Commonwealth v. Read — Trial ArchiveJennifer McCabe - Cross (Part 2)
460 linesCOURT OFFICER: ...is now in session. You may be seated.
JUDGE CANNONE: I understand counsel wants to see me, but can it wait? Can we get started with the testimony? It's already 9:15.
MR. YANNETTI: We can, with regard to three of the four issues. But with regard to one of them, it applies to this witness's testimony.
JUDGE CANNONE: All right. So I'll hear from Mr. Jackson about that, since it's this witness. Why don't we come over here and do it while we bring the jurors in? Okay.
COURT OFFICER: All persons having any business before The Honorable Beverly Cannone, Justice of the Norfolk Superior Court and for the County of Norfolk, draw near, give your attendance, it shall be heard. God save the Commonwealth. Massachusetts Superior Court is now in session. You may be seated.
COURT CLERK: 2117, the Commonwealth versus Karen Read. Can I have counsel identify themselves for the record?
MR. LALLY: Adam Lally for the Commonwealth. Good morning.
JUDGE CANNONE: Morning.
MS. MCLAUGHLIN: Laura McLaughlin for the Commonwealth. Good morning, Your Honor.
JUDGE CANNONE: Good morning.
MR. JACKSON: Alan Jackson on behalf of the defendant. Morning.
JUDGE CANNONE: Morning, Mr. Jackson.
MR. JACKSON: Morning, Your Honor.
MS. LITTLE: Elizabeth Little, also for the defendant. Good morning.
JUDGE CANNONE: Good morning, Miss Little. Good morning.
MR. YANNETTI: David Yannetti for Ms. Read. Morning.
JUDGE CANNONE: Mr. Yannetti, good morning. Good morning, Ms. Read. Good morning. So the county was kind enough to come in last night and make sure that the air conditioning was working. They were here late. They did a really terrific job, so I think everybody should be comfortable today. I do have to ask you those same three questions. Were you all able to follow the instructions and refrain from discussing this case with anyone since we left yesterday? Everyone said yes or nodded affirmatively. Were you also able to refrain from doing any independent research or investigation into this case? Everyone said yes or nodded affirmatively. Did anyone happen to see, hear, or read anything about this case since we left yesterday?
JUDGE CANNONE: Everyone said no. All right. May we have Miss Read— Miss— Sorry, Miss McCabe, please?
COURT CLERK: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
MS. MCCABE: I do.
JUDGE CANNONE: All right. Mr. Jackson, whenever you're ready.
MR. JACKSON: Thank you, Your Honor. Ms. McCabe, as a matter of housekeeping, I want to show you a quick set of documents that you saw yesterday, but I just want to make sure that we were talking about the same thing. Your Honor, with the Court's permission, may I approach? Can you just take a look at that and tell me if that appears to be the same set of documents that we talked about yesterday that included the group chats?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. Your Honor, may— I don't need to rush you. Your Honor, with the Court's permission, I would ask that this set of group chats be admitted into evidence. And is there any objection?
JUDGE CANNONE: Is there any objection?
MR. LALLY: No, Your Honor.
JUDGE CANNONE: They may come into evidence. A bit— [Exhibit] 98 covers more than what you covered yesterday. Exact same document. I just failed to do it yesterday. My fault. All right. So is there still more? I'm just curious if my form's different from yours.
MR. JACKSON: Should be the exact same.
JUDGE CANNONE: Why don't I— why don't I take a look at the exhibit, please? Can we come to sidebar, please?
PARENTHETICAL: [Sidebar]
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes. All right, so that will come into evidence. And, jurors, sometimes I do have to repeat myself a bit, but this is again: before you can consider any electronic communication in your deliberations, you must first find that it's more likely true than not that the person who authored or sent these messages was in fact the person identified as doing so. If you do not find that it's more likely true than not that the person who was identified as doing so was the person who authored or sent or transmitted the electronic communication, then you may not consider that electronic communication in your deliberations. So, all right, Mr. Jackson, go right ahead.
MR. JACKSON: Thank you, Your Honor. Ms. McCabe, if you'll recall, yesterday we talked about the 12 times in your grand jury transcript that you talked about statements that you attributed to my client. You remember that conversation?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: And in those dozen times, you never used the word or the words or the phrase "I hit him." Correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: And your explanation for that was, well, I wasn't asked that specific question. Correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: You did, in fact, on January 29th— let me rephrase that just a little bit. You did, in fact, on January 29th seek to ask an officer to come back to 34 Fairview for the specific purpose of telling that officer something that you thought was important. Correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: Which officer was that?
MS. MCCABE: Michael Lank.
MR. JACKSON: And about what time did you ask Officer Lank to join you back at 34 Fairview?
MS. MCCABE: I'm not sure. I know it was in the a.m. I'm just not sure what time exactly.
MR. JACKSON: Somewhere around 9:00 a.m.? Does that sound about right?
MS. MCCABE: Possibly.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. So this— —literally, we're talking about just a couple of hours after the incident in question. Correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. Sergeant Lank came with Sergeant Gallagher, I believe. Correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: Came back to the location at 34 Fairview and gave you an opportunity to provide whatever information you deemed relevant at that time to impart to him. Correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: And isn't it true that at that time you didn't tell Sergeant Lank that my client said "I hit him"— what you said was that my client said "I hope I didn't hit him"? Correct?
MS. MCCABE: No.
MR. JACKSON: May I approach, Your Honor?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Page— the second to the last, or third to last page. Could you take a look at that report— just the face page— and tell me if that appears to be an incident report associated with this case? I know you didn't draft it, but do you recognize that that's an incident report from the Canton Police, specifically?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Could you turn to the tab— that's the little light blue tab— maybe three pages from the end of that report?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: I'd like you to read that paragraph to yourself, if you wouldn't mind, please. Do you have that in mind?
MS. MCCABE: I do. Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. May I approach, Your Honor?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Thank you. What you read just now appears to be a report of the incident in which Sergeant Lank came back to 34 Fairview to give you an opportunity to tell him whatever it was that you thought was important. Correct?
MS. MCCABE: Was that a full report, or is that just an excerpt from it?
MR. JACKSON: That paragraph right there is a full report of that incident of Sergeant Lank going back to 34 Fairview. Would you agree?
MS. MCCABE: Well, that's not a full report of what I said. But if that's his full report, it's his full report.
MR. JACKSON: And in this report, what he writes that you said to him—
MR. LALLY: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Objection sustained.
MR. JACKSON: Isn't it true that what you actually told Sergeant Lank when he returned is that while driving around with her— with her and Roberts looking for the victim— Miss Read said something to the effect of, quote, "I hope I didn't hit him," end quote? Isn't that what you told him?
MS. MCCABE: Yes, because she said that when we were driving around. And then— it— she—
MR. JACKSON: You went on to say, Ms. McCabe, that— quote— she, Karen Read, made these statements again at the scene when the victim was discovered. Correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: And then you went on to say she— Karen Read— I'm sorry— that you thought that Read may have made these same statements in front of a police officer, but she was not sure— meaning you were not sure. Correct?
MS. MCCABE: I was not sure if she made— what the police officers may have heard. That report is his recollection. My recollection is I told him that she said "I hit him, I hit him, I hit him," and I told him that he should ask the responders if they heard that, because it was a great possibility that they heard it as well.
MR. JACKSON: But none of that— you'll agree, you just read the report— none of that is in his report?
MS. MCCABE: That's a very brief report.
MR. JACKSON: I didn't ask you if it was brief. I asked you if it was in it.
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: Correct. And that's a report of a conversation that he had at 34 Fairview with you for the specific purpose of memorializing what you told him. Correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: And what you told him, according to Sergeant Lank, is she said one phrase: "I hope I didn't hit him." Correct?
MS. MCCABE: That's what's in the report.
MR. JACKSON: All right. And again, this was two and a half, three hours after the incident— not two and a half years later. Correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: Ms. McCabe, we talked yesterday about this unrecorded meeting that you had in front of Sergeant Lank's home on January 30th. Do you remember that conversation?
MS. MCCABE: I remember the conversation, yes.
MR. JACKSON: Have you had any other home visits with any other police officers involved in this case?
MS. MCCABE: I went to visit— I went to drop off. It was not a visit. It was myself with Kerry Roberts dropping her daughter off. There was no involvement of Mike Lank on this day.
MR. JACKSON: Have you been to the home— the personal residence— of any other police officer involved in this case ever?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Tell me who.
MS. MCCABE: Kevin Albert.
MR. JACKSON: Who else?
MS. MCCABE: I went to Elizabeth Proctor— the wife of Michael Proctor— his house.
MR. JACKSON: Who does Elizabeth Proctor live with?
MS. MCCABE: Michael Proctor.
MR. JACKSON: So you actually went to Michael Proctor's personal residence?
MS. MCCABE: I did. Yes.
MR. JACKSON: That was in September of what year?
MS. MCCABE: '23. I went over— '23. Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Why'd you go to Michael Proctor's house in September of 2023?
MS. MCCABE: I met Elizabeth Proctor in approximately July or August 2023. We are two mothers that are being viciously terrorized and harassed by social media. Things that were stated in this courtroom and allegations that were made have turned our lives upside down. We receive hate letters, letters— —saying that they hope things—
MR. JACKSON: Why—
JUDGE CANNONE: I know you want to give a narrative. She— she gets to answer this, Mr. Jackson. The door's open.
MR. JACKSON: I want to know if she could answer the question why she went to the house, as opposed to the narrative behind her motivation.
JUDGE CANNONE: It sounds to me like she's explaining why she went to the house. Okay. The door was open, Mr. Jackson. Go ahead.
MS. MCCABE: We receive letters, we receive emails, we receive calls. People drive by our house. There was a rolling rally outside of my house where people just screamed at us. They take pictures of our children. They took a picture of my daughter and put semen on it and said "property of" a— —some named blogger that I think the defense is very familiar with. So that is why myself and Elizabeth Proctor got together. Michael Proctor was not home. We are two mothers trying to get through the unthinkable together.
MR. JACKSON: So you were upset about the public outrage concerning your family's involvement in the death of John O'Keefe?
MS. MCCABE: I was outraged because I am a state witness that is being tortured because of lies.
MR. JACKSON: Because of public outrage concerning your involvement in the death of a police officer, correct?
MS. MCCABE: No, it's a social media witch hunt.
MR. JACKSON: I see. So you decided that the best way for you to address that angst that you were feeling is to go to the lead investigator's personal home in this case, correct?
MS. MCCABE: I went to visit Elizabeth Proctor. Michael Proctor was not home.
MR. JACKSON: So, just like when you went to— I'm sorry— when you went to Sergeant Lank's house and the only person you met with was his wife, when you went to Michael Proctor's house, your claim is the only person you met with was his wife?
MS. MCCABE: I personally did not go to Mike Lank's. It was not Jen going to Mike Lank's. It was Kerry Roberts dropping her daughter off and I happened to be in the car with her. Elizabeth Proctor I met with because we couldn't take the torture any longer.
MR. JACKSON: And you were later asked about this unrecorded visit at Trooper Proctor's home by Massachusetts State Police, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Can you remind me?
MR. JACKSON: Sure. Did you have a conversation with a trooper by the name of Tully who interviewed you specifically about your contact with Michael Proctor?
PARENTHETICAL: [pause]
MS. MCCABE: Could I see the report to refresh my memory?
MR. JACKSON: Do you not remember having a conversation with—
MS. MCCABE: I've had many conversations over the last two years with a number of troopers.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. All I'm asking you is, do you— and I've got a report that will refresh your recollection. I want to know, first of all, do you remember having a conversation about your relationship with Michael and Elizabeth Proctor with Trooper Tully?
MS. MCCABE: I know I had a conversation with a trooper about it. I don't remember exactly which trooper.
MR. JACKSON: Fair enough. May I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: The multipage report— I'm going to show this page. Thank you. Take a look at the face page of that, read it to yourself, and then I'd ask you to turn to the tabbed page. It is paragraph 27. Okay? You have that in mind?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: May I approach, Your Honor?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Does that refresh your recollection, Ms. McCabe, that you had a conversation— or a formal interview— with Trooper Tully about your relationship with Elizabeth and Michael?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: And you told— actually, let me back up for a second. Okay. Was that somewhere in the vicinity of September, late September, early October, when you had that conversation? Is there a date on it?
MS. MCCABE: reviewing document
MR. JACKSON: May I approach, Your Honor?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: There's a date stamp on the bottom. Take a look at that date stamp on the bottom and tell me if that refreshes your recollection of about the time that that conversation would have taken place.
MS. MCCABE: Well, the date stamp on the bottom— I'm assuming it was entered into evidence, but that doesn't say when the interview itself was.
MR. JACKSON: Right. So, if you'll agree with me— you know that you had the meeting at Elizabeth and Michael Proctor's home sometime in September 2023, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: If that's dated October of 2023, that's what I'm trying to get to.
MS. MCCABE: I don't know the date because it's not dated, so—
MR. JACKSON: I don't either. So do you think it was between September and October?
MS. MCCABE: It must have been.
MR. JACKSON: Right. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Before I get to that, I've got a couple of other questions. You had, at some point, multiple phone calls with Michael Proctor after January 29th, 2022, correct?
MS. MCCABE: I believe so.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. Do you remember all the phone calls that you had with him?
MS. MCCABE: No, I don't.
MR. JACKSON: Would it refresh your recollection to take a look at a log of your phone calls?
MS. MCCABE: Yes, that'd be great.
PARENTHETICAL: [pause]
MR. JACKSON: —or this morning? That will be next. Okay. This is just a full—
PARENTHETICAL: [pause]
MR. JACKSON: —that I have highlighted. Thank you. Take a look at that and tell me if you— specifically, there are a lot of calls there. There are blue tabs. You can look at those blue tabs and then tell me when—
MR. JACKSON: Thank you. May I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Is this— what was marked—
MS. MCCABE: reviewing document Okay.
MR. JACKSON: May I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: You're welcome. Having looked at this set of records, does this appear to be an accurate reflection of the phone calls that you shared with Michael Proctor on and after January 29th?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Just to summarize those, and I don't want to belabor this— there was a call on the 29th at 10:55 a.m. with Trooper Proctor, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: There was a call on the 29th at 12:49 p.m., correct?
MS. MCCABE: I didn't memorize them. I understand, so if you want to give me the paper back, then I could probably answer correctly that way.
MR. JACKSON: We can, yes. Thank you. Okay. First call: January 29th, 10:55 a.m., Trooper Proctor calls you for a minute and 17 seconds.
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: Next tab. January 29th, 12:49 p.m.: Trooper Proctor calls you for a minute and 8 seconds.
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: January 30th at 9:51 a.m.: you called Trooper Proctor, 4-second call, probably a voicemail or something.
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: January 30th, a minute later, 9:52 a.m.: you then call Trooper Proctor again, 21 minutes and 31 seconds.
MS. MCCABE: I called. Correct.
MR. JACKSON: January 30th, same day, 4:45 p.m.: Trooper Proctor calls you, 9 minutes and 43 seconds.
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: January 31st, the next day, at 11:51 a.m.: [unintelligible] Trooper Proctor, for 2 minutes and 53 seconds.
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: That is the sum of those call logs, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. Those aren't all the calls that you had with Trooper Proctor. That didn't stop. It's just where these logs stop, correct?
MS. MCCABE: I'd have to see my further call logs.
PARENTHETICAL: [inaudible — sidebar]
MR. JACKSON: May I inquire?
MR. JACKSON: Do you believe that you've had additional phone calls with Trooper Proctor after that last call on the 31st?
MS. MCCABE: I know I did in 2023.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. In 2022, did you have additional phone calls with—
MS. MCCABE: I'm not sure. I'd have to look at phone records.
MR. JACKSON: May I have a moment?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: May we approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Thank you, Ms. McCabe. I don't have the records in front of me. Maybe they'll be found before the end of our conversation, but in the meantime, for expediency— do you remember a call on February 14th with Trooper Proctor lasting about 17 minutes?
MS. MCCABE: I don't know.
MR. JACKSON: Do you remember a call on February 17th lasting about two minutes?
MS. MCCABE: I don't know.
MR. JACKSON: Do you remember a call on February 28th lasting about two minutes?
MS. MCCABE: I don't recall.
MR. JACKSON: Again, I expect that your answer is going to be "I don't recall," but I want to make a record if I could. This is not a test of your memory at this point. I don't expect you— to have it memorized. I just want to ask if maybe one of these stand out in your mind, or all of them. What about a second call on February 28th lasting about a minute?
MS. MCCABE: Don't recall.
MR. JACKSON: On March 1st, another call with Trooper Proctor lasting about a minute.
MS. MCCABE: I do not recall.
MR. JACKSON: Apparently a second call on March 1st lasting about two minutes and a few seconds.
MS. MCCABE: I don't recall.
MR. JACKSON: On March 11th, another call in the afternoon lasting about 12 minutes.
MS. MCCABE: I don't recall.
MR. JACKSON: And finally, a call toward the end of March, March 29th, lasting about 4 minutes.
MS. MCCABE: Again, I don't recall.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. Understood that this is not a memory test and I don't have the records in front of me, so I apologize about that. Based on the conversation that we've just had, does that jog your memory that you had multiple calls in February and March with Trooper Proctor, as well as the calls we've gone over with the records in January?
MS. MCCABE: To be honest, I had calls with many people. I was in a state of shock for months following this, so if you have the record I can answer off of that, but besides that, just reading them to me does not jog my memory. I'm sorry.
MR. JACKSON: That's okay. You wouldn't quarrel with the idea — I don't want to hold you to a number — you wouldn't quarrel with the idea that you had multiple calls with Trooper Proctor in January, in February, in March?
MS. MCCABE: The ones I've just saw on the record, yes, there were multiple calls there.
MR. JACKSON: And of course you met him in your home on January 29th.
MS. MCCABE: On January 29th, yes, I did.
MR. JACKSON: And he came into your living room. You had a conversation with him.
MS. MCCABE: In my dining room, yes.
MR. JACKSON: I'm sorry — your dining room.
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: And also Kerry Roberts was there?
MS. MCCABE: Kerry Roberts was not there on the 29th. Kerry Roberts was not at my house on the 29th. No.
MR. JACKSON: When was — when was she at your house?
MS. MCCABE: When she was interviewed. I believe that was the Tuesday — whatever the date was, maybe 1? That sound right? Um, first or second? Yeah, something. It was the Tuesday following.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. And was that with Trooper Proctor or a different trooper?
MS. MCCABE: A different trooper.
MR. JACKSON: And with Trooper Proctor on the 29th, when he was interviewing you in your dining room, that was the day that Brian Albert was also there, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: And was Brian Albert also interviewed on that day?
MS. MCCABE: I believe so.
MR. JACKSON: So Trooper Proctor was in your house for — gosh, it had to have been an hour.
MS. MCCABE: I'm not sure. After I was interviewed, I went upstairs and then my children started waking up and I was tied up upstairs for a while. I'm not sure when or how long he was there.
MR. JACKSON: But your memory is clear that not only did you meet Trooper Proctor on that day, you had a full conversation with him, it was in your house, that was in your— in your dining room, and another witness was interviewed by Trooper Proctor in your home as well, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: And then you had multiple conversations with him in January — on that day, the day after, and the day after that — you've already seen those records, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Yes, correct.
MR. JACKSON: Then in either September or October you were interviewed by — by Lieutenant Tully. That's the report that you've already seen, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: And in that interview you were asked specifically whether or not you had a relationship with Trooper Proctor and when that relationship started, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: And you said — quote — you had never met Elizabeth Proctor or Michael Proctor prior to September 2023, correct?
MS. MCCABE: I did not say that.
MR. JACKSON: So yet again, this is another example of a trooper completely getting it wrong. Is that right?
MR. LALLY: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Sustained. Ask it differently.
MR. JACKSON: Did, in your view, did Lieutenant Tully get your statement wrong — that you had never met Trooper Proctor before September of 2023? Is that true or is that wrong?
MS. MCCABE: Lieutenant Tully knew I met Proctor prior to that because Proctor was the one who did the initial interview on January 29th.
MR. JACKSON: Does it make you wonder why he wrote in his statement — quote — Elizabeth Proctor or Michael Proctor prior to September 2023?
MR. LALLY: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Sustained.
MR. JACKSON: If you indicated that you had never met Trooper Proctor before September of 2023, that would be a false statement, correct?
MR. LALLY: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: You can answer that, Miss McCabe.
MS. MCCABE: I met Proctor January 29th —
MR. JACKSON: Every statement — if you said it, would it have been false? That's all I'm asking.
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. On January 29th, in the early morning hours, I want to take you all the way back to 1:30, 1:45 a.m. — when you left 34 Fairview on the 29th, where did — after you dropped off the girls, where did you and Matt McCabe go?
MS. MCCABE: We came home.
MR. JACKSON: After you got home, you indicated that you went upstairs, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: After you went upstairs, you indicated that you got on the phone, correct? On your cell phone, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: After you got on your cell phone, you indicated that you started searching for stuff, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: So, if there's — you've seen the forensic extraction, or part of it, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Which one are you referring to?
MR. JACKSON: The forensic extraction of your phone.
MS. MCCABE: I saw what you showed me yesterday from Cellebrite. That's what I mean. Okay, part of it. I saw, yeah.
MR. JACKSON: The phone calls, yes. Okay. You're aware that that extraction shows that you got home after 2:00 a.m. or so?
MS. MCCABE: So that would be generally correct.
MR. JACKSON: Correct. The Cellebrite extraction shows, from your Apple Health data, that you actually went up a set of stairs.
MS. MCCABE: That would be accurate.
MR. JACKSON: Correct. Accurate. The Cellebrite data shows that you actually logged into your phone — got to log in either face ID or a passcode — opened up the phone.
MS. MCCABE: That would be accurate.
MR. JACKSON: Correct. The Cellebrite data shows that you were engaging with an app called Safari to engage some Google searches, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Yes, that would be generally accurate as well. Correct. Yes.
MR. JACKSON: So after you opened up Safari, you indicated that you Google searched something about Ozone basketball. Is that right?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: That was sometime after 2:00 a.m., right?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: What was so important about Ozone basketball at 2:00 a.m. that it couldn't wait until the morning? Why did you search it then?
MS. MCCABE: Well, first I was home, I was wide awake, and I had been texting about a basketball chat and basketball was clearly on my mind. My daughter had been invited to join a team, I didn't know much about the team, so I just was like Googling to see — 'cause the woman who had given my daughter the offer had wanted an answer.
MR. JACKSON: So you say that the basketball was on your mind, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Was there anything else on your mind in the early morning hour time frame?
MS. MCCABE: Don't believe so.
MR. JACKSON: Miss McCabe, if you wanted to know — in general — how long it takes for a human being to pass away because of exposure to extreme temperatures, right — if you wanted to know the answer to that, what would you Google search? What phrase would you use?
MS. MCCABE: I'm not sure. All I recall is what the defendant asked me to Google in the morning.
MR. JACKSON: If you wanted to know — I'm asking a different question, Miss McCabe — if you personally wanted to know how long does it take for a person to die of exposure due to extreme temperatures, what would you put in? What phrase would you use?
MR. LALLY: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Sustained.
MR. JACKSON: Well, we don't have to guess at the phrase that you would use if you wanted to know something about dying of hypothermia, do we? Did you actually Google search it?
MR. LALLY: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Sustained. Ask that differently, please.
MR. JACKSON: Did you in fact use a phrase to Google search how long it takes for someone to die of extreme temperatures?
MS. MCCABE: I did, in the morning, at the request of your client.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. And what phrase did you use?
MS. MCCABE: I'm not sure, really.
MR. JACKSON: Correct. I was — after two and a half years of this, you don't know the phrase that you used?
MS. MCCABE: Jackson — there's so many lies and misconceptions on social media.
JUDGE CANNONE: Question.
MR. JACKSON: Oh, I apologize. Okay, are you telling me you don't remember what Google search you put in?
MS. MCCABE: Karen was screaming, my hands were shaking, and she was saying "Google hypothermia, how long does it take to die in the cold."
MR. JACKSON: And what did you — what phrase did you put in your phone? I'm just asking you to say it.
MS. MCCABE: Why don't you show me it?
MR. JACKSON: You literally don't remember?
MS. MCCABE: Again, she was screaming "Google hypothermia, how long does it take to die in the cold."
MR. JACKSON: How about—
MS. MCCABE: —and I picked up my phone and I started Googling.
MR. JACKSON: And you literally, to this day, right now, under oath, you're saying you don't remember that phrase that you used?
MR. LALLY: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow it.
MR. JACKSON: Is that what you're saying?
MS. MCCABE: I'm saying that, at her—
MR. JACKSON: Do you remember it or do you not, Miss McCabe? That's a simple question.
MS. MCCABE: That morning I don't remember specifically what I Googled, but I do know what you've put out to the social media.
MR. JACKSON: How about this — "hos long to die in cold" — does that sound familiar?
MS. MCCABE: Yeah, it's been everywhere.
MR. JACKSON: Why does that sound so familiar?
MS. MCCABE: Because you've put it out in social media.
MR. JACKSON: Well, I haven't put anything out in social media, 'cause I don't personally have social media.
MS. MCCABE: I'm sorry — Turtleboy.
MR. JACKSON: So if the world happens to know it, that's not on me, is it?
MS. MCCABE: I guess not.
MR. JACKSON: I guess not. "Hos long to die in cold" is what you put in to the Google Search, right?
MS. MCCABE: If you say so.
MR. JACKSON: Is there a reason that you don't want to admit to that?
MS. MCCABE: Absolutely not.
MR. JACKSON: It's a simple question, right? No reason. So say it — what Google search did you use?
MR. LALLY: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Sustained.
MR. JACKSON: You were seeking at some point to Google how long to die in the cold, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: And you made a mistake and mistakenly typed "hos long to die in cold," correct?
MS. MCCABE: You could show me it, I'd appreciate it.
MR. JACKSON: You later Google searched — may I approach, Your Honor?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes. While she looks at that, Mr. Jackson, can we bring our clerk back upstairs?
MR. JACKSON: Of course, yes.
JUDGE CANNONE: I— I think we're— thank you very much. Can you text Jimmy and tell him—
MR. JACKSON: Take a look at that report and tell me if that refreshes your recollection.
MS. MCCABE: Yes, it does.
MR. JACKSON: Does that appear to be an accurate page from a Cellebrite extraction from your phone?
MS. MCCABE: It does.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. May I have that — I'm sorry, may I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: I have that back for a second.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Did you see this? The actual— —search phrase?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Does that now refresh your recollection?
MS. MCCABE: Yes, but I'd like to have this marked.
MR. JACKSON: Next order. Is there an objection, Mr. Lally?
MR. LALLY: No. [Garbled court procedural exchange — Jim the clerk summoned back upstairs]
JUDGE CANNONE: Motion to publish this. Okay.
MR. JACKSON: Does this appear to be the document that was just marked as Exhibit 99?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: I know it's a little bit small. You see this column? Third column from — four from the left. Some dates, some data, and then a Google search, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: What does that Google search say?
MS. MCCABE: "Hos long to die in cold."
MR. JACKSON: Now, you indicate that you made that search at 6:23 a.m., correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: And you did it again thereafter at 6:24, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: At 6:24, you misspelled the phrase, and you spelled it as follows: "how long to die in cik D," correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: Now you claim that those two searches were at 6:23 and 6:24 a.m. respectively, correct?
JUDGE CANNONE: Jackson, phrase it differently.
MR. JACKSON: Sure. You've indicated under direct examination that these two searches were at 6:23 and 6:24 a.m., right?
MS. MCCABE: I don't know if I gave exact times, but I said it was in the morning and Karen had asked me to do it.
MR. JACKSON: And exactly — you claimed that you searched it because Karen was screaming at you, or yelling at you, "Google hypothermia," and you Googled how long does it take for a person to die—
MS. MCCABE: I'm sorry — she said something like, "How long does it take for a person to die of hypothermia."
MR. JACKSON: And you Google searched it at 6:23 and 6:24, is that right?
MS. MCCABE: Again, I'm not sure about the exact times. I just did it after Karen asked me to do it.
MR. JACKSON: Would you quarrel with the idea that those were about 30 seconds apart?
MS. MCCABE: Okay.
MR. JACKSON: And you're aware, Miss McCabe, that both spellings — both misspellings of that phrase — result in the exact same search results, don't they?
MS. MCCABE: I'm not aware of that, no.
MR. JACKSON: Well, you Googled them, ma'am. You're looking on your phone, and you Googled "hos long to die in cold" and "how long to die in cik D" — both of those — you Googled them, right?
MS. MCCABE: I did, yes.
MR. JACKSON: And they result in the exact same search results, don't they?
MS. MCCABE: I have no idea.
MR. JACKSON: So my question to you is: why the two searches?
MS. MCCABE: She was standing next to me screaming, shaking my hand. My hand was cold. I was trying to Google it. Obviously, maybe whatever came up first didn't make sense because I had some misspellings, so I did it again.
MR. JACKSON: "Hos long to die in cold" results in articles concerning dying of exposure, doesn't it?
MS. MCCABE: We never got the chance to read it.
MR. JACKSON: Well, you're the one — when you say "we," who's "we"?
MS. MCCABE: Karen and myself.
MR. JACKSON: Well, you're the one holding the phone, Miss McCabe, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: So you're looking down at your phone and you see exactly— —what comes up, correct?
MS. MCCABE: I don't remember exactly what came up.
MR. JACKSON: Well, what came up was something about dying of hypothermia, wasn't it?
MS. MCCABE: That's what she asked. So why do it again?
MR. JACKSON: Why do it again, Miss McCabe? You had the result. Why the second search?
MS. MCCABE: I cannot answer that beyond telling you that my hands were frozen, she was shaking me and screaming at me.
MR. JACKSON: Can you see the time? Let me scroll up, please. According to the Cellebrite data — you see this? The first search says "hos long to die in cold."
MS. MCCABE: I do.
MR. JACKSON: What's that time?
MS. MCCABE: It's right over — at 2:27 a.m.
MR. JACKSON: A.m. or p.m.?
MS. MCCABE: A.m.
MR. JACKSON: Miss McCabe, you made that search at 2:27 a.m. because you knew that John O'Keefe was— —outside on your sister's lawn, dying in the cold, didn't you?
MS. MCCABE: Absolutely not. I did not make that search at that time. No.
MR. JACKSON: You realized, the next morning, after John was discovered — after 6:00 a.m. — that you had an incriminating search on your phone, didn't you?
MS. MCCABE: Absolutely not.
MR. JACKSON: To cover your tracks, you searched it again in order to overwrite the original search at 2:27, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Again, absolutely not.
MR. JACKSON: But you were nervous and you screwed it up — so the first search you made at 6:23 was "hos long to die in cik D," wasn't it?
MS. MCCABE: No.
MR. JACKSON: You see the search right there?
MS. MCCABE: Correct. I see the search, but I disagree with your narrative.
MR. JACKSON: And what's the time frame of— —that search?
MS. MCCABE: 6:23.
MR. JACKSON: And you agree that time frame is accurate, right?
MS. MCCABE: Again, it's what the report says. And that comports with my memory of that morning — about 6:23 in the morning.
MR. JACKSON: In 51 seconds, there's a second search, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: And this one at 6:24 says "hos long to die in cold" — correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: And that comports with your memory as well?
MS. MCCABE: I remember Googling it at the request of the defendant. Yes.
MR. JACKSON: About 27 seconds apart, correct?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: But the reality is, your first search didn't comport with the 2:27 a.m. search — it was a different spelling, wasn't it?
MS. MCCABE: I never searched at 2:27. That is not reality.
MR. JACKSON: But the 6:24 search— —did exactly mirror the search that, according to this report, took place at 2:27, correct?
MS. MCCABE: I'm sure Cellebrite will be able to explain it to you. I can't.
MR. JACKSON: And then, of those three searches, one of them ended up deleted, isn't that right?
MS. MCCABE: I never deleted any search.
MR. JACKSON: Take a look at the Cellebrite report — top search — the column marked "deleted." What do you see?
MS. MCCABE: I see a "yes."
MR. JACKSON: Miss McCabe, the reason you deleted that 2:27 a.m. search is because you realized that if you were caught Googling how long it takes for a person to die — some three and a half hours before John's body was found — that would incriminate you, wouldn't it?
MR. LALLY: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Sustained.
MR. JACKSON: Did you delete that search— —because you knew that you would be implicated in John O'Keefe's death if that search was found on your phone?
MR. LALLY: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Hold on. Could you answer that, please?
MS. MCCABE: I did not delete that search. I never made that search at 2:27. I never would have left John O'Keefe out in the cold to die, because he was my friend that I loved.
MR. JACKSON: But he's not your family, is he?
MS. MCCABE: Family and friends.
JUDGE CANNONE: Sustained.
MR. JACKSON: You acknowledge that you made the search at 6:23, don't you?
MS. MCCABE: In the morning. I did, yes.
MR. JACKSON: Acknowledge that you made the search at 6:24, multiple times in the morning?
MS. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: Of the three searches that show up — that were all found on your phone — the one that you disavow— —is the one that took place at 2:27 a.m., which would implicate you and exonerate my client, correct?
MR. LALLY: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Sustained. Can you ask it differently, Mr. Jackson?
MR. JACKSON: Of those three searches, it was only one marked deleted, isn't that right?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: That was the one at 2:27 a.m., correct?
MS. MCCABE: I wouldn't even know how to go in and delete a search.
MR. JACKSON: That's not what I asked you. The one, according to the Cellebrite report, that was deleted — the one at 2:27 a.m. — correct?
MS. MCCABE: Correct.
MR. JACKSON: You would agree that that's awfully convenient for you, isn't it?
MR. LALLY: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Sustained.
MR. JACKSON: That's all I have.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. Mr. Lally, thank you.