Commonwealth v. Read — Trial ArchiveJessica Hyde — Redirect/Recross
297 linesREDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. BRENNAN:
MR. BRENNAN: You were asked when you began working on analyzing phones in this case and said it was in May. Was that in May of 2023?
MS. HYDE: May of 2023. May 4, 2023, is the email I have of the note. Thank you, yes. It's easy to remember because, "May the 4th be with you."
MR. BRENNAN: When you first began work on this case in May of 2023, what was the catalyst for you to begin working on this?
MS. HYDE: I was contacted by Mr. Tully and then contracted, a SAL was signed, and I began work on the initial request to look at those two search terms on January 29. Does that answer your question?
MR. BRENNAN: Sure.
MR. BRENNAN: Was there a certain claim that was lodged that you were to focus on?
MR. BRENNAN: And were you informed why? Was there any context to that?
MS. HYDE: Probably, I don't recall the exact conversation that I had with the DA's office and Lieutenant Tully at that time, but I'm assuming that I was given that context. I have in my notes that I was to look at those two searches on that date and do an analysis about those.
MR. BRENNAN: Were you asked to reach any particular result?
MR. BRENNAN: Were you asked to reach a conclusion that the 2:27 time stamp was inaccurate?
MR. BRENNAN: When you engaged in your analysis, was it independent of the district attorney's office?
MS. HYDE: My analysis was independent of the district attorney's office. I actually, in the first case, had very little communication with the district attorney's office during the period of my analysis.
MR. BRENNAN: Was there any input from any outside source on what your results or ultimate opinions would be?
MR. BRENNAN: Would you ever allow anybody to affect your input?
MR. BRENNAN: Throughout the course of your efforts with this phone, have there been changes to software?
MR. BRENNAN: I want to ask you about changes to the Cellebrite software. You were asked about certain reports you wrote. Were the reports that you wrote relative to different requests for analysis?
MR. BRENNAN: The report regarding, report number three, regarding changes to Cellebrite software, was that report limited to the time stamp change or was it to include other efforts?
MR. BRENNAN: Please.
MR. BRENNAN: Yes.
MS. HYDE: And I have the request was to understand changes made in a newer version of Cellebrite Physical Analyzer to artifacts pertaining to the timeline of a particular Google search on January 29, 2022, namely "hos long to die in cold".
MR. BRENNAN: When you looked at the Cellebrite software in the report, was the time stamp characterization changed or removed?
MS. HYDE: Yes, it was removed. That time stamp in the version starting in May of 2024, Cellebrite actually removed that and they put a release note stating that it was due to the ambiguity and potential for misconstruing the meaning of that data.
MR. BRENNAN: Was there any other releases informing other reasons why that was changed other than the potential that somebody could misconstrue, misinterpret, or distort the information?
MR. BRENNAN: Please.
MR. ALESSI: Objection, Your Honor.
JUDGE CANNONE: To yourself.
MS. HYDE: To myself? Okay. Roger that. Thank you. I appreciate that. A Can you repeat the question now?
MR. BRENNAN: Was there any reason other than the concern about misinterpreting --
MR. ALESSI: Objection, Your Honor. They said.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. So what's your understanding? A My understanding is that it is not a reliable time stamp, and that is why Cellebrite removed it.
MR. BRENNAN: You were asked about Axiom. Axiom, is it the same or different?
MS. HYDE: Magnet Axiom and Cellebrite Physical Analyzer are two different tools that both do forensic analysis of mobile phones.
MR. BRENNAN: You were asked whether Axiom still has a time stamp that was similar to Cellebrite before the change.
MS. HYDE: Axiom shows what I spoke to on direct where they have it as a parsed versus carved result, and so that particular result shows in the suspended state DB artifact as carved.
MR. BRENNAN: Do companies like Axiom and Cellebrite give you releases, updates, information about how to interpret their reports?
MS. HYDE: So Axiom actually has a document that's released with it called "The Artifact Reference Guide" and that actually gives a brief description of the fields and of artifacts. All tools when they release new artifacts, they put out inner release notes. Not all artifacts are clearly documented that are parsed, however, all of the vendors regularly put out webinars and blog posts that explain their new artifacts, but not necessarily all.
MR. BRENNAN: Is there any releases of cautions from Axiom on the same issue about misinterpreting a time stamp?
MS. HYDE: Axiom in their artifact reference guide for this artifact does speak to the possibility of misinterpretation and states that the time stamp can be earlier than the search had occurred based on what different reasons could cause that time stamp.
MR. BRENNAN: Let me ask you about a Faraday bag. You said that best practices is to isolate an item in a Faraday bag?
MR. BRENNAN: Do you have any information or did you know the travel of Mr. O'Keefe's phone that night or where it went after?
MR. BRENNAN: On January 29, 2022, from say 6:04 in the morning until later that afternoon?
MR. BRENNAN: When you analyzed data from certain devices, are they always placed in a Faraday bag immediately after an incident?
MS. HYDE: There's a lot of times when this is situation dependent. An example of when you would not put something in a Faraday bag is when you have a deceased victim, and you're going to be using their biometrics to possibly unlock the device. Because a Faraday bag is enclosed and it can't be opened, if your intent if you don't have the password is to use a deceased person's fingerprint to unlock the phone, we don't want to put the person's finger in the Faraday bag, so usually those phones would not be Faradayed, but they would typically have airplane mode enabled or SIM card removed. But, no, SIM card removed doesn't actually work in iOS, so I won't get into that.
MR. BRENNAN: Understanding or having an opinion that this item was not placed in a Faraday bag at 6:04 in the morning, does that in any way affect your opinion about the data that you analyzed on this phone and the conclusions that you reached regarding Mr. O'Keefe's phone?
MS. HYDE: It does not have any impact on the conclusions other than the fact that it wasn't Faradayed and more data came in. So we have additional data.
MR. BRENNAN: You were asked a very specific question about history DB, and it was simply whether or not "hos long to die in cold" whether it appeared in history DB. From that isolated question, does that provide any context to you in your analysis or conclusions about "how long to die in cold" and that it occurred at 6:23 and 6:24 the next morning?
MS. HYDE: The absence of the history DB artifact doesn't mean that that search didn't occur at that time. We have multiple corroborating artifacts which is usually what we look for to artifacts that demonstrate is, like, very good. You don't necessarily need that, but in this instance, we have both from the mobile Safari P list, which tracks a history as well as the knowledge C DB. So we do have two artifacts showing that those searches were done at that time, of course, six seconds apart for the difference between the knowledge C and the mobile Safari P list.
MR. BRENNAN: On direct examination, you were not asked questions about Mr. O'Keefe's phone?
MR. BRENNAN: You weren't on cross-examination, so let me follow-up. You have a report that you authored regarding Mr. O'Keefe's phone?
MR. BRENNAN: And you had an opportunity to look at the healthcare data for July -- I'm sorry -- January 29, 2022?
MR. BRENNAN: Page 6 of your report.
MR. BRENNAN: You noted that there were steps that began at 12:11:09 a.m., is that accurate?
MR. BRENNAN: And the way healthcare data works, do you have an understanding whether steps means a person actually took a number of steps or does it mean something else?
MS. HYDE: Steps doesn't necessarily mean that you took a number of steps. It's based on the motion of the device. So it could be steps, it could be you're carrying it. It could be that you're in some other kind of motion. You could be on a bicycle. You could -- any number of things. And the number of steps is based on the presumed gait based on the input into the Apple health app in terms of gender and height. So it determines a gait and then prescribes a number of steps, but it is possible for other things to cause steps to occur.
MR. BRENNAN: You were asked specifically if you saw that there were reported movement or health steps at 12:21:10 a.m. and specifically pointed out to you a notation or a characterization of 80 steps; is that accurate?
MS. HYDE: That is what's stored in the database. I try to clarify, as I did for you, sir, that that's what stored in the database. I'm not saying that 80 steps were taken.
MR. BRENNAN: And by the way, in addition to the healthcare analysis, you did some analysis on the movement of a car, didn't you?
MR. ALESSI: Objection, Your Honor.
JUDGE CANNONE: I'm going to deny that question. Sustained.
MR. BRENNAN: Can these health steps occur if somebody's holding a phone while traveling in a car?
MS. HYDE: As mentioned in my report, it's caused by motion. It could be various motions that could cause it. You could using an elliptical. You could be in a vehicle. You could be on a bicycle. It's not necessarily steps taken.
MR. BRENNAN: Based on your analysis of Mr. O'Keefe's phone and the report that was pointed out to you in cross-examination, do you have information or an opinion where Mr. O'Keefe's phone was located around 12:21:10 while those steps registered?
MR. ALESSI: Objection, Your Honor. Scope.
JUDGE CANNONE: I think that's beyond the scope of the cross, Mr. Brenan.
MR. BRENNAN: It was pointed out to you at 12:21:10 there a registered 80 steps; is that accurate?
MR. BRENNAN: And then you were also asked about the last healthcare data, the last movements of this phone, and it was pointed out that that began at 12:31:56 and 20 seconds?
MR. BRENNAN: And is that the last movement of Mr. O'Keefe's phone that evening before 6:04 that you saw when you analyzed the entire data in the phone?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes. A That appears to be the last before 6:00 a.m. hour.
MR. BRENNAN: So that 20 seconds, if it began at 12:31:56, what was the last movement in seconds and time that that time of Mr. O'Keefe's phone?
MR. BRENNAN: Yes. If that was a 20 second interval --
MR. BRENNAN: -- at 12:31:56, what was the last second that evening that Mr. O'Keefe's phone moved?
MR. BRENNAN: And then when you analyzed the phone and were asked about these times, is there any movement between that last movement and 6:04:01?
MR. BRENNAN: Yes, 12:32:16 and 6:04:01, any movement in that phone whatsoever?
MR. BRENNAN: Do you know what was going on with Mr. O'Keefe's phone at 6:04:01 a.m. on the morning of January 29, 2022?
MS. HYDE: I do not know precisely what was happening with his phone at that time in terms of movement, if that's -- or are you asking me -- I'm sorry. Can you clarify what you mean by the question?
MR. BRENNAN: The next moment after 12:32 --
MR. BRENNAN: -- 6:04:01 --
MR. BRENNAN: -- a.m.?
MR. BRENNAN: Do you have any information about where or why there was movement in the phone at that time?
MR. BRENNAN: And the last question is, the next moment at 6:15:14, do you know if that phone was being moved by somebody or somebody else than Mr. O'Keefe?
MS. HYDE: The phone was in motion. I do not know if -- it could be but a person. It could be on a rail car. I don't think it was on a rail car for clarity, but I don't know what is causing that motion at that time.
MR. BRENNAN: Thank you very much.
JUDGE CANNONE: Any follow-up, Mr. Alessi?
MR. ALESSI: Yes, please, Your Honor. May I have a moment, Your Honor?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. ALESSI: Excuse me, Mr. Brennan, your notes.
MR. BRENNAN: Oh, thank you.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. ALESSI:
MR. ALESSI: Ms. Hyde, you were asked questions by Mr. Brennan just moments ago about Cellebrite and release notes. Do you recall those questions?
MR. ALESSI: And did Cellebrite, beyond stating that their opinion was the 2:20:40 a.m. time stamp was not reliable, did it give any reason at all for why they concluded it was not reliable in that -- I'm sorry. We'll wait for the --
(Sirens in background.)
MR. ALESSI: May I, Your Honor?
JUDGE CANNONE: Go ahead, Mr. Alessi.
MR. ALESSI: Thank you.
MR. ALESSI: In that release note, does Cellebrite state any reason for why they wrote not a reliable time stamp?
MR. ALESSI: Sorry. My question is in the release note, whether there's a reason for why they concluded --
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
JUDGE CANNONE: Please not try to talk over each other.
MR. ALESSI: I will.
MR. ALESSI: I'm not asking you to read it. Just asking whether or not they give any reason for the conclusion, "not a reliable time stamp."
MS. HYDE: One moment. I'd like to review what they wrote. Thank you. Q You're welcome. A Yes, they do. They state that further research since is the reason that they're doing it. That there is further research.
MR. ALESSI: Did they state what that research is?
MR. ALESSI: All right. They don't state what the further research is?
MR. ALESSI: I'd like to move onto Axiom. You were asked questions by Attorney Brennan, and you referred to Axiom as using a different parlance of with a time stamp of carved, correct?
MS. HYDE: Cellebrite uses this deleted demarcation or recovered demarcation. Axiom does not do that at all. They speak to how they recovered the artifact, be it that it was parsed. When I say parsed, I mean the item was where it was expected to be in the algorithm, found it, located it, and said it's here, versus carved which is when they have to go into an unexpected area such as slack space which would be the areas that are not yet used or were previously used to extract the data from that.
MR. ALESSI: So Axiom actually recovers the time stamp, but Cellebrite does not; is that correct? Is that correct?
MS. HYDE: Yes, Cellebrite currently. Currently. Previously, when we did the first case, it was the opposite. Correct.
MR. ALESSI: But currently, Cellebrite doesn't but Axiom does --
MR. ALESSI: -- Axiom recovers 2:27:40 a.m., correct, time stamp?
MR. ALESSI: Exactly. So now I'd like to go back to next topic. Our discussion about Mr. O'Keefe's phone and secured or not. You talk about one example about of maybe needing to use a biometric to unlock the phone and that might be a reason, as I understand it, as to why someone might not put it in a Faraday bag or box; do I have that correct?
MR. ALESSI: Okay. Do you know whether the passcode was immediately provided on the phone of Mr. O'Keefe?
MR. ALESSI: Assume that the passcode was immediately provided for the phone of Mr. O'Keefe, can you think of any other reason why that phone wouldn't be put in airplane mode, Faraday bag, or Faraday box?
MR. ALESSI: Okay. And that phone was obviously not put in airplane mode, Faraday box or Faraday bag after 6:04 a.m. on January 29, 2022, correct?
MR. ALESSI: Now let's go to --
MS. HYDE: Well, I don't know if at some point past 12 o'clock. My report only goes to noon, so just for clarity I don't know anything past noon.
MR. ALESSI: Fair enough. But from 6:04 a.m. until approximately noon --
MR. ALESSI: -- on January 29, 2022, at least that time that phone is not in airplane mode, in a Faraday bag or a Faraday box, correct?
MS. HYDE: It would appear such. Because I didn't analyze past that, I don't know if it had been potentially Faradayed and then it broke Faraday and got data, but I don't suspect that based on this. It appears that that data was live. But I just have to speak to the fact that I just don't know because I didn't go past noon.
MR. ALESSI: You're going past noon.
MR. ALESSI: I'm not.
MR. ALESSI: So to be clear, from 6:04 a.m. on January 29, 2022, until at least noon of January 29, 2022, the iPhone of Mr. O'Keefe is not in airplane mode it's not in a Faraday bag and it's not a Faraday box, correct?
MS. HYDE: Unless it was in a broken Faraday bag like they put it and it was failing, but, yeah, it does not appear to be have been placed in a Faraday bag.
MR. ALESSI: All right.
MS. HYDE: I'm just being honest. You should test your Faraday bags. They go bad. I use Dr. Katz testing methodology, but it 100 percent it appears to have been receiving signal for that entire period and not in a Faraday bag, which would be best practice unless biometrics were needed.
MR. ALESSI: So let's now go to hopefully what are the last two categories of questions. With regard to the iPhone of Jen McCabe, do you have any knowledge as to whether over 200 calls were auto deleted on her phone? You analyzed it.
MS. HYDE: Can -- we can see that calls were auto deleted. You're asking me if the number -- I just want to make sure I understand the question. If the number of calls that were auto deleted, if that exceeded 200?
MR. ALESSI: My question is do you know whether there was auto deletions on Jen McCabe's phone; do you know that?
MS. HYDE: I'm uncomfortable with the term auto deletions because I don't know what that is inferring.
MR. ALESSI: Okay. Did you analyze her phone at all for deletions?
MS. HYDE: I analyzed her phone to see if there had been deletions of call logs and what I found was that there were records that were removed by the system and not recoverable from that database but were recoverable from biomes.
MR. ALESSI: Understood. Now what I'd like to do is to address your answer in response to Mr. Brennan's questions where you said that the issue with regard to Mr. O'Keefe's -- or just generally your proposition, that there was no impact on your conclusion because more data had been obtained. Did I get that correct?
MS. HYDE: I believe my statement was there was no impact on my conclusion with the fact that it had not been in a Faraday.
MR. ALESSI: Right. So isn't it, though, the case that when a phone is not in a Faraday, it is, therefore, active, data can be overwritten?
MR. ALESSI: So, so if data can be overwritten when it's not in a Faraday, you can lose that data, correct?
MR. ALESSI: All right. You talked about in response to Attorney Brennan, the 12:31:56 status, and you said the last, according to you, the last movement 12:32:16; do you recall those questions?
MR. ALESSI: To boil it down, isn't it correct that that phone was moving at that time?
MS. HYDE: May I check the time stamp again? I apologize. There's a lot of time stamps going back and forth.
MR. ALESSI: Please do.
MR. ALESSI: Yes, that's a start, yep.
MR. ALESSI: So does it matter what kind of movement, that phone was moving starting at 12:31:56 and still moving until 12:32:16 a.m. on January 29, 2022, correct?
MR. ALESSI: Thank you. Appreciate again you answering my questions.
JUDGE CANNONE: All right, Ms. Hyde, you are all set.
JUDGE CANNONE: Can I see counsel about scheduling for a minute? Jurors, feel free to stand up and stretch.
(Sidebar commences:
JUDGE CANNONE: So is your next witness still a long witness?
MR. BRENNAN: Very long witness.
JUDGE CANNONE: Do you want to start? Are we on schedule?
MR. BRENNAN: We're very much ahead of schedule, and that's something we should briefly discuss.
JUDGE CANNONE: All right. So maybe I'll let the jurors go and we can figure out scheduling.
MR. BRENNAN: Okay. Does that work?
MR. JACKSON: Sure, yeah.
MR. BRENNAN: I want to play one clip before we end.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
end of sidebar.)
JUDGE CANNONE: Thank you, jurors.
MR. BRENNAN: May I?
JUDGE CANNONE: Yes.
MR. BRENNAN: I would like to play clip 15, please.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
(Whereupon Clip 15 was played.)
JUDGE CANNONE: All right. So, folks, I talked to the lawyers briefly about scheduling at sidebar, and I'm told we're actually ahead of schedule. So with that rather than beginning a witness who's probably going to take a while, we may as well as let you go and enjoy the rest of this beautiful afternoon. So we're on schedule, ahead of schedule, we'll reevaluate that tomorrow, and I will see the lawyers at sidebar as the jurors walk out, so we can talk a little bit about scheduling. Those same cautions, please. Do not discuss this case with anyone. Don't do any independent research or investigation into this case. If you happen to see, hear, or read anything about this case, please disregard it, and let us know. And be very careful about your social media use. We'll see you tomorrow morning. Thank you.
(Jury out.)
JUDGE CANNONE: All right. Why don't you come on up?
(Sidebar commences:
JUDGE CANNONE: All right. So we'll talk about scheduling. I have a copy of 687, Commonwealth's certified petition for certificate of materiality of out-of-state witness. I'm inclined to just allow it. The defense, you don't need to be heard on this, do you?
MR. ALESSI: I'm sorry, your questions, Your Honor.
JUDGE CANNONE: Just to get the out-of-state witness here. It's just process that's typical. All right. So I'll sign it. That will be allowed.
MS. MCLAUGHLIN: Mr. Clerk, it does need to be hand stamped and certified.
JUDGE CANNONE: Attested to and all of that. That's why we need the original. All right. So what do you want to tell me?
MR. ALESSI: I'm just for clarification. Those are just marked for ID? Is that what we're talk about, or are we talking about evidence?
JUDGE CANNONE: It's not evidence. This is to get an out- of-state witness here. Everything's been done. I just need to sign off on it.
MR. ALESSI: Got it. Thank you.
JUDGE CANNONE: I had you here. I didn't want to do anything that I could do in front of you without --
MR. ALESSI: I know. I understand.
JUDGE CANNONE: All right. And we are going to mark clip 15 as evidence. And you'll tell us the number.
COURT REPORTER: Exhibit 83.
(Whereupon Exhibit No. 83, Clip 15, was marked as an exhibit.)
MR. ALESSI: 83, Your Honor.
JUDGE CANNONE: All right. What do you want to tell me about scheduling?
MR. BRENNAN: We have Trooper Bukhenik who we'll start with tomorrow. I think he'll be maybe two and a half hours on direct examination. I don't want to be presumptuous, but I expect he'll be a long cross-examination.
JUDGE CANNONE: Who's doing the cross of Trooper Bukhenik?
MR. YANNETTI: Mr. Jackson.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. Long cross-examination?
MR. JACKSON: Probably.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. Will it get us through the day tomorrow?
MR. JACKSON: I don't know if it would get us through the entire day. If Mr. Brennan is going to get us through lunch, I'm guessing that I'll be a couple of hours.
JUDGE CANNONE: Which is probably almost --
MR. BRENNAN: We will try to bring some lab people in as well. The defense may be stipulating to some of our officers who just introduced photographs which will expedite things if we can come to an agreement as well.
MR. YANNETTI: We'll talk about that tonight.
MR. BRENNAN: We're going to try to get do the staff, all of the rest of the lab people that we can get here Friday.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. BRENNAN: There was a witness from Bode that cannot come until next week.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. BRENNAN: And there is an effort we have Dr. Wolfe.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. BRENNAN: He cannot appear until next Wednesday.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. BRENNAN: The medical examiner is scheduled for Monday? We're working on scheduling the medical examiner for Monday.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. BRENNAN: We still have part of the accident reconstruction team which is Shannon Burgess. I can bring him in anytime next week. As you know, our expert is away. We have still not received the ARCCA report. We received the data but not the report. So he hasn't even had a chance to even look at a report yet.
MS. LITTLE: I have it. I just haven't had a chance to forward it to them, so I just received it. So they'll have it before the end of the day. It was due today.
JUDGE CANNONE: Right. How long is it?
MS. LITTLE: I literally have -- I just got it, so I'm not sure.
MR. BRENNAN: So we'll need time for our expert to look at that and digest it. It's my expectation to not ask for a continuance during the trial. We are going to ask that he be able to testify and then be allowed to look at the information and then return for rebuttal after he's had a chance to review the information because there's no way he's going to be able to testify next week and digest that before he conducts any tests that he wants to conduct, and contemplate all the evidence in that massive amount of data that they've given us.
MR. ALESSI: We would not agree to having him come in testify and then get to read the report and then come in rebuttal.
JUDGE CANNONE: He's got to read the report first.
MR. ALESSI: Understood. Exactly.
JUDGE CANNONE: But in order to digest it --
MR. ALESSI: I'm okay with that a reasonable amount of time to digest it, I'm fine with that.
MR. BRENNAN: Part of the difficulty is we don't have that time. As their witness has said, when they have new information of this size, they give a month to look at it, test it, and vet it and write a report. He's not going to have a month, and I'm not going to ask for a month continuance. It's not practical, but he should have the right to look at it; consider it, if there's limited testing, he should be able to do that. I'm not looking for him to rebut the original report, but anything that is new that we still haven't received the report for if we're going to have him testify timely and fairly, he should be able to come back to address all of the new information after in rebuttal.
JUDGE CANNONE: So I agree that he needs time to digest it. I think we're putting the cart before the horse here. He hasn't seen it yet. You haven't seen it yet. He may, as we know, we know some experts can go through 500 pages and say, yeah, I'm okay. So let's find out from him -- Fair enough.
JUDGE CANNONE: -- what he needs and then we can have a hearing on what he needs and what the appropriate remedy is.
MR. BRENNAN: I think that's fair. I was just trying to get the scheduling -- I'm trying to get the Commonwealth's case done as quickly as possible so that's why I raised it.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MS. MCLAUGHLIN: And, Your Honor, we do anticipate having a juvenile witness here on Friday to testify. If permitted by the Court, we would like that witness to be able to begin at 9:00 a.m. if that means interrupting a certain witness, but to have this witness go early in the morning so they can return back to school.
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. So I will make every effort to accommodate this witness. I don't like, as you know it worked out fine with Trooper Guarino were there was no cross, but I just -- not in a criminal case, as you know.
MS. MCLAUGHLIN: Yes, we can make accommodations and I understand the Court to appreciate the accommodations just with media, cameras, and things like that --
JUDGE CANNONE: Right. I issued an order last year. Everybody has to be out -- well, I'll look at the order. I think the order was no filming and no recording. I think they reported on the demeanor of the child.
MS. MCLAUGHLIN: Similar no still photographs.
JUDGE CANNONE: No photographs. No photographs. So I'll look at that. We'll make very clear with the media. It may need that we need to suspend early on Thursday, which I don't really want to do, and put off the cross-examination if that's what it is. We'll try to find an appropriate spot to stop.
MS. MCLAUGHLIN: Sometime Friday morning would be preferable. It doesn't need to be 9:00 a.m. but in that early morning.
JUDGE CANNONE: As early as possible.
MR. ALESSI: May I ask Mr. Brennan a quick question on scheduling?
JUDGE CANNONE: Okay.
MR. ALESSI: Mr. Brennan, on your medical examiner, you said Monday. Is there any chance before Monday?
MR. BRENNAN: I would prefer to have her here Friday, but I don't know that we can get here Friday and I don't know what's going to happen with the juvenile. So if we can get her Monday, I think we'll do Monday, but if we can put her on Friday, I'm open to it. I just don't know if she can be here. So we're asking.
MR. ALESSI: Fair enough.
JUDGE CANNONE: So plan on Friday.
MR. ALESSI: That's what I'm going to do.
MR. BRENNAN: So suffice to say, I wanted to alert the Court that we're moving with alacrity.
JUDGE CANNONE: Great.
MR. BRENNAN: But there will be some problems, maybe, on Monday or Tuesday because of the fact that Dr. Wolfe can't be here until Wednesday. I still have to determine what the request is going to be for Mr. Wilcher. So we're going to try to fit in everybody the best we can, but I might have some gaps depending on --
JUDGE CANNONE: All right. So if there gap on Tuesday, it gives Dr. Wilcher another opportunity to read -- so that wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if we did suspend for Tuesday if we could finish whatever else you need to give them on Wednesday.
MR. BRENNAN: I'll keep the Court updated day by day, but the goal is to get everybody done. I just think might be a couple of gaps in there. We have somebody from Bode coming from California I think, somebody from Ring coming from California. We wanted to get them here for the beginning of the week so that everything's before the end of our case so no one's waiting for a minor witness.
JUDGE CANNONE: Monday I have a medical appointment at 8:30 that I have cannot move. Some I'll have the jury come in at 10:00. attend. I should be able to be here by 10:00, so factor that into your schedule as well.
MR. BRENNAN: Thank you.
JUDGE CANNONE: All right. We'll see you tomorrow.
MR. ALESSI: Thank you, Your Honor.
(Court in recess at 3:43 p.m.)