Day 30 - June 24, 2024

Dr. Frank Sheridan, a retired triple board-certified forensic pathologist and former chief medical examiner of San Bernardino County, California, testifies as a defense expert. After establishing his credentials — approximately 13,000 autopsies, over 400 court qualifications, and extensive experience with pedestrian-vehicle collisions — Sheridan examines photographs of O'Keefe's arm injuries and testifies they lack the bruising expected from a vehicle strike, instead appearing consistent with animal scratch and bite marks. He describes the fatal head laceration to the occipital area, the resulting skull fracture extending to the frontal regions, extensive brain contusions, and fatal brain herniation. Sheridan states the head injury would have caused immediate unconsciousness, was inconsistent with falling onto grass or snow, and that the overall injury pattern — including hand bruising he characterizes as possible defensive injuries — is consistent with a physical altercation.

ADA Lally cross-examined defense forensic pathologist Frank Sheridan about the limits of opinions he formed from photographs, the autopsy report, and other records rather than from performing the autopsy. Lally asked about a UC Davis canine-DNA predicate, a taillight-fragment item, a hair-sample item, cocktail-glass evidence, and later dog-bite photographs; Sheridan answered that he was unaware, did not remember, did not have, or did not believe he had been shown the described material. Sheridan also testified that he could not identify the animal or breed, say whether the arm injuries were inflicted inside or outside, or time them more narrowly than minutes to hours, and that the materials he reviewed did not show an animal interacting with O'Keefe. Lally further explored compression abrasions, frozen-ground conditions, and a vehicle-projection hypothetical; Sheridan qualified those answers and maintained that he did not think the asserted vehicle scenario occurred.

Attorney Elizabeth Little conducts a brief redirect of Dr. Frank Sheridan, introducing a photograph showing the deceased John O'Keefe's knees. The photograph, admitted as Exhibit 657, depicts the knee abrasion that was discussed during Lally's cross-examination. Sheridan confirms it shows an abrasion and states that is the extent of the knee injury. The redirect consists of this single evidentiary point before Sheridan is excused.

On his initial direct examination before the jury, Jackson established Wolfe's credentials and independence — Wolfe was retained by a separate federal agency (DOJ/FBI), had never met the defense or prosecution, and formed his own theories from the evidence provided. Wolfe described ARCCA's projectile testing, where a pneumatic cannon fired a drinking glass at 37 mph into an exemplar tail light and replicated the damage pattern seen on the Lexus. He testified that a drop test at 15 mph — already fast for reversing — produced significantly more tail light damage than was observed on the subject vehicle, and that 24 mph would produce roughly 2.5 times more energy and damage. Wolfe further noted the absence of damage in the 20-inch gap between the dent above the lift gate and the broken tail light was inconsistent with an outstretched arm being struck. He concluded the tail light damage was inconsistent with striking a human head or arm.

On initial cross-examination, ADA Lally questioned Wolfe about the materials supplied to ARCCA and whether he had reviewed or been made aware of additional items and statements. Wolfe gave item-specific answers: he said he was not aware when Lally asked about Read's reported statements and purported results involving tail-light DNA, mitochondrial testing of hair, and microscopic plastic fragments; he said he had not been given the driveway video; and he said he had not been shown TCH stream data. The reverse-operation follow-up was sustained and unanswered. Lally also challenged ARCCA's testing methods. Wolfe testified that the team used a rocks glass, preconditioned the tail lamps to about 28 degrees although the report did not say so, considered wind effects minimal at the projectile speed, relied on photographs rather than inspecting the vehicle or fragments, and tested a tail-light assembly that was not attached to a vehicle. Wolfe qualified that shoes can come off in a pedestrian impact depending on the interaction and answered that a 0-5 mph collision would not create the observed tail-light damage. Lally opened and closed the cross with the report's standard reservation to supplement or revise if additional information became available.

In a brief redirect of just 12 utterances, Jackson asked Wolfe whether the DNA on the tail light housing, hair evidence, and glass material raised during Lally's cross-examination changed any of his opinions. Wolfe responded 'Absolutely not.' Jackson attempted a broader question about whether the vehicle damage and human injuries were consistent with vehicle interaction, but Lally's objection was sustained. Jackson then released the witness.

Dr. Andrew Rentschler, a biomechanical engineer from ARCCA, testified on direct examination by Alan Jackson about whether O'Keefe's injuries could have resulted from contact with Read's Lexus. Rentschler testified that ARCCA was retained by neither trial party. He said a 24-to-25 mph vehicle-pedestrian impact would produce significant injuries; for the asserted head-contact scenario, he expected associated cervical-spine injuries and greater tail-light damage than ARCCA's 15 mph headform test produced. He testified that O'Keefe's isolated occipital skull fracture with no cervical-spine or other significant body injuries was inconsistent with a tail-light strike. Regarding the arm, he said the abrasions were uniform and superficial, extended over more than 12 inches compared with a roughly 6-inch tail-light width, and lacked the deeper, varied injuries and embedded fragments he would expect from a shattering tail-light impact. He also explained that striking only an outstretched arm could not project the body 20 to 30 feet because the force would not act at the body's center of mass.

ADA Adam Lally cross-examined Dr. Andrew Rentschler, focusing on gaps in the materials provided to ARCCA for their analysis. Lally established that Rentschler never inspected the physical vehicle, never reviewed the State Police reconstruction report or forensic DNA reports, and never examined the actual tail light pieces. Lally confronted Rentschler with evidence discovered after the February 2024 report: DNA consistent with O'Keefe found on the tail light housing, O'Keefe's DNA on a drinking glass near his body, and plastic fragments consistent with the tail light found embedded in O'Keefe's shirt. Lally also elicited that Rentschler did not analyze whether frozen ground could have caused the skull fracture, and that the report's own language acknowledged O'Keefe's head injury was consistent with falling backwards after being pushed or impacted by the Lexus. The defense rested immediately after Rentschler's dismissal.