Day 21 - June 6, 2024

The court initially raised striking Exhibit 463, receipts, for lack of foundation. Defense counsel withdrew the authenticity objection and proposed a stipulation to avoid calling an additional witness, so the exhibit was not struck. The judge also directed that paper exhibits admitted each day remain with the clerk for the court's access, and counsel were asked to provide a scheduling estimate for when the case might reach the jury.

Yuriy Bukhenik described a February 3 secondary search at 34 Fairview Road after snow began to melt, saying troopers recovered a baseball hat, a drinking straw, and plastic items; he also described later collections and evidence storage. The court admitted photograph groups through Exhibits 534 and physical evidence through Exhibits 540. Bukhenik testified that certain Ring videos were absent from the returned data, including video of the defendant arriving home after midnight and video involving Ms. McCabe and Ms. Roberts near the vehicle. The court admitted and played an audio excerpt of a June 9, 2022 conversation with Ms. Read, with an instruction on evaluating alleged defendant statements, and limited later DNA-swab testimony to the voluntary collection of swabs.

Defense counsel questioned Sergeant Bukhenik about Ring-account materials, the early investigation at 34 Fairview, handling and documentation of recovered clothing and later debris, and videos from One Meadows and the Canton Police sally port. Bukhenik said Ring did not provide activity logs and that the materials did not prove or suggest the account activity counsel asked about. He acknowledged that investigators did not secure the home as a crime scene, described later yard processing, and testified that some evidence was stored and dried while he could not identify every handling or logging detail. He also said certain February 10 items were not GPS- or cross-coordinate documented. After sidebar rulings, the court permitted one enlarged-video demonstration and allowed limited questioning about witness preparation. Bukhenik said he had met with Lally twice to discuss portions of the case he would present and agreed the sally port video was mirrored.

Defense counsel sought to play a brief portion of an inverted version of video previously introduced by the Commonwealth, describing it as the same video inverted correctly. The court required the Commonwealth to receive and review it before any display, and deferred the issue until Monday after redirect. Counsel then discussed projected completion dates, and the court told jurors they could expect to receive the case for deliberations in the last week of June.

The court deferred argument on a Commonwealth motion received that morning, setting a hearing for Monday at 8:30 a.m. and permitting a written response by email.