Day 6 - April 29, 2025
Judge Beverly J. Cannone · Trial 2 · 6 proceedings · 2,575 utterances
Whiffin's cross-examination extracts key concessions on phone location data and the McCabe timestamp before Jennifer McCabe takes the stand to describe finding O'Keefe's body and Karen Read's repeated question: 'Could I have hit him?'
Full day summary
Key Moments
- Alessi extracts Whiffin's admission that his BrowserState deletion theory is 'unsubstantiated' and that he has reasonable doubt about how it occurred.
- Alessi establishes that 36 recorded steps covering 84 feet — more than the 72-foot flagpole-to-door distance — could place O'Keefe's phone inside 34 Fairview Road.
- Brennan's live iOS 15.2.1 demonstration shows the Safari BrowserState timestamp records when a tab is first opened, not when subsequent searches are performed, directly rebutting the defense's version-mismatch argument.
- Jennifer McCabe testifies that Karen Read repeatedly asked 'Could I have hit him? Did I hit him?' during the 4:53 a.m. phone call — the prosecution's most direct evidence of a consciousness of guilt statement.
- Judge Cannone rules ARCCA experts may testify to all previously disclosed opinions despite finding repeated and deliberate discovery violations, invoking the defendant's right to a fair trial.
Notable Quotes
Ian Whiffin
“I have an idea of how it occurred, but I've not been able to replicate it. So my idea is unsubstantiated.”
Whiffin's admission that his theory about how the McCabe BrowserState record was deleted is unsubstantiated was the most damaging single concession of the Whiffin cross, undercutting the prosecution's framing of the 6:23 a.m. search as forensically settled.
Jennifer McCabe
“She started saying, 'Could I have hit him? Did I hit him? I don't.' And then she was just all over the place, like screaming my name, screaming so many different things.”
McCabe's account of Read's repeated 'Could I have hit him?' statements is the prosecution's central consciousness-of-guilt evidence and the most consequential moment of the day.
Beverly J. Cannone
“I understand completely the Commonwealth's argument, completely the ambush that has been set upon here. However, a defendant's right to a fair trial is paramount to everything.”
Judge Cannone's balancing ruling — acknowledging the 'ambush' of discovery violations while holding that excluding defense experts would compromise Karen Read's trial rights — defined the legal stakes heading into the defense case.