Judson Welcher - Redirect/Recross - Day 22

Judge Cannone limits Welcher's testimony to consistency opinions, barring him from naming Read's Lexus as the instrument of collision; defense cross-examination exposes methodological gaps and financial bias.

← Day 21

Day 23 →

Redirect Line 1

Recross Line 31

Redirect

1 6:44:51

JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. You are all set, doctor. Thank you. All right. Did you have any questions, Mr. Brennan?

2 6:44:58

MR. BRENNAN: If it'd be helpful — I have a couple quickly.

3 6:45:02

JUDGE CANNONE: Okay. Keep under two minutes.

4 6:45:05

MR. BRENNAN: Dr. Welcher, you were shown a photograph of the street of Fairview Road. Did you know that didn't come from Trooper Paul? It came from the CARS report and Trooper Paul then took it from the CARS report and put it in separately in his presentation. Did you know that?

5 6:45:26

MR. WELCHER: I had no idea. I just was given it as a folder.

6 6:45:32

MR. BRENNAN: And the photo you were using, it didn't have the markings that Trooper Paul put on his report, did it?

7 6:45:37

MR. WELCHER: It did not.

8 6:45:37

MR. BRENNAN: When — when you used that photo, was it because you were borrowing, relying on, or using any of Trooper Paul's reports for your conclusions or any of your decisions or analysis in this case?

9 6:45:46

MR. WELCHER: I did not use his report at all. It was simply limited to the use of the photo to show a different demonstrative issue.

10 6:45:52

MR. BRENNAN: Correct. And then when you saw diagram one, again, that was different than what was used in Trooper Paul's report because it had absent in it all the writing. Isn't that fair to say?

11 6:46:01

MR. WELCHER: As per — [unintelligible] did you rely on

12 6:46:03

MR. BRENNAN: ...Trooper Paul's analysis or conclusions in this case for your conclusions and your analysis?

13 6:46:07

MR. WELCHER: Not at all.

14 6:46:08

MR. BRENNAN: Is that why you went and downloaded the information and looked at the car and did everything individually, separately, and uniquely from Trooper Paul?

15 6:46:16

MR. WELCHER: I wanted it to be independent in my analysis.

16 6:46:19

MR. BRENNAN: Regarding Dr. Scordi-Bello, did you ever consider her conclusions regarding manner or cause of death as a basis for your analysis and conclusions?

17 6:46:27

MR. WELCHER: Yes.

18 6:46:27

MR. BRENNAN: And when you considered her analysis, did you consider the conclusion of undetermined cause of death? Was that part of your analysis?

19 6:46:35

MR. WELCHER: No. I was using the skull fractures, the description of the injury.

20 6:46:39

MR. BRENNAN: So, you were considering the information in her autopsy report?

21 6:46:42

MR. WELCHER: Correct.

22 6:46:42

MR. BRENNAN: How about her conclusions? Did you rely on her conclusions to do your studies or any analysis in this case as far as cause of death or manner of death?

23 6:46:52

MR. WELCHER: Only — I thought I said blood, trauma, and hypothermia.

24 6:46:56

MR. BRENNAN: Okay. Regarding her conclusions about whether this wasn't caused by a car accident or not, did you consider that as the basis of your opinion?

25 6:47:04

MR. WELCHER: No, I wouldn't take a person like that — opinion for that.

26 6:47:08

MR. BRENNAN: Did you ever have a conversation with Dr. Scordi-Bello about her expertise limitations?

27 6:47:12

MR. WELCHER: No. I would want a biomechanical analysis.

28 6:47:15

MR. BRENNAN: Was your opinion regarding the collision in this case — did it have anything to do whatsoever with Dr. Scordi-Bello's conclusions regarding cause of death, whether it was accident, undetermined, or homicide?

29 6:47:26

MR. WELCHER: No.

30 6:47:26

MR. BRENNAN: Okay. Thank you.

Recross

31 6:47:28

MR. ALESSI: Your honor.

32 6:47:28

JUDGE CANNONE: All right. One question. Can we just wrap it up? I'd like to hear you argue, but we don't have time.

33 6:47:36

MR. ALESSI: I have two questions, your honor. You put in your slide presentation information from the autopsy report of Dr. Scordi-Bello for a reason. Correct, sir?

34 6:47:45

MR. WELCHER: Correct.

35 6:47:45

MR. ALESSI: And that reason is because you considered the autopsy report as part of your analysis. Correct?

36 6:47:51

MR. WELCHER: So I considered portions — the portions I included here from the autopsy report. And part of those considerations were the final diagnosis.

37 6:48:00

JUDGE CANNONE: We can put that back up. Mr. Woll?

38 6:48:04

MR. ALESSI: But you recall the slide that you had has the final diagnosis of Dr. Scordi-Bello, and you put that in your slide presentation because you considered that as part of your analysis — else it wouldn't be in there. Correct?

39 6:48:28

MR. WELCHER: So the final diagnosis is in there. There's a line. Then it says cause of death and then manner of death. The things I highlighted are the things I thought were important.

40 6:48:46

MR. ALESSI: So the highlighting on slide 130 —

41 6:48:51

MR. WELCHER: So the final diagnosis again does not include cause of death. It does not include manner of death. There's that horizontal line demarcating them. The important things that I was looking at are the underlined or highlighted, which is why I highlighted them.

42 6:49:09

MR. ALESSI: Exactly. So the ones that you highlighted, you considered, are from the autopsy report. That's why you're highlighting them, right, sir? You considered them.

43 6:49:19

MR. WELCHER: Correct.

44 6:49:20

MR. ALESSI: Thank you.

Procedural Procedural - End of Day

45 6:49:21

MR. BRENNAN: No questions, your honor. I appreciate that opportunity.

46 6:49:24

JUDGE CANNONE: So I'm not going to let you argue now. I'll hear you very briefly tomorrow before we stop. But Mr. Alessi, how much longer are you going to be tomorrow? [unintelligible]: I could have a motion.

47 6:49:40

MR. ALESSI: I'm about halfway through, your honor. I think it will take up a little bit tomorrow. If we can get through things quicker, I would like to do that today. That's my best estimate.

48 6:49:51

JUDGE CANNONE: So, we're half a day tomorrow. Oh, that's right. So, it may be that we have a 20-minute break tomorrow and we finish up by 1:30 by going straight through. We've got a juror who has an appointment that we told her she'd be able to make. So, I'd like to do everything we can so that Dr. Welcher doesn't have to come back or stay here another day. So, let's just see what we can do, and we will do the same thing for your experts as well.

49 6:50:20

MR. ALESSI: No, I understand your honor, and I respect everything that your honor is saying. I must say, your honor, to state the obvious, this is a key aspect of the case and we've got to be able to proceed through to the question, and I'm not asking you to curb it. I'm just hoping that we can do it.

50 6:50:40

JUDGE CANNONE: So, I will ask you tomorrow at a certain time to see whether we're able to do it with the 20-minute break and finish.

51 6:50:40

MR. ALESSI: Fair enough.

52 6:50:40

JUDGE CANNONE: My answer is at that point. Okay. All right. Thank you.

53 6:50:40

COURT OFFICER: All rise for the court, please.

54 6:50:40

JUDGE CANNONE: Thank you, Dr. Welcher.

55 6:50:40

MR. WELCHER: Thank you. Can I step down?

Redirect Judson Welcher (Hank Brennan)

Prosecutor Hank Brennan conducts a brief redirect examination of Dr. Judson Welcher, limited to two minutes by the judge. Brennan addresses two points raised during cross-examination. First, he establishes that while Welcher used a photograph from the CARS report, he did not rely on Trooper Paul's analysis, conclusions, or report — the photo was used solely as a demonstrative, and Welcher conducted his own independent analysis including downloading data and inspecting the vehicle separately. Second, Brennan clarifies Welcher's relationship to Dr. Scordi-Bello's autopsy findings: Welcher relied on the physical injury descriptions (skull fractures, trauma) from her report but did not adopt her conclusions regarding cause or manner of death, and never consulted with her about her expertise limitations.

Legal Significance

Brennan rehabilitates Welcher's independence as an expert by separating his analysis from both Trooper Paul's reconstruction work and Dr. Scordi-Bello's cause-of-death determination — two areas the defense used to suggest Welcher was not conducting original analysis.

Examination Style

Hank Brennan: Focused, efficient rehabilitation targeting the two main cross-examination themes — borrowed work product and reliance on other experts' conclusions. Leading questions designed to elicit clean denials.

Key Quotes

"I did not use his report at all. It was simply limited to the use of the photo to show a different demonstrative issue."
— Judson Welcher Directly rebuts the cross-examination suggestion that Welcher borrowed from Trooper Paul's work.

"I wanted it to be independent in my analysis."
— Judson Welcher Establishes Welcher's intent to conduct wholly separate analysis from other prosecution experts.

"No, I wouldn't take a person like that — opinion for that."
— Judson Welcher Welcher distances himself from the medical examiner's cause-of-death conclusions, asserting that biomechanical analysis requires different expertise.

Evidence Referenced

Photograph of Fairview Road from CARS report
Diagram one (Google Maps/aerial image)
Dr. Scordi-Bello's autopsy report

Topics

provenance of Fairview Road photograph from CARS reportindependence of Welcher's analysis from Trooper PaulWelcher's use of Scordi-Bello autopsy injury descriptions versus conclusionscause of death and manner of death determinationsbiomechanical expertise versus medical examiner expertise

Recross Judson Welcher (Robert Alessi)

In a brief two-question recross, defense attorney Robert Alessi pins down Dr. Welcher on his use of Dr. Scordi-Bello's autopsy report. During redirect, Brennan had established that Welcher relied only on physical injury descriptions, not Scordi-Bello's conclusions. Alessi closes the loop by getting Welcher to confirm that the highlighted portions of the final diagnosis on slide 130 of his presentation were included precisely because he considered them as part of his analysis. Welcher attempts to distinguish between the final diagnosis and the cause/manner of death determinations, but ultimately concedes the point.

Legal Significance

Alessi neutralizes the redirect's attempt to distance Welcher from Scordi-Bello's autopsy findings. By establishing that Welcher affirmatively considered the autopsy report contents he highlighted, the defense preserves its argument that Welcher's analysis is intertwined with — and potentially dependent on — the medical examiner's work.

Examination Style

Robert Alessi: Surgical two-question recross designed to undo the redirect. Alessi uses simple logical framing — you included it because you considered it — leaving no room for evasion.

Key Quotes

"You put in your slide presentation information from the autopsy report of Dr. Scordi-Bello for a reason. Correct, sir?"
— Robert Alessi Sets up the simple logical trap: inclusion equals consideration.

"The important things that I was looking at are the underlined or highlighted, which is why I highlighted them."
— Judson Welcher Welcher's attempt to narrow which parts he relied on inadvertently confirms he actively selected and considered specific autopsy findings.

"Correct."
— Judson Welcher Final concession that the highlighted autopsy findings were considered as part of his analysis, undermining the redirect's distancing effort.

Credibility Challenges

Judson Welcher — Alessi highlights tension between Welcher's redirect testimony (that he did not adopt Scordi-Bello's conclusions) and the fact that he selected and highlighted specific autopsy findings for his presentation because he considered them in his analysis.

Evidence Referenced

Slide 130 of Welcher's PowerPoint presentation showing highlighted portions of Dr. Scordi-Bello's final diagnosis

Topics

Welcher's reliance on Scordi-Bello autopsy reportslide 130 highlighted final diagnosisdistinction between final diagnosis and cause/manner of death

← Judson Welcher - Cross (Part 1) 3 of 3 Day 23 → Procedural - Scordi-Bello Ruling