Day 31 - June 11, 2025

Judge Beverly J. Cannone · Trial 2 · 5 proceedings · 1,845 lines

Day 31 of 36

Appearing:

Defense biomechanical expert Dr. Andrew Rentschler completed testimony after cross-examination that challenged his independence and methods; later, the Commonwealth announced conditional no rebuttal after a defense rest.

Full day summary

Dr. Andrew Rentschler concluded direct examination with impact-testing and slow-motion video analysis supporting his opinion that O'Keefe's injuries were inconsistent with a Lexus tail-light strike. On cross, ADA Hank Brennan questioned Rentschler about trial updates supplied by the retaining client before Trial 1, his post-testimony socializing and deleted texts, his wheelchair-focused publication record, and the literature and methodology underlying his analysis. Rentschler denied breaking sequestration, described roughly two scheduling texts he likely deleted, acknowledged no source stating the Hybrid III arm was suitable for determining superficial abrasions, and rejected Brennan's characterization of the implications for his broader analysis. Brennan also asked about physical evidence Rentschler had not considered, including tail-light fragments in O'Keefe's clothing, glass in his nose, and other scene items. On redirect, Rentschler said he did not know when, how, or by whom plastic pieces reached 34 Fairview and gave his opinion, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, that O'Keefe's injuries were not consistent with being struck by the Lexus. After the jury was dismissed, the Commonwealth said it would call no witnesses or present further evidence after the defendant rests; Yannetti renewed the motion for required finding, and Judge Cannone scheduled a charge conference for Thursday with closing arguments set for Friday.

Key Moments

Rentschler testified that 36 arm abrasions, absent hand fractures, and absent lower-extremity injuries are collectively inconsistent with an SUV strike at any tested speed.
Brennan impeached Rentschler with his own prior sworn testimony admitting that receiving trial updates from his client before Trial 1 'certainly helped prepare me to understand what was going on during the trial,' directly contradicting denials made earlier in the cross.
Brennan questioned Rentschler about his wheelchair-focused publications and whether three cited references supported use of crash-test dummies for superficial-abrasion analysis; Rentschler acknowledged no source saying the Hybrid III arm was suitable for that determination but rejected Brennan's broader characterization of his testing and analysis.
On recross, Brennan asked whether O'Keefe could have been clipped by the vehicle; Rentschler acknowledged that a person can generally be clipped but said he did not believe that scenario fit the evidence in this case.
The Commonwealth said that, after the defendant rests, it would call no witnesses or present further evidence; Yannetti renewed the motion for required finding, and Judge Cannone set a charge conference for Thursday with closing arguments for Friday.

Notable Quotes

Andrew Rentschler

“I said it certainly helped prepare me to understand what was going on during the trial. Yes.”

During cross, Brennan confronted Rentschler with his prior sworn statement that receiving trial information helped him understand the trial. Rentschler had said the retaining client supplied the information and denied breaking sequestration.

Andrew Rentschler

“No, they are not.”

Rentschler's closing statement of his ultimate defense opinion — delivered to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty — framing the entire day's testimony in a single word.

Andrew Rentschler

“Well, I don't believe that's consistent with the evidence and what occurred. I mean, someone can get clipped by a car, sure. But in this case, no. I don't believe the evidence indicates that's what occurred.”

On brief recross, Brennan asked whether O'Keefe could have been clipped rather than struck more fully. Rentschler said a person can generally be clipped by a car but did not believe that scenario was consistent with the evidence in this case.

Watch this day Day 31 — Rentschler Watch with synced transcript →

Direct

Andrew Rentschler Alan Jackson

700 lines

Dr. Andrew Rentschler continued his direct examination by Alan Jackson, presenting a PowerPoint-based analysis critiquing Aperture's paint transfer test and offering ARCCA's own impact testing results. Rentschler testified that O'Keefe's 36 superficial abrasions were inconsistent with tail light contact, noting the abrasion directionality did not match expected kinematics, the sweatshirt had only 9 holes versus 36 abrasions, and X-rays showed no fractures despite forces at 24 mph exceeding bone fracture thresholds. He demonstrated through slow-motion video analysis that Aperture's surrogate appeared to lean into the vehicle during the paint transfer test rather than passively receiving contact. Rentschler concluded that an arm-only strike could not propel a body 7-10 feet perpendicular to the vehicle's travel, and that the absence of lower extremity injuries, hand fractures, bruising, or center-of-mass damage was inconsistent with being struck by an SUV at speed.

Cross

Andrew Rentschler Hank Brennan

990 lines

ADA Hank Brennan conducted an extensive cross-examination of Dr. Andrew Rentschler, challenging multiple dimensions of his testimony. Brennan questioned Rentschler about trial updates he received from the retaining client before testifying in Trial 1; Rentschler denied breaking sequestration and said he assumed the client-provided information was allowed by the court. Brennan also questioned Rentschler about post-testimony socializing with the defense team and deleted texts; Rentschler described roughly two scheduling texts that he likely deleted around that time. Brennan challenged Rentschler's peer-reviewed publications as exclusively wheelchair-related with nothing on pedestrian collisions, and questioned whether the citations underlying his arm-injury opinion supported use of crash test dummies for superficial-abrasion analysis. Rentschler acknowledged he had no source saying the Hybrid III arm was suitable for determining superficial abrasions, but rejected Brennan's characterization of his broader testing and analysis. Brennan confronted Rentschler with physical evidence he had not considered — tail light shards in O'Keefe's clothing, his shoe near the curb, his hat in the yard, glass from his nose, and a broken drinking glass — pressing repeatedly on why a reconstruction expert would exclude scene evidence. Brennan closed by impeaching Rentschler with prior sworn testimony about receiving trial information from his employer.

Redirect

Andrew Rentschler Alan Jackson

72 lines

Alan Jackson conducted a focused redirect of Dr. Andrew Rentschler after Brennan's cross. Rentschler clarified that information supplied before the first trial came from a client rather than his employer and said it did not affect his opinions. He described the distinction between the collision scenarios discussed, testified that the path of a shard to the left side of O'Keefe's nose was inconsistent with the tail-light-strike geometry he described, and said he did not know when, how, or by whom plastic pieces reached 34 Fairview. He also explained his view that scene items could not establish an impact unless the injuries and collision mechanics first supported one. Jackson concluded by eliciting Rentschler's opinion, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, that O'Keefe's injuries were not consistent with being struck by the Lexus.

Recross

Andrew Rentschler Hank Brennan

34 lines

Hank Brennan asked Dr. Andrew Rentschler whether O'Keefe could have been clipped by the vehicle rather than subjected to the fender-vault collision Rentschler had rejected. Rentschler acknowledged that a person can generally be clipped by a car but said he did not believe that scenario was consistent with the evidence in this case.

Procedural

Procedural - Motions

49 lines

After the jury was dismissed, Judge Cannone addressed several pending matters. The Commonwealth, through Brennan, objected to admitting Dr. Rentschler's PowerPoint presentation, arguing that prior decisions about experts' materials were strategic. Jackson argued the PowerPoint should be admitted since specific slides were already removed at the prosecution's request. The judge deferred ruling, asking Jackson to identify which video slides were not already in evidence. Brennan said that, after the defendant rests, the Commonwealth would not call any witnesses or put on further evidence. Yannetti renewed the motion for required finding on all evidence, deferred to the next morning. The court resolved exhibit numbering for sweatshirt-related documents (marked as 230 A through D), scheduled a charge conference for 10:00 AM the following day without jurors, and set closing arguments for Friday morning with discussion of time limits.

◀ Day 30 Trial 2 Day 32 ▶

Day 31 - June 11, 2025

Andrew Rentschler — Direct (Part 2)

Andrew Rentschler — Cross

Andrew Rentschler — Redirect/Recross

Procedural — Motions