This is Hidden Killers Week in review.

I look back at the most prolific stories of the week.

This is Hidden Killers with Tony Brewski.

We're diving back in to one of the hottest cases that there is, the Karen Reed case.

Judge Beverly Canoni, depending on who you ask. She's either keeping the trial

fair and focused, or she's the fourth prosecutor hiding in plain sight. Supporters of

Karen Reed say that she's biased, censoring the defense, and protecting the so-called

Canton cover-up critics claim that she's overstepping, silencing protests,

and limiting what the jury gets to hear. On the flip side, others argue that she's just following

the rule of law. It's cool-headed in a courtroom that's turned into a reality show with a true

crime Twitter subplot. Joining us to discuss someone who knows both sides of the courtroom, former prosecutor

and defense attorney, Eric Fattis. Eric, let's start here when the judge begins limiting

suspects, excluding expert witnesses, and blocking an attorney from joining the defense team.

It sounds pretty bad on the surface, but when you dig into the reasoning behind these choices,

to me it makes a little bit more sense from a legal standpoint. What are your thoughts?

You know, the common understanding is a person gets their day in court, right? And so some people

think that that means they get to go in there and say whatever

they want and call whatever witnesses they want and do whatever they want. But that's not the

reality inside that courtroom. Inside that courtroom, there are rules. And oftentimes,

witnesses are limited. Defenses are limited. Attorneys can be limited. That one's a little

less common. But by and large, those types of rulings are limited. Attorneys can be limited. That one's a little less common. But by and large,

those types of rulings are something that are rather common. And a lot of these rulings that

...