This is Hidden Killers with Tony Brewski.

The latest hearing in the Karen Reid case did not just focus on evidence.

It turned into a courtroom showdown over credibility, legal ethics, and potential misconduct.

The judge did not rule immediately, which means she's carefully weighing the prosecution's

claims that Reed's defense team hid financial ties with expert witnesses and possibly influenced

testimony. This raises huge questions, not just about the legal battle, but about how

investigations are conducted, how evidence is handled, and whether bias could be a play

in the courtroom. Jennifer Coffin Defer, retired FBI special agent, joining us, Jen, as you've

dealt with high-stakes investigations where credibility is everything, from an investigative standpoint,

how do we separate legitimate concerns about legal misconduct from potential courtroom theatrics?

And what signs do you look for to determine whether bias or manipulation may be at play here?

Well, hi, Tony. And I think the number one thing you look for is corroboration of such allegations.

In this case, there is a signed agreement,

an expert agreement. There is fiduciary proof that money changed hands. There are trial transcripts

that include not only what was said in open court, but also what was said in sidebar.

And so you may recall Judge Canoni, the first thing she did at the beginning of that hearing was she said,

I want my sidebar transcript entered into evidence as an exhibit.

That was critical when I saw that.

Another thing that really stood out to me was that I couldn't believe when Alessie

took the reins in this thing.

In other words, Inetti, Alan Jackson, they were not willing to stand up for themselves.

You've seen in the past during this trial when other issues have come up.

...