:16:28.370]  But really do appreciate all of your encouragement, your kind comments.
[03:16:29.170 --> 03:16:35.090]  Obviously, of course, your super chats, your your questions, your financial contributions, all of it.
[03:16:35.090 --> 03:16:36.830]  It really means a lot to me.
[03:16:38.750 --> 03:16:43.750]  And just really, I feel, you know, I feel very validated about about what we're doing here.
[03:16:44.770 --> 03:16:50.430]  So I enjoy being being the eyes being the eyes for the public and the voice for the public in this process.
[03:16:50.430 --> 03:16:56.090]  It's it's a heavy responsibility, but it's one that I take on very willingly.
[03:16:56.290 --> 03:16:59.270]  So with that, guys, I'm going to say good night.
[03:16:59.270 --> 03:17:05.330]  I'm going to go get some shut eye and I will see you guys on stream tomorrow.
[03:17:05.890 --> 03:17:07.290]  Same bat time, same bat channel.
[03:17:07.470 --> 03:17:09.750]  Aim to be back here at seven o'clock with our recap.
[03:17:10.010 --> 03:17:12.290]  So I will see you then.
[03:17:12.470 --> 03:17:17.250]  And in the meantime, have a wonderful evening and take care of yourselves.