Hey everyone, I'm Ashley Banfield, and this is Drop Dead Serious.

It was day 26 of Karen Reed's murder trial, and the word of the day was memory.

Whose memory is reliable and whose might be falling apart.

We saw more fireworks between expert witnesses and the

defense today, questions about dog bites, tail lights, and DNA testing gone wrong. And a new witness

walked in with a story that did not match the official photos, which in a case hinging on forensic details could mean

everything. So let's start at the beginning. Court kicked off today with Dr. Marie Russell,

the ER physician turned dog bite expert. She was back on the stand for more cross-examination.

And special prosecutor Hank Brennan came out swinging.

He questioned why her testimony seemed more confident now than it was last year.

Last year, he said she described the injuries to John O'Keefe as being possibly caused by a dog.

But this year, she used the word likely.

He also challenged her methods.

He asked if she had confirmation bias.

And he even brought up her ride to court that morning because she rode with Karen's

lawyer, Bob Alessie. Dr. Russell said they just

chatted about Boston and New York, but nothing about the case. But Brennan pressed more,

asking, who was it that helped her organize the report from which she was testifying?

Dr. Russell said it was a woman who helped her structure it.

Brennan then read from her prior testimony where she said it was a lessee who'd helped.

He's not a woman.

Dr. Russell clarified, Karen's lawyer, Bob Alessie, helped rearrange the report but didn't influence the content.

...