Commonwealth v. Read — Trial ArchiveBrian Tully - Direct (Part 2)
466 linesCOURT OFFICER: Hear ye, hear ye, hear ye. All parties having anything to do before The Honorable First Justice Beverly Cannone, now sitting in the Norfolk Superior Court within and for the county of Norfolk, draw near and give your attendance. Be heard. All say, "Court." Thank you. May be seated.
JUDGE CANNONE: For us now — 22-117, the Commonwealth versus Read. All right, good morning, counsel.
PARENTHETICAL: [voices]
PARENTHETICAL: [Witness approaches the stand.]
COURT OFFICER: Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
JUDGE CANNONE: : Good morning. Good morning, Ms. Read. Good morning, jurors. I 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 follow the instructions and refrain from doing any independent research or investigation into this case? Everyone said yes and nodded affirmatively. Did anyone happen to see or read anything about this case since we left? Everyone said no. Thank you very much.
COURT OFFICER: We have a detective — please just watch your step.
MR. TULLY: I do.
JUDGE CANNONE: Whenever you're ready, Mr. Lally.
MR. LALLY: Good morning, sir.
MR. TULLY: Good morning.
MR. LALLY: Again, could you please state your name and spell your last name for the jury?
MR. TULLY: Brian Tully. T-U-L-L-Y.
MR. LALLY: Now, Lieutenant Tully, you were testifying yesterday. You were testifying in some part about a search that you did in conjunction with the ASSERT team at 34 Fairview on January 29th, 2022. Correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And at any point in time, did you or any other member of your unit conduct any search of the residence at 34 Fairview Road?
MR. TULLY: No.
MR. LALLY: And why not?
MR. TULLY: We had no reason to believe that the evidence found within the home of 34 Fairview Road.
MR. LALLY: Now, Lieutenant, if you could — could you inform the jury a little bit about sort of search warrants as far as residences go, and what is required in Massachusetts for you to conduct a search —
JUDGE CANNONE: We haven't heard the question. Let's hear the question.
MR. LALLY: That was the question. I'm sorry. I thought it was — you inform the jury about search warrants and then —
JUDGE CANNONE: If I didn't — if I interrupted your question, I apologize. Okay. So that's sustained. Thank you.
MR. LALLY: As far as, Lieutenant — over the course of your career, you've conducted search warrants of people's residences, correct?
JUDGE CANNONE: I'm going to allow him to build a foundation here, so the objection is overruled.
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And what do you need to do a search warrant — consent or exigent circumstance? And as far as a search warrant is concerned, what is — what is needed or what is necessary in order for you to get a search —
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
PARENTHETICAL: [Inaudible.]
MR. TULLY: As governed by the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 14 of the Massachusetts Constitution, law enforcement is required to get a search warrant if we're going to invade someone's privacy. In order to obtain a search warrant, I need to gather facts that I swear under oath and affirm that are true and accurate — that there is probable cause, which means more likely than not, that a specific piece of evidence will be found in a specific location related to a crime. So I need to check those boxes in order to obtain a search warrant through the trial court.
MR. LALLY: And what, if any, information did you have related to specific evidence of a crime in relation to the interior of the residence at 34 Fairview Road?
MR. TULLY: I didn't have any. When thinking about residences and search warrants and evidence, I need to put the evidence inside the house. And so I don't believe that Mr. O'Keefe entered the home, so I had no nexus to the house.
MR. LALLY: And what, if any, evidence did you have that Mr. O'Keefe had ever entered the home at 34 Fairview Road on January 29th or on any other day?
MR. TULLY: I don't. On the contrary, I have evidence that he was outside, but I don't have anything putting him inside the residence.
MR. LALLY: Now, you're aware — or you testified yesterday — that at some point while you and the ASSERT team were conducting the search at 34 Fairview, you — Sgt. Bukhenik and Trooper Proctor — were following a tow truck with the defendant's vehicle from Dighton to the Canton Police Department. Correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And in reference to taking the vehicle to the Canton Police Department, how was that decision arrived at? What, if any, discussion — or what, if any, other options did you have?
MR. TULLY: So Sgt. Bukhenik and I had conversations. It was ultimately my decision of where the vehicle was going to go. And so we need to find a location that was secure, indoors, and preferably heated. And so we start going through a checklist of what's available. So you start thinking obviously of State Police facilities. So between Dighton and Canton, where our office is as well, you have the Foxboro Barracks, which — I worked out of the Foxboro Barracks. The garage was probably not appropriate for that large a vehicle to get in there. It's an old building. I worked at the State Police barracks in Milton. That's even worse, with a smaller garage that's attached inside of an older building. So the Canton Police Department was the next step.
MR. TULLY: It kind of checked all those boxes — it was inside, it was secure, and it was heated.
MR. LALLY: Now, over the course of your career, specifically within the homicide unit — the detective unit of the District Attorney's Office — approximately how many investigations have you led or been a part of? In relation to — let me first ask you this. As far as your unit is concerned, how is it that — from a staffing perspective — how is it that an investigation is conducted as far as certain roles? Or can you speak a little bit about sort of the roles that different people within your unit play with reference to an investigation, just in the general sense?
MR. TULLY: Within the unit, we have different sections. We have the homicide section, narcotics section, and special investigations. So each is kind of broken up into that. Obviously the homicide section will undertake homicide investigations. But we work as a team, so there'll be situations where you may need all-hands-on-deck just to get some people out there. So the narcotics folks will help with homicide investigations and vice versa — the homicide people will help with narcotics investigations when needed.
MR. LALLY: You want to — may I just have a moment?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Now, specifically when it comes to a death investigation, there's someone who's assigned as what you call a case officer. Is that correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And can you explain to the jury what the role of the case officer is, and what, if any, other sort of supervision there is with reference to that case officer?
MR. TULLY: The case officer is essentially the central collection point for the investigation. So they are the person that would gather the evidence, the records, hold those records. And then somebody needs to be held accountable — for a to-do list or something to do, a supervisor would go to that one person — as well as the District Attorney's Office would know who to contact about a certain case. And then we'll go from there. Obviously that case officer usually is the rank of Trooper, especially when you're talking about unattended deaths. They have a sergeant and two lieutenants that are supervising them in that realm.
MR. LALLY: And as far as interviews are concerned, what, if any, sort of policy is there with regard to Troopers and how many would be involved in the interview of any witness?
MR. TULLY: We would always have two people present — either a Trooper and a local detective, or two Troopers — just one asks questions, one takes notes. It's just good practice.
MR. LALLY: And with respect to this investigation, the locals — as far as Canton Police Department — was not something that you utilized. Correct?
MR. TULLY: Correct.
MR. LALLY: And again, I know you testified a little bit about it yesterday, but if you could just reiterate or expound upon sort of what your discussions were with the chief as far as Canton Police Department's involvement in this investigation going forward, following the early morning hours of January 29th.
MR. TULLY: Our conversation circled around in the early hours about the homeowner of 34 Fairview, which was Brian Albert, who has a brother Kevin Albert, who was a detective with the Canton Police Department. And so where we were — we had essentially zero information about the investigation. We wanted to remove any appearance of conflict by not having Kevin Albert or any of his co-workers involved in the investigation.
MR. LALLY: Was that in the investigation in its entirety, or the interviewing process, or how was that sort of delineated, if at all?
MR. TULLY: Definitely no interviews. They were not involved in any discussion — essentially the entire investigation.
MR. LALLY: And as far as the case officer is concerned, is the case officer — someone who, particularly in a homicide investigation — as far as a decision regarding charging, is that something that the case officer
MR. TULLY: Would be tasked with? No.
MR. LALLY: Now turning your attention back to your testimony yesterday, there were items that you had retrieved from the search on January 29th, correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And as a precursor, if I could ask you sort of over the course of your career — and specifically within the homicide unit with the District Attorney's office — about how many death investigations, homicide investigations have you been involved?
MR. TULLY: I would say in excess of 600 unattended death investigations that I personally investigated. That's not counting those phone calls — the calls I end up declining — that I mentioned yesterday. In addition to that, I probably have either worked or supervised 75 homicides. And then getting back to the unattended deaths, I've supervised countless since I've attained the rank of — sorry — sergeant and lieutenant.
MR. LALLY: And with respect to your training and with respect to your experience, how many of those investigations have involved injuries which included abrasions?
MR. TULLY: Probably 10 to 20% of them.
MR. LALLY: And if you could, at least from your understanding, explain to the jury — what is an abrasion, with regard to the items that you covered on January 29th? There was one piece of clear plastic — you testified yesterday it had something that you termed as stippling on the outside, correct?
MR. TULLY: Yeah, I may have used the word dimples, but yeah.
MR. LALLY: Now with respect to Mr. O'Keefe — at some point did you have occasion to view photos of Mr. O'Keefe from Good Samaritan Hospital?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And with regard to the items that you recovered, what if any significance did you observe between those items and the injuries that you observed to Mr. O'Keefe?
MR. TULLY: The injuries to Mr. O'Keefe — I noticed the abrasions had a certain pattern on them. And I know that when a blunt force object is involved in causing an abrasion, the characteristics of the object that comes in contact with a person will often leave the characteristics on that person in the form of an abrasion.
MR. LALLY: And with respect to this specific case, as far as any items recovered on January 29th and your observations of Mr. O'Keefe, what if anything did you observe of any significance in relation to that?
MR. TULLY: I'd be — [unintelligible] — that the marks of Mr. O'Keefe are consistent with —
MR. JACKSON: Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Sustained.
MR. LALLY: Now sir, if I could turn your attention to other members of your unit — Troopers by the name of Trooper Dunne and Trooper Moore, is that correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And on February 2nd, 2022, are you familiar with them retrieving some video in relation to this investigation?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And specifically from the town of Canton, did they retrieve video from there?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And specifically, what location did they retrieve video from?
MR. TULLY: From the Canton Public Library at 786 Washington Street.
MR. LALLY: And are you familiar with them speaking with a gentleman by the name of Mr. Jutras?
MR. TULLY: Yes, he's an IT person with the town of Canton.
MR. LALLY: Yes. And as far as the timestamp with regard to the video retrieved from the Canton Public Library, what if any information do you have in reference to that?
MR. TULLY: Whenever we retrieve video, we want to ensure the timestamp is accurate, because as we've learned, businesses are not always great about updating the timestamp. So that's always top of mind when we collect video. Mr. Jutras ensured us that the timestamp on the video was consistent and in real time.
MR. LALLY: Now the following day, February 3rd — are you familiar with Trooper Moore retrieving some additional surveillance video?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And where did you retrieve that from?
MR. TULLY: Temple Beth Abraham in Canton at 1301 Washington Street.
MR. LALLY: Now as far as those two locations — the Canton Public Library and Temple Beth Abraham — are you familiar with where they are in relation to each other?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Both located on Washington Street, is that correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And about how far away from each other are they?
MR. TULLY: About a mile and a half.
MR. LALLY: Now with reference to the temple video, what if any information did you receive in regard to the timestamp on that?
MR. TULLY: That was also accurate.
MR. LALLY: Now from each of these respective locations, what time frames — Trooper Moore in one instance and Trooper Moore and Trooper Dunne in the other — what time frames of video did they retrieve from each of those respective locations?
MR. TULLY: From 12:00 a.m. midnight to 1:00 a.m., and from 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.
MR. LALLY: And why was it that those were the time frames — based on what you'd learned to that point in the investigation — why were those the time frames that the troopers were looking for?
MR. TULLY: We had reason to believe that those were the times that Ms. Read's vehicle was traveling in and around that area.
MR. LALLY: And I'll get to that a little bit more in a moment, but as far as reason to believe that Ms. Read's vehicle was traveling in that area around those times, what if any information did you have to base that on?
MR. TULLY: We had statements and video from the Waterfall Bar and Grille, also on Washington Street a little bit further down, and the car departing in that direction. We had information about a car that matched her description arriving at 34 Fairview at a certain time, shortly before 12:30 a.m. And so, like we always do, we do a video canvas and look for video cameras from that first known point — which would be the Waterfall Bar and Grille — to the residence, 34 Fairview, and then from there, from 34 Fairview to 1 Meadow Ave, which was the home of John O'Keefe.
MR. LALLY: In reference to the morning hours between 5 and 6:00 a.m. — the later morning hours between 5 and 6:00 a.m. — what if any information did you have in relation to Ms. Read's travel at that time?
MR. TULLY: So we had learned through interviews that she was calling people as early as 4:45 in an effort to locate Mr. O'Keefe, and a statement that she had left the house shortly after 5:00 a.m. We then know that she arrived at the McCabe residence on Country Lane after 5:30. So we're trying to account for the movements of the vehicle for that 30-minute block.
MR. LALLY: Now in reference to phone calls — you've had occasion to review information related to the defendant's phone?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Now you mentioned that about 4:45 in the morning she made phone calls trying to ascertain — or allegedly trying to ascertain — the whereabouts of Mr. O'Keefe, is that correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Prior to those 4:45 a.m. phone calls, were there other phone calls that the defendant placed?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And to whom did she place those calls, and at about what time?
MR. TULLY: Starting at 12:33 a.m. to 6:03 a.m., there were 53 phone calls from Ms. Read to a phone number associated with John O'Keefe.
MR. LALLY: And in addition to those phone calls to Mr. O'Keefe's phone, what if any other calls did the defendant make prior to those 4:45 a.m. calls?
MR. TULLY: There were phone calls to her family members, to Jennifer McCabe, Kerry Roberts, [unintelligible] — those are the ones off the top of my head. I have the notes in front of me if you want me to refer to them.
JUDGE CANNONE: You may refer to your notes.
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Would you like me to continue?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: After 6:03, when Mr. O'Keefe was found, there are a number of calls to members of John O'Keefe's family. Now the phone calls to family members of her own — the defendant's family members — also specifically to her mother and her father, is that correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And then those phone calls precede the phone calls to Ms. McCabe or Ms. Roberts, or anybody else?
MR. TULLY: Earlier that morning on the call detail records they don't appear, but I know the phone dump has other information.
MR. LALLY: Your Honor, may I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Lieutenant, turning your attention back to the videos we were speaking about — showing you a disc — I just ask you to recognize that.
MR. TULLY: I do.
PARENTHETICAL: [objection]
MR. LALLY: ? Your Honor, may I return Exhibit 573 to the witness?
MR. LALLY: And what do you recognize that to be?
MR. TULLY: It is surveillance video from Temple Beth Abraham.
MR. LALLY: May I publish? No objection. Thank you. [Exhibit 572 admitted.] May I approach again?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: [Exhibit] 573. Any
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes, your honor.
MR. LALLY: With the court's permission, if I could publish that to the jury at this time?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Do you have a pointer?
MR. TULLY: I do.
MR. LALLY: Using that laser pointer, if you could direct the jury's attention to the icons that you inserted in reference to various points of relevant locations, as well as any sort of route of travel or roadways depicted in this.
MR. TULLY: So each icon is a house-shaped icon that I placed at different locations. The first one is red in color — it denotes where 34 Fairview Road is. Starting at the bottom, there is a pinkish-colored one — that is the location of the Waterfall Bar and Grille. Just north of that, you'll see a brown one which denotes the Canton Public Library. Following up this street here, which is Washington Street, you'll come to Temple Beth Abraham, which is denoted by the blue icon there, and then off to the right is 1 Meadows Lane with the green icon.
MR. LALLY: Now, using that laser pointer again, could you note where the temple is?
MR. TULLY: It is the blue icon in the center of the map.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as where the temple is located in reference to specific roadways — it's, you mentioned, located on Washington Street, correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And so, what if any roads intersect with Washington Street around the location of —
MR. TULLY: Chapman Street is the street that runs in this direction towards Washington Street. So, again, Washington Street is a street here, it continues and stays Washington Street as it turns slightly east in that direction.
MR. LALLY: And as far as available points of directionality, or ways to travel — roadways from the area of the temple — it intersects in the area of Dam Street, is that correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And so, as far as available routes of travel from the temple to 34 Fairview, if you could note those on the map.
MR. TULLY: If one were at the temple in order to travel to 34 Fairview, you could continue up Washington Street, take the left onto Dam Street, which is that street you just mentioned, a left onto Cedarcrest, and to enter that neighborhood down here. Um, one could take a left and come down Chapman Street and take the right to enter the neighborhood in that direction, straight onto Fairview Road.
MR. LALLY: And uh, if you're approaching sort of from the Chapman Street side of Fairview Road — as you come down Fairview Road — which side of the road would 34 Fairview be on?
MR. TULLY: Left.
MR. LALLY: And uh, similarly, if you're approaching from the Cedarcrest side of Fairview Road and turn onto Fairview Road, which side would 34 Fairview be on?
MR. TULLY: Right.
MR. LALLY: Thanks. Now, with respect to each of these videos — as far as the Canton Public Library video and the temple video — these are exterior cameras, is that correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And sort of orientation-wise, where do they focus on, or where are they pointed at?
MR. TULLY: The ones that we focused on were the ones that captured Washington Street.
MR. LALLY: Now, are you aware of another location right around the area of Temple Beth Abraham called Cassis?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And that's essentially like a convenience store, is that right?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And were you — or other Troopers — able to retrieve video from that location as well?
MR. TULLY: I don't believe so.
MR. LALLY: Now, your honor, with the court's permission, if I could publish a portion of the video from the Canton Public Library, which is marked as Exhibit 110.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And Miss Gilman, if you could — from the first video, and from the time on the video, I'd ask you to go to about — 12:50 — I'm sorry — [garbled timestamp]. Now, again, for orientation purposes, Lieutenant, if you could, using the laser pointer, just describe to the jury sort of what we're looking at here, directionality-wise, and what you observe in this video.
MR. TULLY: The main street in the video is Washington Street. The Waterfall Bar and Grille would be off to the right-hand side and Temple Beth Abraham would be off to the left. The intersecting road we're looking at here is Sherman Ave, I believe.
MR. LALLY: And uh, if one were to take that right — if you're coming from the right of the screen, now left of the screen, on Washington Street heading towards Sherman — and you were to take that right on Sherman, where does that take you?
MR. TULLY: Would head towards the neighborhood where 1 Meadows Lane resides.
MR. LALLY: Now, were you also able — over the course of the investigation — did you have occasion to look at a surveillance video from the Waterfall Bar itself?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And from that video, were you able to determine a time at which Mr. O'Keefe was leaving that establishment?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And what if any observations — as far as time — or what if any observations did you make as far as what Mr. O'Keefe was doing or had with him when he left?
MR. TULLY: When he left, shortly after midnight, he was holding what appears to be a clear glass container.
MR. LALLY: And do you recall which hand he was holding it in?
MR. TULLY: His right.
MR. LALLY: And specifically, that was about 12:01 a.m., is that correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And Miss Gilman, if you could, I'm going to ask you to press play here and then pause again at 12:55:58. Now, looking up at the screen — where it's paused at 12:55:58 — Lieutenant, what if anything do you observe there?
MR. TULLY: I observe a large black SUV here on Washington Street.
MR. LALLY: And the large black SUV that you observe — is that consistent with what you've observed of the defendant's vehicle?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And uh, if you could describe to the jury — as far as when I asked Miss Gilman to press play — what is that vehicle going to do?
MR. TULLY: It's going to continue north on Washington Street through the intersection at Sherman and continue north on Washington Street.
MR. LALLY: And uh, what if anything is sort of in that directionality as it continues off of the screen to the left?
MR. TULLY: I'd be heading towards Temple Beth Abraham.
MR. LALLY: Now, your honor, with the court's permission, if I could publish portions of the temple video.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And just, as a continuing — my intention would be to sort of go back and forth, if that's all right with the court.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay, yes.
MR. LALLY: One moment — to technician — I'm sorry, I should — this a little bit better — be second — last one — and if you could pause there. Thank you. Uh, again, for orientation purposes, Lieutenant, if you could describe, using the laser pointer, what we're looking at in this particular camera angle and shot, and as far as the roadways —
MR. TULLY: This is an exterior camera from Temple Beth Abraham at 1301 Washington Street. Where it's paused now, at — 12:01, I believe, is the time stamp. You see a vehicle here, that vehicle traveling on Washington Street. We are now on the other side of Washington Street looking at it than we were from the library. So, the south — and towards the Waterfall and the library — would be off to the left. North would be off to the right.
MR. LALLY: And uh, Miss Gilman, if you could fast-forward to 12:17 and pause it. Now, as far as the time concerns — the video from the prior video from the library was about 12:15 a.m. when you saw the vehicle consistent with the defendant's vehicle pass by that location —
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And so, as far as this time that's up here now — approximately 12:17 or so, or somewhere within that minute between 12:17 and 12:18 — is that consistent with the time it would take to travel from where the library is on Washington Street to where the temple is on Washington?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And uh, from this particular time period around 12:17 — between the minutes of 12:27 and 12:28 — what if anything did you observe, with reference to anything of significance to this investigation, on this portion of this video?
MR. TULLY: At approximately 12:27 and 56 seconds, you'll see a large black SUV travel from left to right on the screen, which again would be northbound.
MR. LALLY: And again, left to right on the screen — just for orientation purposes — what is in the direction from left to right on the screen, as far as any significance to this?
MR. TULLY: As you continue north on Washington Street, you would — I believe the next intersection on the left is Dam Street, which one could take to get to 34 Fairview Road.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, if you could, I would ask you again — press play. And again, Lieutenant, directing your attention to the screen — using the laser pointer, direct the jury's attention to what if anything of significance you observe in this portion of the video.
MR. TULLY: At 12:27:56, from the temple, a large black SUV traveling northbound on Washington Street.
MR. LALLY: And the large black SUV — is that consistent with the large black SUV that you observed in the prior video, Exhibit 110, from the Canton Public Library?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Is that also consistent with what you observed as far as your personal observations of the defendant's vehicle?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: If you could please — press play — you can pause that — take that down please, Miss Gilman. If I could ask you for the Canton Public Library video again, and from this I'm going to ask — from the second video. Now, Lieutenant, direct your attention to the screen. This is the Canton Public Library video again, Exhibit 110.
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And as far as uh — this is the time frame that you brought up before, between 5:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m., that Troopers Dunne and Moore retrieved from Mr. Jutras, correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And with reference to the conditions outside at this particular time between 5:00 and 6:00 a.m. — what if anything do you observe in this video?
MR. TULLY: The ground is now covered in snow.
MR. LALLY: And Miss Gilman, if I could ask you to fast-forward to about 5:11 a.m. and pause it there. Now, Lieutenant, from this portion of this video from the Canton Public Library, what if anything of significance did you observe in this portion of the video relevant to this investigation?
MR. TULLY: You observe a large black SUV take a left from Sherman Street onto Washington Street, heading south.
MR. LALLY: And as far as the directionality — from where that vehicle came from, and the directionality where that vehicle is headed toward — what if any of the locations of significance are located in those areas?
MR. TULLY: So, again, Sherman Street goes straight to 1 Meadows Lane. So if one were to travel from 1 Meadows Lane — the residence of John O'Keefe — to this location here, you would come down Sherman and you could take a left on Washington Street to head south.
MR. LALLY: And as far as south on Washington Street — again, off to the right of the screen — what if any locations of significance in this case are located in that direction?
MR. TULLY: The Waterfall Bar and Grille.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as the black SUV that you observe in this video — is that again consistent with the black SUV you observed in the temple video from um 12:17 a.m.?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Is it also consistent with the black SUV that you observed in the library video from 12:15 a.m.?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And is it also consistent with the defendant's black SUV?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Now, with reference to — are you familiar with Mr. O'Keefe's home having Ring cameras fixed to it?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And are you familiar with a video from those Ring cameras depicting the defendant backing the black SUV out of Mr. O'Keefe's garage at approximately 5:07 a.m.?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And from that, as far as the distance or time it would take to travel from Mr. O'Keefe's residence to this intersection covered by the Canton Public Library — from 5:07 to 5:11, now depicted on the screen — is that consistent with the time it would take to drive that, particularly given the conditions?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And Miss Gilman, if you could please play — if you can pause that. Now Miss Gilman, if you could fast forward to about 5:15 and 30 seconds, pause there. Now, between these time frames at 5:11 a.m. and 5:15 a.m., at any point in time do you observe the black SUV traveling back in the other direction?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And specifically around 5:15 and 51 seconds, what if anything did you observe on this video of significance or relevance to this investigation?
MR. TULLY: A large black SUV will appear on the screen on the right-hand side and travel to the left-hand side, which again would be traveling north on Washington Street.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as directionality — north on Washington Street — so the left side of the screen would be towards the temple, is that correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And as far as directionality is concerned, what you observe in this area from 5:15 a.m. — is that consistent with what you observed on the Canton Public Library video earlier at 12:15?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And again, as far as the black SUV that you observe in this — it's consistent with all the other black SUVs you observed in the video and the defendant?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And Miss Gilman, if you could press pause — and Lieutenant, if you could, using the laser pointer you have before you, direct the jury's attention to where you observe the vehicle here on Washington Street near the intersection. Again, using that laser pointer, if you could just indicate to the jury as far as directionality where this vehicle is going to head on this —
MR. TULLY: North would be to the left-hand side of the screen, towards Temple Beth Abraham.
MR. LALLY: Again, if you can pause there. Miss Gilman, you can take this one. Now Miss Gilman, if I could ask for the Temple Beth Abraham video again — you may have just one moment.
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Pause. For the record, this is from the Temple Beth Abraham video. This is from the period of 5:10 a.m. to 5:20 a.m., which is the second video listed down within those. Now, Lieutenant, with regard to this video, at some point around 5:18 a.m., what if anything do you observe of significance or relevance to this investigation from that period of the video?
MR. TULLY: A large black SUV travel left to right on the screen.
MR. LALLY: And again, as far as directionality — where would that vehicle be coming from, where would that vehicle be heading?
MR. TULLY: From the left side of the screen would be in the direction of the Canton Public Library and the Waterfall Bar & Grille. Off to the right, again, would be the intersection with Dam Street, which one could take to 34 Fairview Road.
MR. LALLY: And as far as directionality, with reference to the earlier video from 12:17 a.m. from Temple Beth Abraham — is the directionality consistent in this video with what you observe in 12:27?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Now Miss Gilman, if you could play from 5:18 — [unintelligible] — what if anything do you observe in this portion of the video relevant to this investigation?
MR. TULLY: A large black SUV traveling north on Washington Street.
MR. LALLY: And again, is that large black SUV that you observed here consistent with the large black SUV you observed in prior videos, and also consistent with the defendant's vehicle?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Miss Gilman, if you could please press play again — thank you. Miss Gilman, you can take that. Court Officer, lights back up. If I can just have a moment —
JUDGE CANNONE: Sure.
MR. LALLY: Now Lieutenant, through the course of your investigation, are you familiar with — approximately what time it was that the defendant arrived at Ms. McCabe's home?
MR. TULLY: 5:35 approximately.
MR. LALLY: And Ms. McCabe's home is located on Country Lane, is that correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Now from the directionality of that vehicle in the 5:18 a.m. video, as far as timing is concerned — 5:18 to about 5:35 or so — is that consistent with the time it would take to drive from that area of Temple Beth Abraham to Ms. McCabe's residence on Country Lane?
MR. TULLY: No, not if you were to drive directly there.
MR. LALLY: And so to that point, as far as what about that time doesn't match up — is it too short, too long, or something else?
MR. TULLY: It would take you much quicker to get there. It's about a mile and a half from Temple Beth Abraham to Country Lane. You would continue north on Washington Street and just take a left into the Country Lane neighborhood.
MR. LALLY: So the time to travel a mile and a half — and from sort of the distance between either that Temple video and either 34 Fairview Road or Country Lane — were you able to find, locate, or retrieve any surveillance video in those areas that would capture the vehicle?
MR. TULLY: No.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as — you had mentioned earlier in your testimony, when we were talking about the earlier 12:17 a.m. portion from the Temple Beth Abraham video — the directionality of that black SUV, both from the 12:27 and the 5:18 — where is Fairview Road in relation to the directionality of the SUV that you observed?
MR. TULLY: That SUV could take a left on Dam Street and then a left on Cedarcrest to enter down to Fairview Road.
MR. LALLY: And from your knowledge of the area, as far as travel is concerned, would — from 5:18 to about 5:35 or so — would that allow for sufficient time to go from where it's viewable on the Temple Beth Abraham video, for the vehicle to then travel to 34 Fairview Road and then travel to 12 Country Lane?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Now, I believe you had mentioned earlier in your testimony that at some point there were call detail records that were obtained in reference to the defendant's phone.
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And can you explain to the jury — let me ask you this first. With regard to call detail records with regard to phones in general, what if any specialized training have you received or have you given in reference to those areas of focus?
MR. TULLY: I've received over 200 hours of training relative to obtaining and using call detail records and cell phone data in furtherance of criminal investigations. Most recently I've given talks and seminars about the topic, and I've testified in numerous courts around the Commonwealth about the topic.
MR. LALLY: Now can you explain to the jury — call detail records, what they are and how you would use them, as far as utility, generally speaking, in reference to an investigation?
MR. TULLY: Call detail records are business records held by cell phone companies. Specifically to this matter, they are created in the normal course of business. Typically you think about them in a billing context — so if you think of your own cell phone bill, it would contain information like the date and time a communication occurred, the other phone number with which you communicated, the duration of the call — that sort of bits of information. Obviously as we're doing a criminal investigation it's helpful to know with whom someone was communicating. Additionally, the cell phone companies memorialize other bits of information specific to what we refer to as CSLI — cell site location information.
MR. TULLY: They tell us the antennas that were used during the communication, usually just in the form of the first antenna and the last antenna. There are other engineering records that we can obtain that can be helpful when trying to determine where the handset — the cell phone — was at any given time.
MR. LALLY: And the handset that you refer to is essentially the phone itself, correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And with relation to the handset and its connection to antennas or towers, can you speak a little bit about that based on your training and experience?
MR. TULLY: With reference to how the handset sort of communicates with an antenna, and how it connects — the specific cell phone companies place antennas all around to help facilitate communication. You can think of a cell phone as really a two-way radio: it's sending and receiving radio waves. So in order to facilitate that, cell phone companies place these antennas all around. Traditionally, you can think of them on a tower, but they can also be placed on the side of buildings, or disguised as trees, or just on the top of light poles. So they're all around, but you don't quite know it. As far as how the handset communicates with the antenna, there are different variables that go into that. The cell phone wants to connect to the antenna with the strongest signal.
MR. TULLY: The best predictor of a strong signal is distance — the further a radio wave travels, the more it's going to degrade and not be as strong. But there are other factors that can degrade or reduce the strength of a radio wave, specifically ...in obstruction. If you're in a basement of a building or standing behind a large brick wall, the radio waves aren't going to penetrate that as well. But even things like precipitation or foliage on a tree can also hinder it. And you think about rolling hills here in Massachusetts, and tall buildings — they can also disrupt radio waves.
MR. LALLY: As far as that sort of disruption of radio waves, are you familiar with certain areas that get termed as a "dead zone"?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And can you explain what your understanding of that term is, as it relates to what you've been talking about — as far as the handset communicating with the antenna?
MR. TULLY: I would define a dead zone as an area where there's not good cell phone coverage. So the antennas are not covering that area for whatever reason — obstruction, the density of the tower. Often times an antenna can only handle so many cell phones at a time. It's an idea that we coin — or refer to — as load. So there's only a certain number of devices that an antenna can handle. My best analogy of that is Gillette Stadium. I've worked at Gillette Stadium detail many times. We have roll call for a Patriots game early in the morning — I take my post, I have strong functionality on my cell phone. As hundreds of thousands of devices are now entering the area around Gillette Stadium, the functionality of my cell phone reduces as more devices are using the antennas in that area.
MR. LALLY: Now, with respect to the cell phone companies themselves, they create or utilize this data for their own business purposes — correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And can you just briefly explain a little bit about what the cell phone companies would be using this kind of data for, as far as what you're talking about — connections to antennas and time?
MR. TULLY: It's a company who wants to make money, so it's going to memorialize things to bill their customers appropriately. They're also required by the FCC to keep, for a certain period of time, certain records, because they are a communications provider. So there are some regulatory requirements that they need to fulfill.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as the information that you're able to glean from these call detail records — I believe you've spoken a little bit about this — but what, if any, limitations are there with reference to the information you're able to glean from the records?
MR. TULLY: Well, the overarching one is: I can only get what I get. So whatever the company sends me, that's what I can use in my determinations. Kind of the next step is when we're talking about antennas — I will never — well, I have difficulty saying exactly where a cell phone was when using an antenna. I can make generalizations that the phone is going to be in the area of the antenna, but I would never, with just that specific information, be able to tell you exactly where it is. I can look at other records — like the engineering records — where, especially now with 4G and 5G technology, the cell phone providers need to know how far away a handset is from the antenna in order to facilitate that communication, and they keep those ranging records for me.
PARENTHETICAL: [sidebar]
MR. TULLY: So if I can obtain those records, I can then place a much narrower area where a cell phone would have been during a time period.
MR. LALLY: Now, in reference to this investigation — the search warrant that Trooper Proctor did with regard to call detail records from Ms. Read's phone — correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And were you able to — you had occasion to look at those call detail records?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: May I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes, you may.
MR. LALLY: I'm showing you a four-page document. Do you recognize that document, sir?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: What do you recognize it to be?
MR. TULLY: It is the subscriber information for the phone number ending in 9554.
MR. LALLY: And through the course of your investigation, as far as that phone number ending in 9554, who, if anyone, did you find that number to be associated with?
MR. TULLY: The defendant, Karen Read.
MR. LALLY: Now, with respect to the documents before you — that has some listing of account information — is that correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And who is listed as the subscriber for that account with phone number ending in 9554?
PARENTHETICAL: [sidebar] [sidebar — audio unclear]
MR. TULLY: Karen Read, of 481 Gilbert Street in Mansfield, Massachusetts.
MR. LALLY: And are you, through the course of your investigation, familiar with that address — 481 Gilbert Street?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And is that the residence of the defendant?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: May I move to introduce and admit the next exhibit?
MR. JACKSON: No objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. [Exhibit] 57.
COURT CLERK: We'll mark that, Madam Court Reporter. Thank you. That's 574.
JUDGE CANNONE: All right, go ahead, Mr. Lally.
MR. LALLY: Thank you. Now, as far as the information that you receive with reference to call detail records, is there a section called a record key?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And can you explain to the jury what a record key is and how you use that in order to facilitate — or read — the records?
MR. TULLY: The records key gives us the definitions of terms that are used in the record. So the record comes usually in the form of a spreadsheet or PDF — you'll get columns and rows, the columns will be named certain things, and those titles are often specific to the company. So I want to make sure that I'm reading and understanding what the data is.
MR. LALLY: I believe you alluded to it earlier in testimony, but just for the jury's edification, if you could describe to the jury your understanding of the term "cell site listing information" and how that's used in an analysis of call detail records.
MR. TULLY: So CSLI — as it was referred to — has that billing information: time, date, duration, other phone number, and it has the antenna used during the communication. Just as it says, it's a cell site — which is another term for antenna — as I usually use it.
MR. LALLY: Now, sir, through your training and experience, are you familiar with the term — in reference to this type of material — called ranging data?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And can you explain to the jury what you understand that term to mean and how it's used in interpretation of call detail records?
MR. TULLY: So the ranging data goes back to the engineering reports I had mentioned earlier, that can provide more information. They can tell me the antennas that were used during communication; it can tell me the range in which the handset was away from the antenna. So now, as opposed to just making general determinations where a handset was near an antenna, I now have a range. So I will plot the location of the antenna, measure out that distance, and draw an arc with that radius of the distance on a map, and I can make an assumption that the handset is somewhere on that arc. The ranging data is also helpful because the user does not need to be actively using the phone in order for a record to be created, right?
MR. TULLY: The billing record is going to be a phone call made or received, text message made or received. A cell phone as it sits today is still communicating with the antenna — you're getting notifications, it's checking email, it's updating — and because it's utilizing the network, your cell phone provider is capturing that data and generating a record, even though unbeknownst to the user.
MR. LALLY: So to illustrate that point —
MR. TULLY: So if I'm standing right here with the cell phone in my pocket, not using it, not turning it on, not activating it in any way — that cell phone is still doing some sort of communication with the closest, or some, antenna within the vicinity.
MR. LALLY: Now, you're also familiar with a term called UTC, or Universal Time Code?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Can you explain to the jury what that term means and how it relates to these types of records?
MR. TULLY: So UTC — now known as Coordinated Universal Time — is the time zone along the prime meridian. So if you think of the globe, you've got longitude and time zones. The prime meridian is a spot that runs through western Europe and western Africa — that is the line in which all time zones around the world are predicated. UTC would be a time there, and it's not determined by daylight saving time either. So all those time zones around the globe are predicated on that, because it's one standard time on the globe. A lot of records will come in UTC time, and you have to make the conversion. They will provide records — specifically to a cell phone — what time it was locally, but it will tell me what the UTC time was.
MR. TULLY: So for me to figure out what the time was locally during the time of the communication, I have to do the conversion.
MR. LALLY: And to that point, as far as the conversion is concerned, what type of conversion are we talking about?
MR. TULLY: Here on the Eastern side of the United States, it's minus four hours during the summer and minus five in the winter.
MR. LALLY: Now, as far as these records are concerned — I believe you spoke a little bit about the arc and plotting — but if you could expound upon that, explain to the jury what it is exactly you're able to do with the information from call detail records, as far as a visual representation?
MR. TULLY: You said two things there, so I want to make sure I Answer the question right. You mentioned ranging data but CSLI — so specific to the engineering report in ranging, or CSLI — let's first off with CSLI. So with the CSLI, I will place on a map the location of the antenna. And I talked — I mentioned load a little bit, but that load factor determines how dense the antennas will be placed by the provider. So if you think of an urban environment, there's more cell phones, there's more devices that need antennas, so the locations of the antennas will be more dense. I've seen them as close as 100 yards away from each other in an urban environment. You come out to the suburbs, there are less devices.
MR. TULLY: The companies are going to put less antennas because they don't want to put them up where they don't need to — they're going to be further away. So in North County the antennas are placed anywhere from a mile to four or five miles apart.
MR. LALLY: And so there would be a difference as far as the amount of antennas, the amount of towers, like say in the town of Canton versus downtown Boston?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And again I think it's pretty clear, but which of those two — as far as downtown Boston or the town of Canton — would have more antennas or more towers for a cell phone to connect to?
MR. TULLY: Downtown Boston would have more.
MR. LALLY: And so with relation to the number of antennas or towers that a handset or cell phone could connect to, what if any relation does that have to geographic location, or what you're able to glean in reference to geographic location from the call detail?
MR. TULLY: So once I place the antenna on a map I will look at where the other antennas are, and I can make a general determination that the cell phone was closer to that antenna than other antennas. Again there's the caveat — and I'll say it up front — is that there are other mechanisms that could prevent it from connecting to the closest tower. But generally it's going to connect to that cell tower. Now — again, there are redundancies built into the system. If an antenna goes down because it gets struck by lightning or needs service, there are other antennas nearby that can cover an area.
MR. LALLY: Now with respect to the CSLI, were you able to do that in this case, as far as plotting that on a visual representation on a map?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: May I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: I'm going to start showing you — I believe a 10-page document. Just ask you to review that, look up when you finish. And did you recognize that, sir?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: What do you recognize that it is?
MR. TULLY: A series of maps that I created depicting the records obtained from that number ending in 9554, and that's plotted onto sort of a Google image, or Google Earth image. I use Google Earth to create the maps. I then take a screenshot and place it typically in PowerPoint in order to make it look nice. [unintelligible] to introduce and admit collectively.
MR. JACKSON: No objection.
MR. LALLY: May I return that to the witness?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes. brief pause
MR. LALLY: Direct your attention to the second page there. And, Your Honor, with the Court's permission, if I could publish this to the jury?
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. LALLY: Lieutenant, you recognize what's depicted now up on the screen?
MR. TULLY: Yes. And again, what it is — it is a map that I created using the information from the call detail records of CSLI from that account.
MR. LALLY: And from what time period of the call detail records are we looking at in this particular representation?
MR. TULLY: From 12:33 a.m. to 12:34 a.m. Again, I had done the conversion for the purposes of making this exhibit, so if one were to look at the call detail records you may see the UTC time — for the convenience I've done the conversion for the purposes of the exhibit.
MR. LALLY: Now, sir, if you could, using the laser pointer, direct the jury's attention to what if any significance you've plotted out, put into this visual representation.
MR. TULLY: So, first we're looking at the area of the town of Canton. I've placed different landmarks, again to give context to what we're talking about here. You see 34 Fairview Road with a yellow house icon, 1 Meadow Ave, Canton, as a darker color, and the Waterfall Bar and Grill as another icon. Now off to the left, just west of Route 95 — which you'll see running here — you'll see a red triangle, which I use consistently as the antenna, and a series of letters and numbers next to them. So next to them is the numbering system that Verizon assigns to that antenna. So in this instance we're looking at eNB — which is the antenna acronym — and specifically 57171.
MR. TULLY: To be clear, as far as that marking with the red triangle, the eNB ID 57171 — that is the antenna that the handset, or the defendant's cell phone, is connecting to. [unintelligible]
MR. LALLY: Correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes. And I always try to be clear that that is the antenna — that's not where I'm saying the handset was. The handset is somewhere in that vicinity.
MR. LALLY: Based on your training and experience, is that correct?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: We have the next slide, sir. What time here are we looking at in this representation?
MR. TULLY: 12:35 to 12:37 a.m.
MR. LALLY: And again if you could, using the laser pointer, direct the jury's attention to what if anything of significance or relevance you depicted in this representation.
MR. TULLY: Those same icons appear at about the locations relative to this investigation. You'll see another red triangle here close to Route 95, which is eNB ID 57286. And during this time period, the handset associated with this account communicates with that antenna.
MR. LALLY: And from the locations of significance or relevance, as far as eNB 57286, which of them is the closest to — in this?
MR. TULLY: It's just north of 34 Fairview Road.
MR. LALLY: And now if I could direct your attention to — next — the next. And Lieutenant, what time frame are we looking at in this slide?
MR. TULLY: This comes from one call that occurred at 12:38 a.m.
MR. LALLY: And as far as — if you could again, using the laser pointer, direct the jury's attention to what if any other locations you identified or signified in this representation.
MR. TULLY: Again, same icons. Further south — at the bottom, the antenna is located here, the intersection of Route 93 and 138, and it's eNB ID 57021.
MR. LALLY: And of those locations of interest that you signified within this slide, where is eNB 57021 in relation to those?
MR. TULLY: If you're thinking back to the previous slide — so now we've moved a little bit further east. Here's Fairview Road, and here is 1 Meadow Ave.
MR. LALLY: Direct attention to the next slide — if I have the next slide, please. And — what time frame are we looking at in this?
MR. TULLY: 12:39 a.m. to 5:08 a.m.
MR. LALLY: And again if you could, using the laser pointer, direct the jury's attention to what if any locations of significance you noted in this slide.
MR. TULLY: So there were a series of calls during this time period. They all used this antenna here, eNB 57199, which is south of Meadow Ave.
MR. LALLY: Direct your attention to the next one. Lieutenant, what are we looking at as far as time frame in this particular?
MR. TULLY: There was one entry in the call detail records at 5:16.
MR. LALLY: And again, using the laser pointer, could you direct the jury's attention to what if any locations you denoted within this particular?
MR. TULLY: I'll start with the antenna that was used, which was 57259, here in downtown Canton, just north of the Waterfall Bar and Grill.
MR. LALLY: Direct — next slide. What time frame is?
MR. TULLY: 5:19 a.m.
MR. LALLY: And again if you could, using the laser pointer, direct the jury's attention to where the antenna is that the phone is connected to at this point, and what if anything?
MR. TULLY: It is close — slightly further south than the previous one. It's 57199, directly south of 1 Meadow Ave.
MR. LALLY: Now I ask you to turn to the next slide. Have that one. Lieutenant, what time frame are we looking at?
MR. TULLY: 5:20 a.m. to 5:37 a.m.
MR. LALLY: And again if you could, using the laser pointer, direct the jury's attention to where the antenna is and what if any of the locations you observe it, where it is in reference.
MR. TULLY: I previously mentioned this one here at the intersection of Route 93 and 138. It's ID 57021. It's north of those locations I mentioned earlier — the 34 Fairview and 1 Meadow Ave.
MR. LALLY: And next slide, what time frame are we looking at in this?
MR. TULLY: It's one entry at 6:00 a.m. from the record.
MR. LALLY: And if you could again, using the laser pointer, direct the jury's attention to the antenna and in relation to locations of interest in this.
MR. TULLY: It is located just north of the Waterfall Bar and Grill, in downtown Canton.
MR. LALLY: And the next slide, what time frame are we looking at in this slide, sir?
MR. TULLY: 6:03 to 6:57 a.m.
MR. LALLY: And again, using the laser pointer, if you could direct the jury's attention to which antenna the defendant's cell phone connected to at this point, or where it is in relation to locations of significance relevant to this investigation.
MR. TULLY: During this time period the cell phone will bounce back and forth between two antennas, so I did lump them together and place them on one map with this time frame here. So you will see two antennas. One is this one here just west of Route 95, which is 57171. The other antenna is north of 34 Fairview Road, which is 57286.
MR. LALLY: Now, sir, as far as the locations that you observed from looking at the CSLI information from the defendant's phone, any relationship did you note with them in relation to what you had observed on each of the respective videos from the Canton public library and Temple Beth Abraham?
MR. TULLY: It was — it's consistent. As with anything in our investigation, we want to get corroborating information. So the best corroboration about the location of a handset is to obtain video receipts, anything else with a time stamp in a location that we can corroborate the location of a handset.
MR. LALLY: And with respect to information that you had received as far as the defendant's whereabouts, what, any consistency or corroboration was there between witness accounts of the defendant, including the defendant's own statements, as far as where she was and what she received from the CSLI? Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Ask it differently, Mr.—
MR. LALLY: Throughout the course of the investigation, were you made aware of a path of travel attributed to the defendant, both between— between the times of 12:00 a.m. and 6: a.m.?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And the information that you obtained from the CSLI records, was that consistent with what you knew as far as the location of the defendant? Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Ask it differently, Mr.— The objection is the same.
MR. LALLY: With respect to what you knew as the path of travel of the defendant, the information that you obtained from the CSLI, what if any relationship was there between that and the path of travel you knew? Objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'll allow it.
MR. TULLY: It's consistent.
MR. LALLY: Now, sir, as far as the ranging data, what if anything were you able to do with the ranging data in relation to a visual depiction of that, similar to the maps we just saw using Google Earth?
MR. TULLY: I made a visual representation of what the records display, specifically where the antenna is. I did take that additional step to measure the distance out from the antenna that's depicted in the records, and draw a semicircle line depicting where that range would lie.
MR. LALLY: May the witness—?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Did you recognize those documents, sir?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: What do you recognize those?
MR. TULLY: The series of maps I created using the ranging or engineering report.
MR. LALLY: May I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: I seek to introduce and move it as the next exhibit. No objection.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay, 576, you may— May I return them to the witness?
MR. LALLY: May I return them to the witness?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: And with the court's permission, if I could—
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. LALLY: Now, turning your attention to the second page of what's now been marked as Exhibit 576, is that what's up on the screen? What you have before you as Exhibit 576, second page — is that what's up on the screen, Lieutenant?
MR. TULLY: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Now if you could, again, what time frame are we looking at here?
MR. TULLY: 12:17 a.m.
MR. LALLY: And again, sir, if you could, using the laser pointer, describe to the jury what's depicted in this particular—
MR. TULLY: So two locations that, again, as a frame of reference — 34 Fairview Road in Canton and the Waterfall Bar and Grill — are depicted with icons. You'll notice a red lollipop — that would be the best description — icon here. And next to it you see a number and the words either "first" or "last." This one, three, first or last — if you were to go back to the record, the ranging report, you would go to line three and that's where you would find this record, so just an easy way to cross-reference the map with the documents. With these ranging reports, it gives me the range that the handset was from the antenna at the beginning of the communication and at the end of the communication, so that's the first range and the last range — that's why we're using those words.
MR. TULLY: You'll notice a line that goes straight out to the semicircles — that line denotes what's called the azimuth. And I've failed to kind of describe what an azimuth is. So, as antennas are placed in these locations, they're pointed in a direction. Now they're not typically a 360-degree antenna — some are, but mostly they're not — they're pointed in a direction and have a beam width. Rule of thumb, as you'll see with the records with Verizon, it says typically it's 120-degree beam width, because they'll place three around the circle and you get 360 degrees. So with this record here I know what the azimuth is.
MR. TULLY: I then draw a semicircle in each direction — I'll go beyond that 120 degrees, just to give deference to — maybe it was on the outer edges of that, so I want to give the tie to it, it was maybe further away. So that's what's being depicted on the map.
MR. LALLY: Now, with reference to this semicircle itself, if I could ask — is the semicircle that is being drawn, what does that exactly denote as to the location of the handset or the cell phone?
MR. TULLY: The report is telling me that the handset is somewhere on that semicircle. So the phone could be anywhere from here on the semicircle all the way around to there on the semicircle.
MR. LALLY: So again, it's not denoting sort of that the handset of the phone is within the confines of the semicircle, but actually on the line that you've drawn?
MR. TULLY: Correct.
MR. LALLY: And if I could ask you to flip to the next slide — with the next one. Now with reference to what's up on the screen now, Lieutenant, what time frame are we looking at here?
MR. TULLY: 5:18 a.m.
MR. LALLY: Again, if you could, using the laser— before you, draw the jury's attention or direct the jury's attention to what if anything of significance to observe.
MR. TULLY: So the two icons again appear on the map — Waterfall Bar and Grill, 34 Fairview Road — here is that red lollipop, which is the antenna that's used during the communication. The azimuth, or the direction in which the antenna is facing, is depicted on there, and two semicircles — the first one and the last one. As a frame of reference, I failed to put the Temple Beth Abraham, which would appear right here.
MR. LALLY: Now, from this, what's depicted in these last two exhibits, as far as what you're able to plot out from the CSLI and the ranging data, what if any significance did that have as far as in reference to the investigation and the handset, or the defendant's phone?
MR. TULLY: It's important to figure out the movements of someone that we're investigating for a crime. These ranging records really narrow down the scope — they're somewhere around this antenna. It's possible they were somewhere on this line. Again, these records are just depicting where the handset was, but as we all know, we all travel with our cell phone within arm's reach.
MR. LALLY: And again, it's in reference to this ranging data in the last two slides here — what if any relationship did you find that to have with other information, being videos and witness statements, that you obtained during the course of the investigation?
MR. TULLY: So as we previously showed, the Temple Beth Abraham, which would be located here, just south of this intersection here, depicts a large black SUV traveling north on Washington Street. That SUV is similar to the defendant's. And with this record here, a phone associated with the defendant was somewhere on this arc at that exact same time.
MR. LALLY: May I have a moment?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: May I approach?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Just to retrieve.
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. LALLY: Thank you, sir. I have no further questions.