Day 24 - June 13, 2024

On redirect, Lieutenant Brian Tully explained why he considered a witness's Ford Edge account unreliable and testified that physical evidence was on the roadway near 34 Fairview Road. After a sidebar ruling limiting hearsay-based testimony, he said his own review indicated the Canton Police sally port video appeared motion activated. Tully distinguished contemporaneous notes on evidence bags from a report written 11 days later, described limits in the available Verizon records, and gave a qualified opinion that the defendant, vehicle, and phone were on Washington Street outside Temple Beth Abraham at 5:18.

Defense counsel used an RTT record sheet marked Exhibit KKK for Identification to question Lieutenant Tully about the timing and distance information associated with his range-map arcs. Tully maintained that the distances, rather than the times, established the arcs, and said he would need to review Verizon's records key to determine whether the listed times were the exact times for the first and last distances. The court sustained an objection to a proposed travel-speed question and directed counsel to ask it differently.

Brian Gallerani, a Needham Police Department sergeant certified to collect buccal swabs, testified that he collected samples from Sergeant Bukhenik and Trooper Proctor on January 16, 2024. He said he packaged, photographed, and entered the samples into evidence, then shipped them to Bode Technology in accordance with the lab's instructions.

Nicholas Bradford, a Bode Technology DNA analyst, described his qualifications, laboratory procedures, and the testing of an extract from a passenger-side taillight and a hair recovered from an exterior rear panel. He testified that the taillight extract was a three-person mixture with at least one male contributor; under his stated likelihood-ratio assumptions, the result provided very strong support for inclusion of John O'Keefe and support for exclusion of Yuriy Bukhenik and Michael Proctor. Bradford said the hair sample was below the limit of detection for STR testing and was sent for mitochondrial testing by Tess Chart.

Forensic DNA analyst Tess Chart described her training, Bode Technology's procedures, and the distinction between autosomal and mitochondrial DNA. She testified that hair sample EO1 produced a mitochondrial profile consistent with John O'Keefe's profile, so he could not be excluded as a possible contributor. Chart also testified that the profile was not found in the listed EMPOP databases and supported an exclusion of at least 99.895 percent of the population using a 95-percent confidence interval.

Forensic scientist Andre Porto described Massachusetts State Police DNA-laboratory procedures and reported comparison results supporting inclusion of John O'Keefe in mixtures from a passenger-side taillight, a broken drinking glass, and several clothing samples. He also reported samples that were unsuitable for comparison or had no detected human DNA, and said DNA testing could not determine how or when DNA was deposited.

The court confirmed that the parties expected to submit jury-instruction packets the next day. The judge said a formal charge conference would follow and that the proposals would indicate whether either side sought lesser-included instructions; the court also planned to tell jurors to expect a full day rather than schedule voir dire.