You're listening to live courtroom coverage of the trial of Karen Reed from the Hidden

Killers podcast and True Crime Today. Now, back to the courtroom.

That I did not have when I checked email before coming to court today. So I'll hear you

quickly on these. I've had a chance to read them. So, Mr. Brandon, I'll hear you.

Let's today focus on the Bowden ones. We can focus on the other one later.

My motion, the memorandum on Bowden just iterates my objections continuously at sidebar that not all evidence is admissible.

Characterization of evidence is not admissible and the defense should have the ability and intention to follow up with substantive proof if they're going to ask a question. It's not limitless. Bowden is wide parameters to ask the investigator about their

state of mind, about the scope of the investigation, but it has boundaries of reasonableness.

And my earlier objections about offering information that go beyond Bowden, delve into third party,

inadmissible evidence, those objections would compel me to draft this motion.

And I can continue and will continue to object during the case, but once the questions are

asked, if they're improper, the jury hears

him, it inflames the jury. And without a basis and an intention to follow it up with substance

of proof, the question should not be asked.

So the one point I want you to focus on, Mr. Brennan, is the specific evidence regarding

materials that Sgt. Bukenic has not been able to look at.

Is that something we can do here in open court or based on the protective order?

Is that something that should be done at sidebar?

All right.

Why don't you come up, Mr. Jackson?

Let's bring in the jury.

Will that take a couple of minutes?

...