Welcome back. It's time for a quick bit clip. The full episode will be linked in the description,

but this is the quick bit clip to keep you in the loop for everything that's happening on the

live stream channel. Let's get into it. Today we took a look at the court's order regarding the

defense of third-party culprit and regarding the defense's proposed expert

regarding police procedure, which will also go to one of their defenses, what in Massachusetts

they call a Bowden defense.

The Bowden defense roughly encompasses law enforcement didn't investigate, things they should

have investigated, didn't follow

proper procedures, and allows an instruction to be given regarding the police investigation.

The court denied the motion for that expert and pointed out in her order that she had not

seen another case in Massachusetts where that type of expert had been

used, which is incredibly unusual to me because this is really frequent in other jurisdictions.

It was strange to me at the hearing over this motion in limine when the court said, I've never

had a case where anyone's done that.

I've not seen that done because it is such normal procedure elsewhere to bring in an expert in policing and say this is normal

policy and procedure. This is how police do a chain of custody and then juxtapose it to what

was done in a case. The court cited a lot of case law that said that this is done through

cross-examination and is allowing the defense

to do that through cross-examination but not through their own expert, saying that that's not

what's done in the jurisdiction. If that is an inaccurate statement of the position of the law by

the court, then it'll come up if Karen Reed is convicted on appeal. But as we are getting into jury selection on April 1st,

the court needed to get these rulings done and out, and we'll see. Who knows? Could the door

...