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

livestream channel. Let's get into it.

We took a quick look at the defense objection to the Commonwealth's motion to exclude Mr. Green, the defense digital forensic

expert who evaluated the extraction from Jen McCabe's phone and other items of evidence,

though this argument surrounded the 227 AM Google search regarding how long to die in the cold,

which is a much contested item of digital

evidence in the first Karen Reed trial and will be again presumably in the second trial.

The prosecution asked for a hearing like the one we saw with Dr. Russell to determine whether

or not Mr. Green can testify and the defense, among other things, said, but they all use

the same methodology. All of the forensic experts take the digital extraction, run it through

different tools, and interpret that information for the jury, and though they come to different

conclusions, that's for the jury to decide which experts methodology they find more reliable and which

conclusions based on the evidence and information they find most reliable because we see this

in every case with the battle of the experts experts can look at the same information and come to

different conclusions that doesn't guarantee guarantee a Dobert hearing on whether

or not the methodology is scientifically sound. And the defense pointed out, all of the experts are

using the same methodology. They also said that we are getting into the danger zone of legal

tyranny and referenced the, well, I don't think they said the word cynical, but that was the implied.

The cynical efforts of the prosecution to forestall this expert from testifying as dystopian and Orwellian,

the defense is not happy with this motion and are asking the court to deny the motion and not even have

a dober hearing for this expert.

...