Hi everybody. Welcome back to Drop Dead Serious. Glad you're here. I'm Ashley Bannfield.

Today in the Karen Reed trial, we took a sharp turn into digital forensics and into a courtroom tug ofwar over the credibility of a witness.

But it wasn't just what that expert said for the prosecution.

It was whether the jury should believe how the expert got there.

Day 11 was all about one key witness, Jessica Hyde,

a digital forensics examiner with years of experience in cyber crime investigations.

And despite her credentials, the defense clearly does not trust her methods.

And maybe it just might have something to do with the fact that she says,

Jen McCabe's 227 AM Google search, how long to die in the cold?

Never even happened. And today Karen's defense team went on the attack, so let's just jump right in.

We started the morning with Massachusetts State Trooper Connor Keefe. He told jurors that he helped

process the scene at 34 Fairview Road and was the officer who bagged the evidence from the snowy front yard where John O'Keefe was found.

In court, he unsealed a pair of evidence bags and inside those bags, a black Nike sneaker and broken taillight pieces, all of which were recovered near O'Keefe's body.

Then it was time for the main event.

Before forensic examiner Jessica Hyde could even take the stand, Judge Kenone had to pause everything,

giving both sides time to argue about her qualifications and her methodology.

The defense was especially fired up,

not just about her findings in this case, but because of a prior ruling in Maryland, where a

judge found her and her methods unreliable and inadmissible. That was in a separate digital evidence case.

The prosecutor, Hank Brennan, pushed back, hard, calling it an attempt to malign a witness,

and he accused the defense of dehumanizing her and, quote, trying to cheapen her testimony.

In the end, Judge Kenone ruled that the jury would not hear about the Maryland case, even though the defense could ask about her methodology.

...