This is Hidden Killers with Tony Brucey.

In every courtroom drama, there's what we see.

And then there's what we don't.

The Karen retrial gave us both, the parade of forensic evidence, expert testimony, and legal

maneuvering paired with a string of absences, silence, and unanswered

questions, and never quite let the public's mind at ease.

In this video, this audio, retired FBI special agent Jennifer Kaufend effort joins us again

to dive deeper, not just into the verdict, but the trial itself, the decisions that were made,

the rebuttals that weren't delivered, and the curious choices from both the prosecution and the

people closest to the scene of John O'Keeffe's death. Why didn't the Elberts come outside the night?

A Boston police officer was dying in their front yard. Why did so many phones get conveniently discarded

just before they were set to be turned over? And why did the prosecution, despite having

rebuttal witnesses lined up, including crash reconstructionists and forensic analysis,

ultimately choose not to put them on the stand? These aren't just legal loose ends. They are cracks through which

reasonable doubt did seep in. Koffinaff, and after bringing her federal lens to questions

of trial, fatigue jury psychology, and prosecutorial strategy. Was Brennan's choice to rest

without rebuttal a tactic decision or a surrender to a jury that

had already made up its mind? And more importantly, how do moments that appear weird to the public,

like a house full of cops, not reacting to a dying man that they didn't know was out there,

playing to a jury subconscious whether the evidence supports it or not.

This is where legal theory meets real human behavior.

The Karen Reed trial wasn't just about what happened that night in Canton.

...