Day 19 - June 3, 2024

Lieutenant Kevin O'Hara described SERT's activation during a blizzard and its grid search outside 34 Fairview Road in Canton. He testified that the team recovered multiple red and clear taillight pieces and a sneaker near the curb between the flagpole and fire hydrant, stopped the search for documentation when items were found, and used photographs and handheld GPS mapping. O'Hara said the team suspended the search after proceeding beyond the recovered items and that there was a good chance it had not found everything; he offered to return in daylight or after snow melt. Photographs were admitted as Exhibits 111 through 134, and two maps were admitted as Exhibits 135 and 136.

Defense counsel examined Lieutenant Kevin O'Hara about SERT's authorization and deployment during blizzard conditions, the information Lieutenant Brian Tully gave to define the search area, and records documenting the team's response. O'Hara said the final mission report described an off-duty officer as hit and dragged by a vehicle, while also explaining that Tully had not said he personally saw the vehicle or body in the locations used to guide the search. Questioned about the sneaker and plastic pieces, O'Hara qualified the exact distances between them and said he had not seen the evidence log. He also said Trooper Michael Proctor did not call SERT back for a further search on the six dates raised by defense counsel.

On redirect, Lieutenant O'Hara explained that SERT's daily journal provides only a general account of day-to-day activity, while mission-manager software generates a more detailed response report. He identified the Geotab GPS automatic vehicle locator system in his cruiser as the source for precise arrival times for him and other unit members. O'Hara also confirmed that items were photographed as they were discovered, although the team did not measure distances between them.

Defense counsel Alan Jackson cross-examined Massachusetts State Police forensic scientist Maureen Hartnett about her February 1 sally-port examination of the Lexus SUV, her collection methods, and laboratory records. Hartnett corrected the date of her visit, testified that specified vehicle swabs screened negative for blood, and described taking two untested swabs from one of six Solo cups. She also explained that single collections combined multiple taillight and clothing areas, limiting location-specific conclusions. Hartnett identified several exhibits and stated that she had no data showing where certain evidence items had been before laboratory acceptance.

On redirect, Maureen Hartnett testified that she logged, packaged, and submitted swabs taken from exposed portions of the taillight housing rather than protected interior portions. She did not know whether the sally port was heated and did not recall frozen snow or ice on the vehicle's exterior.

Defense counsel sought to question Maureen Hartnett about the signatory or listed name on the evidence submission form marked "UU." The court sustained an objection, found the rephrased question to be the same question, and called counsel to sidebar.