Shanon Burgess - Cross (Part 2)

MR. ALESSI: Thank you, your honor. Morning, Mr. Burgess.

MR. ALESSI: On your direct examination yesterday, your experience was brought up in questions.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. On your direct examination, your certifications were brought up in questions.

MR. ALESSI: Incorrect. There was no discussion in your direct examination about having certifications in Cellebrite and Magnet AXIOM forensics. Did I miss?

MR. ALESSI: I'll repeat it, sir, in case I misspoke. On your direct examination, your certifications were brought up in questions. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: However, on your direct examination, no questions were asked of you at all about your supposed education. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: And you did not bring up your educational background at all. Correct. On direct examination.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. A forensic examiner must prioritize accuracy.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. A forensic examiner must prioritize reliability.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. Both are important.

MR. ALESSI: It's a criminal proceeding we're in.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. And therefore, accuracy and reliability are especially important in a criminal case as opposed to a civil case.

MR. ALESSI: But they're certainly important in a criminal case.

MR. ALESSI: And accuracy and reliability are especially important when seconds and minutes matter, as they matter and as you testified to in this case.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. You testified yesterday that the events on the timeline contained in your PowerPoint presentation that was displayed yesterday and presented to the jury were accurate. Your words — several times — down to the second.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. For the Lexus.

MR. ALESSI: For the Lexus. Yes. You said they were accurate down to the second.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. Let's take a look at your PowerPoint presentation that you discussed extensively before the jury yesterday. Mr. Woll, could we please bring up slide 32 of the presentation Mr. Burgess discussed with the jury yesterday? And your honor, with your permission to publish.

MR. ALESSI: Thank you, Mr. Burgess. Pick your screen.

MR. ALESSI: Is this a true and accurate representation of your analysis of Miss Read's Lexus vehicle traveling to 34 Fairview Road and the O'Keefe residence?

MR. ALESSI: According to your timeline, Miss Read's vehicle powered on at 12:36 a.m. on January 30th.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. Now, is your timeline on this slide accurate down to the second as you stated in your direct examination yesterday for the power on and off events?

MR. ALESSI: Yes. Could we go to slide 33, please, Mr. Woll? And we're going to go through a handful of slides. Sure, Mr. Burgess, just to give you a heads up. Is this a true and accurate representation of your analysis of Miss Read leaving the O'Keefe residence at 5:00:07 a.m.?

MR. ALESSI: And according to your timeline, Miss Read powered on her vehicle at 5:07:46 a.m. on January 30th, 2022.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. Is the time on this slide accurate down to the second as you stated in your direct examination yesterday?

MR. ALESSI: Yes. If we could go, Mr. Woll, to slide 34, please. And these are all your slides. Correct, sir.

MR. ALESSI: You prepared them?

MR. ALESSI: Is slide 34 a true and accurate representation of your analysis of Miss Read traveling to the Dighton residence at 12:25:01 a.m.? I'm sorry. 12:25:01 p.m. 12:35:01, correct? I — I'm sorry. Thank you.

MR. ALESSI: And according to your analysis, Miss Read powered on her vehicle to travel to Dighton at 12:35:01 p.m. on January 30th.

MR. ALESSI: Yes, that's correct. And is the time on this slide accurate down to the second as you stated in your direct examination yesterday?

MR. ALESSI: Slide 35, please, Mr. Woll. Is this a true and accurate representation of your analysis of Miss Read's vehicle being towed by the Massachusetts police vendor from her parents' residence in Dighton?

MR. ALESSI: And pursuant to your timeline that you created here, Miss Read's vehicle was powered on at 4:11 p.m. on January 30th, 2022 and towed to the Canton Police Department.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. Is your timeline on this slide accurate down to the second as you stated in your direct examination yesterday?

MR. ALESSI: Slide 36, please, Mr. Woll. Is slide 36 a true and accurate representation of your analysis of Miss Read's vehicle arriving at the Canton Police Department?

MR. ALESSI: And pursuant to the timeline you created, Miss Read's vehicle powered off at 5:36 p.m. on January 30th, 2022. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: Is your analysis on slide 36 accurate down to the second as you stated in your direct examination yesterday?

MR. ALESSI: In point of fact, Mr. Burgess, none of the five timelines that we just reviewed from your presentation are accurate at all, and certainly not down to the second. Am I right or am I wrong?

MR. ALESSI: Are you aware? And if we could go back to the first slide, which is slide 32, and we'll look at each of them quickly. Are you aware that all of the relevant events in the timeline you described in your presentation in these slides actually occurred on January 29th, 2022, not January 30th, 2022? Do you know that this is January 30th, 2022?

MR. ALESSI: And in terms of January 30th, I want to go back. I want to go back and make sure it's very, very clear. In your presentation, they actually occurred on January 29th, 2022.

MR. ALESSI: Can I have a moment, your honor, please?

MR. ALESSI: Thank you. Mr. Burgess, once that timeline crosses into midnight, it's January 30th, not January 29th.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. Yes, it is January 30th.

MR. ALESSI: So in actuality, these five timelines as you testified to them yesterday are not accurate down to the second. Correct? Because you got the wrong date.

MR. ALESSI: Correct?

MR. ALESSI: Yes. Okay. You understand my point?

MR. ALESSI: The core basis of your job, your role in this case is to reconcile time discrepancies, as you say, down to the second.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. But your discussion of the timeline on each of these slides, on each of these key events, is incorrect.

MR. ALESSI: So your discussion of the applicable date you're saying, as you described it yesterday and interpreted this timeline, was correct. Is that what you're saying now?

MR. ALESSI: But my question is your discussion of it yesterday.

MR. ALESSI: And that was your testimony yesterday, what you spoke about.

MR. ALESSI: Let's turn to a different topic. Lights up. If we could — and thank you for taking that down, Mr. Woll — actually, to mitigate the inconsistencies that you analyzed yesterday between independent clocks. Am I correct that your position is that forensic methodology recommends cross-referencing timestamps from multiple sources to identify discrepancies, and when possible leveraging time anchors — events that contain both a system timestamp and an external physical event — to identify and correct timing discrepancies. Do I have that right?

MR. ALESSI: Yesterday we talked about the scientific method. You recall that, sir?

MR. ALESSI: And how it's designed to prevent bias from infecting the analysis. You recall that as well?

MR. ALESSI: And yesterday you agreed that experts should never selectively gather and interpret evidence to confirm a pre-existing belief while neglecting evidence that contradicts those beliefs. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: And doing that is called confirmation bias, which you said you understood yesterday, right?

MR. ALESSI: And it could also lead to errors in forensic analyses. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: Let's take a look at your January 30th report, sir.

MR. ALESSI: And this is your first report, your second report being the May 8th report. In your January 30th report, you did not issue any opinion or conclusion with regard to the timing of what you call the tech stream event 11622 in your January 30th report, did you?

MR. ALESSI: You didn't even mention either the phrase "tech stream event" or the phrase "11622" in your January 30, 2025 report, did you?

MR. ALESSI: But in your January 30, 2025 report, you did evaluate the variance between the Lexus infotainment system on the one hand and Mr. O'Keefe's iPhone data on the other. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: In fact, in that report, the January 30th report, you compared the call logs on Miss Read's Lexus infotainment system with the call logs on Mr. O'Keefe's iPhone in order to evaluate whether there was a variance.

MR. ALESSI: And do I have it correct in your report that it's the position that the timestamp call log data — specifically the recorded calls between Miss Read and Mr. O'Keefe, along with the infotainment power event logs — were analyzed for what you called clock skew by cross-referencing them against other independent data sources. Right.

MR. ALESSI: So that would have been comparing the timestamps from Mr. O'Keefe's iPhone with the timestamps from the defendant's Lexus, right?

MR. ALESSI: Right — to Miss Read's Lexus. Correct. And a forensic comparison of these data sets was aimed to identify timestamp discrepancies. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: To identify potential clock skew. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: And potential clock drift that could impact event reconstruction. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: All as stated in your January 30th report, right?

MR. ALESSI: One moment. Your honor, may I have this marked as the next exhibit in order for identification?

MR. ALESSI: May I present to the witness, your honor?

MR. ALESSI: Thank you, Mr. Burgess. I am presenting to you what has been marked as exhibit BBB for identification. I'd ask you take a look at it, sir, and pick your head up when you've had a fair opportunity to take a look at it.

MR. ALESSI: Do you recognize that document, sir?

MR. ALESSI: May I reapproach, your honor?

MR. ALESSI: Thank you. What do you recognize that document to be, sir?

MR. ALESSI: And is that exhibit BBB for identification in your January 30, 2025 report?

MR. ALESSI: And did you create that chart that is depicted in exhibit BBB for identification?

MR. ALESSI: And is that a fair and accurate representation of the information that you discussed on page 33 of your January 30, 2025 report?

MR. ALESSI: I offer exhibit BBB for identification into evidence.

MR. ALESSI: May I continue, your honor?

MR. ALESSI: Thank you, your honor. At this time, I offer exhibit BBB into evidence.

MR. ALESSI: May I re-present to the witness, your honor?

MR. ALESSI: Thank you, Mr. Burgess. I am re-presenting to you what is now exhibit 189 in evidence. Ask you to once again take a look at it, and if you need further time, please take it, sir, and then pick your head up when you've had a fair opportunity to look at that document.

MR. ALESSI: Despite claiming the purpose in your January 30th report of quote "identifying timestamp discrepancies, potential clock skew, and clock drift" — you did not compare the time of the three-point turn between the infotainment system in the Lexus SUV and Mr. O'Keefe's phone. Did you?

MR. ALESSI: Instead, you identified the potential variance by analyzing various calls on the infotainment system of the Lexus versus Mr. O'Keefe's phone.

MR. ALESSI: This data — this data in that exhibit — captures a precise moment in time that is easily compared between the two devices. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: Mr. Woll — your honor, may Mr. Woll please publish this exhibit?

MR. ALESSI: So this data, just to reestablish, captures a precise moment in time that's easily compared between the two devices. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: Now, according to your own table, there are potential offsets — reading in the far right-hand column — 2 seconds, 1 second, 2 seconds, 1 second, 8 seconds, 16 seconds, and 21 seconds. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: And yet you failed to apply this variance to the infotainment time on the Lexus associated with the tech stream event 11622. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: I will proceed along. I'm sure if Mr. Brennan has questions and wants you to explain, he may choose to do that. This is simple arithmetic, is it not? It's either an addition or a subtraction — the offset. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: And yet in your initial report on January 30th, 2025, you did not take that final analytical step, did you?

MR. ALESSI: But you didn't — you know what analytical step I'm talking about, correct?

MR. ALESSI: We'll come back to it. I want to focus on your opinion. What you did do, as I understand it, in your January 30th report. So, in your opinion — we can take that down for a moment, please, because I want to see if we need to show the contrast. With your honor's permission. Can we leave it up just a little bit longer?

MR. ALESSI: Thank you. In opinion number five — and please feel free to look at your January 30th report — you indicated only this: "The difference between the Lexus infotainment and Mr. O'Keefe's cell phone ranged between 8 seconds and 16 to 21 seconds during the period between 5:21:36 a.m. and 5:30:31 a.m. on January 29th, 2022." Do I have that correct?

MR. ALESSI: Between 5:21 and 5:30 a.m. Yes. Now, what I'd like to do is — we can take that down. Thank you, Mr. Woll. Let's talk about what information you learned after you issued your January 30, 2025 report, or at the time of that report. You received and reviewed a copy of a portion of your colleague's slide presentation and report at Aperture, Dr. Judson Welcher. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: Well, I understand you want to add Mr. Dogra. My question is —

MR. ALESSI: Okay. Yes, your honor. Thank you. I'm focusing on — what would you like to call it? Do you call it a slide presentation? You prefer Dr. Welcher?

MR. ALESSI: I want to use whatever parlance you're comfortable with.

MR. ALESSI: Slide. So the slide presentation of Dr. Welcher that he submitted the same day you submitted your report, on January 30, 2025. And in that he analyzed the timing of the 11622 — what he calls an infotainment event, you call a tech stream event. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: Absolutely. Absolutely. Could we publish what is in evidence? It was 188.

MR. ALESSI: And I'm also, sir, at your request — may I approach, please?

MR. ALESSI: At your request, I want to give you — sure, if we have 188, we'll just give them the actual marked exhibit. You know what we'll do? We'll use the slide. If you need an exhibit, we'll pull the exhibit.

MR. ALESSI: Now, if we could enlarge the text — we don't need the map. So make that as large as you can, please, Mr. Woll, in the relevant portions.

MR. ALESSI: You're aware that according to Dr. Welcher's analysis, as depicted in this slide in evidence, the 11622 — what he calls an infotainment trigger, that you call a tech stream event, right?

MR. ALESSI: The 11622 tech stream event occurred at 1:23:138 a.m. on January 29, 2022. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: And that's when it began, right?

MR. ALESSI: That's when the trigger threshold was met. Correct. We can take that down now. Mr. Woll — you also testified yesterday that you reviewed Mr. Whiffin — Mr. Ian Whiffin's January report, which established a timeline of the last interactive events on Mr. O'Keefe's phone. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: Your honor, could we please publish exhibit 39, which is in evidence?

MR. ALESSI: And if we could go to slide 82, and have 83 available, if we can enlarge the applicable sections. And what I'm going to ask you, Mr. Burgess, is to see whether these events are consistent with your memory of what the applicable events are. Do you see the column "biometric device unlock with Face ID" event at 12:32:04 a.m.?

MR. ALESSI: Now, that's after the 12:31:38 a.m. 11622 tech stream event that's in Mr. Welcher's slide. Correct? That we just saw.

MR. ALESSI: So — I'm going to repeat the question. The 12:32:04 a.m. device unlock with Face ID event is after the 12:31:38 and 12:31:43 11622 tech stream event that is stated in Dr. Welcher's report. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: Now, do you see the lock event which occurred at 12:32:09?

MR. ALESSI: That is also after the 12:31:38 to 12:31:43 tech stream event. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: That 12:32:09 a.m. lock event is after the 12:31:38 to 12:31:43 range that is stated in Dr. Welcher's report. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: So — if we could go back — And we're going to toggle back, with your honor's permission, between these two slides for the next couple questions. If we can go back to and enlarge Dr. Welcher's slide — that 12:31:38 to 12:31:43 time period is what your colleague, the licensed engineer Dr. Welcher, chose in his slide analysis as the last user interaction, according to him, on John O'Keefe's phone. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: The 12:32:09. Yes. Now, if we could go back to the — and zero in, please. Now, even Mr. Whiffin's report establishes additional activity on Mr. O'Keefe's phone after the event chosen by Dr. Welcher. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: And in fact, Mr. Whiffin identifies a "lock event" that occurred 26 seconds after the 11622 tech stream event identified by Dr. Welcher, at 12:31:38 to 12:31:43. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: Using the unadjusted clock.

MR. ALESSI: Does Dr. Welcher at all use the words "unadjusted clock" in his slide?

MR. ALESSI: Okay. What I'd like to do is ask you a question about whether, in fact, Mr. Whiffin identifies a lock event that occurred 26 seconds after the 11622 tech stream event at 12:31:38 to 12:31:43, as stated in your colleague's report — Dr. Welcher — the slide presentation. Is that correct?

MR. ALESSI: Do you know whether a lock event on an iPhone requires human interaction?

MR. ALESSI: Is it just typically, or it doesn't?

MR. ALESSI: Correct. But this specific instance, the lock — it requires somebody, a human being, to actually press a button on the side. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: Yes, it requires a button press. Yes. Do you have any reason to believe that — if Mr. O'Keefe had an autolocking function on it?

MR. ALESSI: Right. If we can enlarge that — do you see the "end of health" event, 36 steps, that we talked about yesterday, that was covering a distance of 80 over 84 ft.? Do you see that occurring at 12:32:16 a.m.?

MR. ALESSI: Do you see it?

MR. ALESSI: And that's also after the 12:31:38 to 12:31:43 tech stream event identified by your colleague, the licensed engineer Dr. Welcher, in his slide. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: Now finally, do you see the entry "pocket state detected" at 12:33:14 a.m.? You see that, sir? DEFENSE: Objection.

MR. ALESSI: Do you know what a pocket state is, sir?

MR. ALESSI: Do you know when the pocket states occurred on the iPhone of John O'Keefe pursuant to your analysis of his phone?

MR. ALESSI: You didn't analyze pocket state detections on Mr. O'Keefe?

MR. ALESSI: Do you believe pocket state detected data? Well, let me just go back and confirm. So you didn't analyze, with any source, pocket state detection information with regard to Mr. O'Keefe's phone. Is that correct?

MR. ALESSI: So let's go back and summarize — for each of the ones you did look at and analyze that you just testified — every single one of those that we just discussed, those user interaction events occurred after Dr. Welcher claims a collision occurred, as represented in a tech stream event of 11622 at 12:31:38 to 12:31:43. Correct? DEFENSE: Objection. Do you understand? Let's — if we could go back, please, to Dr. Welcher's slide. Highlight the text again, please, Mr. Woll. Do you understand that Dr. Welcher is correlating the infotainment trigger 11622 with an alleged collision? Do you understand that? DEFENSE: Objection.

MR. ALESSI: You can put it back up. Thank you, your honor. If we could go now, Mr. Woll, back to the slide from Dr. Welcher's slide presentation, and if you could re-enlarge the applicable section that we've had up before — thanks for your patience. Mr. Burgess, you have reviewed this slide and this specific data in this slide previously. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: And I just want to — Mr. Woll, just go back to the slide so we're clear on what this is. So this slide here is what you're speaking about, right?

MR. ALESSI: And you've reviewed this slide prior to your testimony in this court?

MR. ALESSI: And you considered this slide as part of your analyses that you have performed and testified about?

MR. ALESSI: So now, Mr. Burgess, I'd like to ask you a question. Every single one of the user interaction events that we talked about — steps, lock, etc. — occurred after Dr. Welcher's, what he calls an infotainment event, which you call a tech stream event, in the range of 12:31:38 to 12:31:43. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: I'm sorry, I didn't know you hadn't finished. Please finish your answer.

MR. ALESSI: Let's just assume that is the case. Let's then just focus on what you consider to be a user interaction, which is device lock. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: And the device lock event that you agree is a user interaction — we could go back to that just so we have clarity — the lock event that you agree is a user interaction, occurred at 12:32:09 according to Mr. O'Keefe's phone. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: We could go back to Dr. Welcher — is after, it is after the end of the tech stream event dubbed as 11622. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: I didn't finish my question. I'm sorry, your honor.

MR. ALESSI: Don't answer, Mr. Burgess, until the complete question. In that — that event, the lock event, according to Dr. Welcher's own words in his own slide, occurs 20 seconds after the end of the tech stream event 11622. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: May I have a moment, your honor?

MR. ALESSI: And so — to alter it, hopefully make it a little clearer. So according to Dr. Welcher, the licensed engineer, your colleague at Aperture — his slide that he has here — the last O'Keefe cell phone event, the lock, occurred within approximately 26 seconds after the end of the tech stream event dubbed 11622. That's what's stated there. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: According to the unadjusted clock — you keep adding "according to the unadjusted clock." But do the words "according to the unadjusted clock" appear anywhere in that slide, sir?

MR. ALESSI: We can take that down, and with the court's permission, turn the lights back on, please. Yesterday you stated that you reviewed a presentation by another expert, Mr. Dogra, who reviewed the findings of your January 30th report. Do you recall that, sir?

MR. ALESSI: In fact, in your May 8th, 2025 report — your second report, your first being the January 30th report — you only cite two new sources of data that you reviewed before making your conclusions. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: May I have a moment, your honor?

MR. ALESSI: May I approach, your honor?

MR. ALESSI: I'm going to need to be careful about this as well.

MR. ALESSI: May I proceed, your honor, and approach the witness?

MR. ALESSI: Thank you. Excuse me. Sir, I'm going to present to you two documents, each of which is marked for identification. The first is exhibit CCC for identification. That is one slide out of what is marked as exhibit DDD for identification. And exhibit CCC is one page out of exhibit DDD for identification. And I'd ask you, sir, to take a look at those documents and reference either one. And please let me know, sir, when you've had a fair opportunity to review those documents so I can proceed with questions about them.

MR. ALESSI: Okay. Sir, can you please read the exhibit designation on the entire slide presentation on DDD? Pardon me. On exhibit DDD — and that's triple D as in David.

MR. ALESSI: So, exhibit DDD — is that the March 5, 2025 PowerPoint presentation of Mr. Dogra that you spoke about extensively yesterday?

MR. ALESSI: And, sir, before you came to court yesterday, did you review and consider exhibit DDD for identification?

MR. ALESSI: And as a matter of fact, you spent considerable time with regard to exhibit DDD before you came to court yesterday. Correct. And in addition, isn't it the case that your testimony yesterday is that exhibit DDD, the March 5, 2025 slide presentation of Mr. Dogra, was part of the reason why you created your May 8th, 2025 report?

MR. ALESSI: May I approach, your honor?

MR. ALESSI: Your honor, I offer — excuse me — exhibit CCC into evidence. And do not offer exhibit DDD at this time.

MR. ALESSI: I will do so, your honor. Thank you. Mr. Burgess, is exhibit CCC a slide page out of exhibit DDD?

MR. ALESSI: Thank you for that, your honor. I now offer exhibit CCC for identification into evidence.

MR. ALESSI: Thank you. And I also hand back to madam court reporter exhibit DDD for identification. Exhibit 190. And sir, do you have before you — read the three letters, please. Just — so we're on the same page in that exhibit. That the one that's in — to Mr. Woll Thank you — the one page.

MR. ALESSI: Exhibit 190. And that's entitled "all possible combinations."

MR. ALESSI: So we'll refer to that as exhibit 190. Okay.

MR. ALESSI: Have you had a fair opportunity to refresh yourself on that one-page chart?

MR. ALESSI: Your honor, may I please publish exhibit 190?

MR. ALESSI: And if we could enlarge it — without — I think Mr. Woll, we can obscure for the moment the "all positive" on the right and come back to that as needed. Thank you. Now, Mr. Dogra, who is an expert for the defense, took the data points you evaluated in your January 30, 2025 report and simply — performed the last step in your analysis that I was referring to previously.

MR. ALESSI: I understand you may have a view as to whether they apply or not. I'm just trying to understand what you understood he did. Again, I'll repeat.

MR. ALESSI: So, we'll strike the comment part and just go to the question. So, you understand that Mr. Dogra took the data points that you evaluated in your January 30, 2025 report and simply performed the last step in your analysis.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. Now what I want to do is just elucidate the columns and their meaning. So the column on the right — the far right — equals the number of seconds between the end of the 11622 text stream event that, in the slide of Dr. Welcher, is ending at 12:31:43, and the lock event on Mr. O'Keefe's phone that occurred at 12:32:09.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. And that's your understanding of that column as well.

MR. ALESSI: Now, even taking your colleague Dr. Welcher's assumption that the last user interaction on Mr. O'Keefe's phone occurred at 12:32:09 a.m. on January 29, 2022, is Mr. Dogra demonstrating in this — chart that by using the clock variance that you calculated in your January 30 report, there are no circumstances where the trigger event of 11622 occurs before the lock event on Mr. O'Keefe's phone?

MR. ALESSI: Okay. In terms of this chart, do you agree that the methodology and application of it — of Mr. Dogra — is that Mr. Dogra took the last user interaction data point of Dr. Welcher in his slide of 12:32:09 and applied the clock variance that you calculated in your January 30th report. Do you agree that that's what Mr. Dogra did?

MR. ALESSI: What do you — believe Mr. Dogra did here?

MR. ALESSI: I understand, but what I'm trying to get at is just what you understood Mr. Dogra did in this chart.

MR. ALESSI: And so do you agree, based upon what Mr. Dogra did as represented in this chart, there are no circumstances where the 11622 text stream event occurs —

MR. ALESSI: I understand your comment. My question, sir, is this. What do you understand Mr. Dogra is doing with regard to this chart? Do you understand what he is doing in this chart?

MR. ALESSI: I'd just like you to state what it is you understand he is doing.

MR. ALESSI: He's trying to adjust timestamps. And adjusting timestamps — do you agree that — Mr. Dogra makes the point with this chart that there are no circumstances where the 11622 trigger occurs before the lock event on John O'Keefe's phone?

MR. ALESSI: Can I have a moment, your honor?

MR. ALESSI: Let me see if I can clarify — my question. Do you understand that what Mr. Dogra is doing in this chart is he is showing numerically and arithmetically that there are no circumstances where the text stream event 11622 occurs after the lock event on Mr. O'Keefe's phone?

MR. ALESSI: Well, he did more than try. Isn't that what he — by his math — is demonstrating?

MR. ALESSI: I understand. But that's — again the question is, is that what he demonstrates using this chart?

MR. ALESSI: And what he demonstrates is that Mr. Dogra demonstrates that there are no circumstances where the 11622 trigger event occurs after the lock event on Mr. O'Keefe's phone.

MR. ALESSI: So I'm asking what Mr. Dogra demonstrates in this report, and isn't it correct that Mr. Dogra, using this math, Mr. Dogra demonstrates and concludes that there are no circumstances where the — 11622 text stream event occurs after the lock event on Mr. O'Keefe's phone?

MR. ALESSI: Does that demonstrate that?

MR. ALESSI: Okay. So, let's — I'm going to move on, your honor. I'm going to move on. And this methodology and approach of Mr. Dogra is simply math that he's using. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: Well, let's go to the clock variance values in the middle column on that chart. You see that, sir?

MR. ALESSI: Those are as of March 5 — the date this column was created. Nothing in that middle column is new. Is it — that data?

MR. ALESSI: Well, the source data upon which it is created is not new, is it?

MR. ALESSI: All right. So, the source data of that column, it's not new.

MR. ALESSI: And the middle column uses your data points from your January 30th report.

MR. ALESSI: But it does use some of the data from your January 30 report.

MR. ALESSI: Is the reason that you did not take that final analytical step that we've been talking about in your January 30th report — and this is a question — is the reason you failed to take that final analytic step we've been talking about in your January 30 report — was because you knew that if you calculated the actual time of the 11622 text stream event, based upon your own methodological analysis of the clock skew, there would always be continued interaction on Mr. O'Keefe's phone after the text stream event?

MR. ALESSI: So you deny that?

MR. ALESSI: Did you keep your January 30, 2025 report purposefully vague by merely noting a clock skew without engaging in any further analysis such as tethering that clock skew or otherwise connecting it to the text stream event in Dr. Welcher's slide presentation?

MR. ALESSI: to Mr. Woll Take that down. Thank you, Mr. Woll. After reviewing — and I'm going to — identify three timelines — after reviewing the timelines presented by Dr. Welcher, one; Mr. Dogra, two; and Ian Whiffin, three — all of which establish that the 11622 text stream event occurred before that last user activity, the lock on Mr. O'Keefe's phone — you then decided to issue a new report that would become dated May 8th, 2025. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: So —

MR. ALESSI: Well, before you issued that report, isn't it correct that you had reviewed the time data of Dr. Welcher in the slide that we've been reviewing?

MR. ALESSI: No, you had not looked at Dr. Welcher's slide with a text stream event 11622 and a time for that before issuing your May 8th report?

MR. ALESSI: Yes — before my — sorry, I misheard you. Yes, that's my question. Let me just ask it through a question.

MR. ALESSI: So it is correct that before you issued your May 8th, 2025 report, you had reviewed that slide of your colleague Dr. Welcher on 11622, that establishes the text event as 12:31:38 to 12:31:43.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. You reviewed it before your May 8th report.

MR. ALESSI: You also reviewed before your May 8th report the slide presentation of Mr. Dogra.

MR. ALESSI: And before you issued your May 8th, 2025 report, you also had reviewed the January 2025 report of Mr. Whiffin.

MR. ALESSI: Correct. Each one of, and all of those three, established that the 11622 text stream event occurred before the last user activity on Mr. O'Keefe's phone.

MR. ALESSI: Let me ask my question again, and if it's not clear, please let me know.

MR. ALESSI: After reviewing what we've discussed, prepared by Dr. Welcher, Mr. Dogra, and Ian Whiffin, each and all of which established that the 11622 text stream event occurred before the last user activity on Mr. O'Keefe's phone. You then decided to issue a new report that would become dated May 8th, 2025. Is that statement I just made correct?

MR. ALESSI: Now, let's take a look at your May 8th, 2025 report. Do you, sir, have that report in front of you?

MR. ALESSI: Do you need a moment to look at it or are you ready to take questions?

MR. ALESSI: Thank you. You departed from your analysis. Let's start it this way. In this May 8th, 2025 report, you departed from your analysis in your January 2025 report to reach a conclusion that would attempt to put the 11622 text stream event after human interaction with Mr. O'Keefe's phone. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: Okay. So, you didn't depart from it, but your position is you clarified it. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: But isn't it correct that in your January 30, 2025 report, you did not address at all whether the 11622 text stream event occurred before or after the last user event on Mr. O'Keefe's phone. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: But you did that in your May 8th report. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: You don't call that a change, sir?

MR. ALESSI: You call that a clarification?

MR. ALESSI: In your January 2025 report, you compared call log entries between the infotainment system on the Lexus and Mr. O'Keefe's iPhone to determine a potential variance. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: And call logs are discrete points in time that are fairly easy to compare. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: Now, in your May 8th, 2025 report, you abandoned the call log analysis from your January 30th, 2025 report. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: But you did depart from it at least in some respects. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: Okay. So you used another method. Correct? In your May 8th, 2025 report, you opined, as I understand it, that the call log variance has been ignored because, in your words, this offset is measured approximately 5 hours after the time of the alleged collision and cannot be assumed to apply to other time frames as stated in the initial report. Do I have that right?

MR. ALESSI: Now, please show me, show the jury in your January 30 report where you ever made that statement of

MR. ALESSI: And conclusion number five is on page 37 of your January 30, 2025 report. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: And you concede at least as much that at least different words are used in paragraph 5 in your January 30th, 2025 report. Correct? And your position is that it's the same statement as in your May 8th, 2025 report, because that's my question.

MR. ALESSI: In your May 8th, 2025 report, instead of applying the offsets from the call logs — which are discrete points in time that are fairly easy to compare, as you stated just moments ago — you decided to use in your words, quote, "approximate time of the three-point turn" as your anchor between the two devices. Do I have that right?

MR. ALESSI: Isn't what you did, and what we just discussed, a classic example of confirmation bias, which is to be avoided in science?

MR. ALESSI: So, you believe that that is not confirmation bias?

MR. ALESSI: Choosing the three-point turn as the independent data source is the only way you could ever get the text stream event to even possibly occur after the lock event on Mr. O'Keefe's phone. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: And that adjustment is the only thing that can be done to get the text stream event 11622 to occur after the lock on Mr. O'Keefe's phone. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: And that is the only one you chose. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: And that's only because it's not a pinpoint in time. It's an amorphous range that can only, in your words, be approximated. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: So it's your view that that's the only one that can be applied. But what you're using is, in your words, an approximate time. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: Isn't the shortcoming, sir, in your analysis that you ignored the additional user activity on Mr. O'Keefe's device that occurred after the lock event?

MR. ALESSI: Yes, I can. Isn't the shortcoming in your analysis, sir, that your analysis ignores the additional user activity on John O'Keefe's device, his cell phone, that occurred after the lock event?

MR. ALESSI: Well, let's take a look at events that, and you tell me if I'm correct or not, occur after the text stream event 11622.

MR. ALESSI: So, do you recall our discussion yesterday about the Apple Health data event of 36 steps covering a distance of over 84 feet? Do you recall that?

MR. ALESSI: And do you recall that that occurred at 12:32:16?

MR. ALESSI: And that's after the text stream event of Dr. Welcher that he put in his slide. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: Do you also recall a Doppler pocket state detection at 12:33:14? Do you recall that?

MR. ALESSI: And that is almost an entire minute after the 11622 text event that is identified by your colleague, the licensed engineer, Dr. Welcher, in his slide presentation. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: I understand your point. Well, but let's just take one of them.

MR. ALESSI: And that is the Apple Health data event of 36 steps covering a distance of 84 feet at 12:32:16. Would you agree that those steps covering that distance is human activity at least? Would you agree that's human activity?

MR. ALESSI: Thank you. Let's take a look at opinion number seven in your initial January 30th, 2025 report. And sir, tell me when you've had a fair opportunity to locate that.

MR. ALESSI: You concluded to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty that quote, "The infotainment module power on events were on average recorded 3 seconds after the ignition release or finger off." Correct.

MR. ALESSI: That means that your own testing requires an offset of minus 3 to account for a delay in the power on of an infotainment system. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: That increases the time between the text stream event 11622 and the iPhone lock event by 3 seconds. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: You testified about this same 3-second discrepancy yesterday during your direct examination in connection with your January 30, 2025 report.

MR. ALESSI: However, you did not mention this offset of 3 seconds in your May 8th, 2025 report. Did you?

MR. ALESSI: Mr. Brennan may have questions for you with regard to that. So nowhere in your May 8, 2025 report did you include the 3-second offset that you discussed in your January 30, 2025 report, did you?

MR. ALESSI: And in fact, sir, nowhere in your May 8th report do you even discuss why you're not addressing that 3-second offset. Do you?

MR. ALESSI: I understand. My question is simply there's no discussion in your May 8, 2025 report how or why you're not discussing that 3-second offset. Correct.

MR. ALESSI: I've got a next section, your honor, if you would like me to move into it.

MR. ALESSI: Okay. Sir, a text stream data event like 11622 — well, let me back up. You testified on direct that you're involved in accident reconstruction. That's part of the work that you do, sir.

MR. ALESSI: Well, let me clarify then. Do you at all understand whether there's an issue as to whether a collision actually occurred in this case? Do you understand if that's an issue?

MR. ALESSI: So, you have no idea what your colleague Dr. Welcher, who is working on the same case, was addressing in his slide presentation.

MR. ALESSI: What do you generally understand?

MR. ALESSI: Do you have any understanding? Can I approach,

MR. ALESSI: May I proceed, your honor?

MR. ALESSI: Thank you. Thanks for your patience, Mr. Burgess. I would like to go back to the line of questioning I was starting, and that is I would like to discuss with you — and I'll start with your conclusion. I'm going to reference your May 8th, 2025 report, sir. If you could turn to the conclusion section of your report, which is on page seven, and I'm going to start with — and I may just end with, we'll see — conclusion number one. Please take a fair opportunity to read that. Pick your head up when you have concluded that fair reading.

MR. ALESSI: Now, that paragraph one states, under conclusions, you say the following can be stated to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty. One: as noted in my initial report, the only call logs that can be used to compare and synchronize the clocks between Miss Read's Lexus and Mr. O'Keefe's iPhone are those occurring between 5:21 a.m. and 5:30 a.m., which occur approximately 5 hours after the collision. Do you see that, sir?

MR. ALESSI: Now, what I'd like you to do is to go back in your report. Same report.

MR. ALESSI: Same report. May 8th. And I'd like you to turn to page three.

MR. ALESSI: And if you could go to the fourth full paragraph that begins with "two events near the time," and let me know, sir, when you're there, and if you could read that paragraph, pick your head up after you've had a fair opportunity to read it.

MR. ALESSI: Now you state: "Two events near the time of the collision were recorded by the Lexus system as identified by Dr. Welcher and referenced by Mr. Dogra. The first event labeled text stream event 11621 is associated with a three-point turn on Cedarcrest Road. The second event labeled text stream event 11622 is associated with a reverse maneuver on Fairview Road. These events will be referenced below for clock synchronization analysis. The timestamps associated with these two events are based on a combination of the Lexus infotainment power-on event and text stream time count." Did I read that correctly, sir?

MR. ALESSI: So in the same paragraph, am I correct that you're discussing a couple of text stream events — 11621 and 11622?

MR. ALESSI: And you are talking about that text stream event in the same paragraph as you're talking about an alleged collision.

MR. ALESSI: And in your paragraph of your conclusion that we were referencing, conclusion one — is this paragraph part of the basis for that conclusion one? Is this sort of like some predicate analysis for conclusion number one?

MR. ALESSI: So in your view it has no relationship whatsoever to conclusion one.

MR. ALESSI: So let's go to your discussion of a collision and a text stream event. Let's go back to paragraph three. You see — you mention the word collision in paragraph three. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: I'm sorry. I meant page three, sir. Page three.

MR. ALESSI: Page three, that paragraph we were just looking at, paragraph four.

MR. ALESSI: I — it does say collision. You see the word — you use the word collision.

MR. ALESSI: And again, that term is used in the same paragraph as your identifying text stream events 11621 and 11622.

MR. ALESSI: Where did you get the basis to use the word collision at that part of your report?

MR. ALESSI: And whose crash reports?

MR. ALESSI: So you used Massachusetts State Police reports to discuss allegations of a crash collision?

MR. ALESSI: Do you state anywhere in your May 8th report that you used those reports at all? Do you list it in your references?

MR. ALESSI: And as a matter of fact, this is the first time — right, this previous moment — that you are mentioning those reports at all.

MR. ALESSI: But I'm talking about your May 8th report.

MR. ALESSI: — your statements, and I want to clarify this because this is the ultimate topic I want to go to. It is not your conclusion that every text stream data event means that there is a collision, is it, sir?

MR. ALESSI: So, isn't it correct that you can have text stream events and they're not collisions?

MR. ALESSI: And isn't it a fact that a text stream event, sometimes called a trigger event, is not like an airbag deploying?

MR. ALESSI: There's just — and we're going to get to this later — it's just something that happens with a Lexus vehicle that can cause the vehicle to register a text stream event.

MR. ALESSI: And some people refer to a text stream event as a trigger.

MR. ALESSI: But there's many things that can happen with a vehicle that can cause a trigger.

MR. ALESSI: We will come back to that. So you would agree again that a text stream trigger event does not mean that there was a collision.

MR. ALESSI: A text stream data event doesn't mean that airbags were deployed.

MR. ALESSI: A trigger data event doesn't mean that there was a vehicle impact.

MR. ALESSI: By itself it doesn't mean —

MR. ALESSI: A text stream data event merely refers to Lexus's practice of capturing real time data from applications, databases, and not devices, and transporting that data for immediate processing and storage or for real time analysis and analytics reporting. Correct?

MR. ALESSI: Sure. A text stream event merely refers to Lexus's practice of capturing real time data from applications and databases. Is that correct?

MR. ALESSI: What would you call it?

MR. ALESSI: Okay. So, it's Lexus's practice of capturing real time data from various sensors and modules on the vehicle, right?

MR. ALESSI: Thank you, your honor. Mr. Burgess, I'm going to pick up, sir, where we left off. A text stream trigger event does not automatically mean there was a collision.

MR. ALESSI: A text stream data event doesn't without more mean an airbag deployed.

MR. ALESSI: A trigger data event doesn't mean without more that there was a vehicle impact.

MR. ALESSI: A text stream data event — a text stream event — merely refers to Lexus's practice of capturing real time data from applications and databases.

MR. ALESSI: That's right. You had said that earlier, sir. Sensors and modules. You reviewed the raw text stream trigger events on Miss Read's vehicle, correct?

MR. ALESSI: Oh, you did not?

MR. ALESSI: Do you have an understanding whether Mr. Dogra reviewed those events in his March 5, 2025 report?

MR. ALESSI: So you did not review the raw data for text stream trigger events on Miss Read's vehicle, and you did not therefore perform any analysis of that data as you sit here today.

MR. ALESSI: Are you aware that there were approximately 30 text stream trigger events in an 8-month period on Miss Read's vehicle?

MR. ALESSI: Assume the data shows that in the mere 8-month period that Miss Read owned her vehicle, the Lexus in question, there were 30 text stream trigger events. Assume that. You would not conclude that there were 30 collisions in that 8-month period, would you?

MR. ALESSI: Would you agree, sir, that there were actually two triggers on January 29th?

MR. ALESSI: And the first trigger that you referred to, of 11621 — that was not a collision, was it, sir?

MR. ALESSI: Well, as you sit here today, you have no basis to state that the 11621 trigger was a collision, do you?

MR. ALESSI: And in fact, didn't you refer to that as a three-point turn?

MR. ALESSI: And you didn't mention in your direct testimony, when you talked about the three-point turn, anything about a collision, did you?

MR. ALESSI: And as you sit here today, there's no fact or data that you have to conclude that there was any supposed collision associated with that 11621 three-point turn trigger event.

MR. ALESSI: A trigger event can occur on a Lexus vehicle by a whole host of possibilities.

MR. ALESSI: You could maybe slam on the brakes and cause a trigger event.

MR. ALESSI: Yeah. You could have just unusual driving. You could be going at a speed or doing something else that has nothing at all to do with a collision.

MR. ALESSI: And in fact, there are almost countless events that can occur that can cause a trigger event in a Lexus vehicle.

MR. ALESSI: Yes. So, back to the 11621 three-point turn trigger event. On your direct examination, you just referred to the events surrounding that as a three-point turn.

MR. ALESSI: And yet that three-point turn registered as a trigger event.

MR. ALESSI: Are Lexus SUVs trigger happy?

MR. ALESSI: As you sit here today, none of the information in that black box that you referred to on your direct testimony indicates that there was a collision on January 29th, does it?