The Emily Show

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/6jS8ZvrgoVU On August 4, 2025, a scheduling conference where the defense argued about the overwhelming volume of discovery (10-11 Terabytes) and requested the prosecution narrow down what will be used at trial. The judge, however, noted that the defense has had the same discovery as the prosecution and that the prosecution has an obligation for full disclosure. A contentious motion to quash a subpoena issued by the defense. The defense is accused of seeking communications between the victim's family's civil spokesperson and the District Attorney's office, which the victim's family's lawyer argues is improper and irrelevant to the criminal trial. RESOURCES Alex Murdaugh Trial - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gK8GOeWkGfi7acMnT-D0zaw Kouri Richins New Charges - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43ULdoW-g4w Kouri Richins Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gJYyEMQDM_Cn4icqWBV20fW Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Published: 7 August 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/V_gRWoUtPKY A hearing was held on August 5th, which was intended to continue the evidentiary portion of the motion to dismiss for the Myles King Murder Case, but this did not happen. Instead, the court requested the defense and prosecution to collaboratively create a comprehensive list of all evidence, when it was turned over, and which items are considered prejudicial by the defense. This is complicated by the fact that the prosecution did not consistently bate stamp documents. Another significant issue is the ongoing delay in receiving discovery related to Former Trooper Michael Proctor's text messages, which are relevant to five cases, including the Myles King case. The court is waiting for federal authorities to release this discovery. The defense is frustrated by the continuous "dripping faucet" of new discovery, making it difficult to prepare their case. The bar for dismissing a case due to discovery failures in Massachusetts is high, and typically, the remedy is to grant more time for trial. The Karen Read case has brought attention to this widespread issue of lingering discovery in Massachusetts cases. The next hearing for the Myles King case is scheduled for August 12th at 2pmET, where the judge will continue to try and clarify the specific evidence at issue for the motion to dismiss. Neither Adam Lally nor Proctor testified on August 5th, and they are not expected to testify on August 12th either. RESOURCES Adam Lally Testifies at Discovery Hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKcnfgU-Lrk  Karen Read Motion to Dismiss Hearing - https://youtube.com/live/DspEzUu2lGM Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Published: 6 August 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on ‪@TheEmilyDBaker‬ YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/live/fjBRC1EgNL8?si=FHARvyhjby51vnFM We sat down with the incredible Robert Alessi, a DLA Piper partner known for his linguistic prowess and legal expertise. While typically practicing environmental and finance law, Robert became a key figure in the high-profile Karen Read case, offering his extensive experience with experts.In this interview, Alessi shares his fascinating journey, from his unexpected path into pharmacy (and how that background still serves him in complex cases) to his insights on the evolving landscape of high-profile cases influenced by social media. Discover how his love for learning and unique scientific background have shaped his legal career, especially when working with diverse expert witnesses. RESOURCES: LIVE TRIALS with EMILY D BAKER: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo&si=QztCkFnpM90uJnG6 DOCKET: 0:00 - Intro: Robert Alessi & The Karen Read Case 1:02 - Robert's General Legal Practice & Working with Experts 3:33 - From Pharmacist to Attorney: A Unique Career Path 6:00 - The Love of Learning in Law & Language in the Courtroom 9:59 - Word Games & Vocabulary in Legal Practice 11:59 - The Impact of Pro Bono Work on High-Profile Cases (Karen Read) 16:00 - Teamwork on the Karen Read Defense & Meeting David Jannetty 18:54 - Robert & David Jannetty's Upcoming Podcast 20:38 - Advice for Attorneys in High-Profile & Online Cases 22:40 - The Importance of Public Engagement with the Judicial Process 23:52 - Where to Find Robert Alessi & Podcast Updates STAY IN THE LOOP WITH EMILY D. BAKER Download Our FREE App: https://lawnerdapp.com Get the Free Email Alert: https://www.LawNerdAlert.com Case Requests & Business Inquiries: [email protected] Help with the shop: https://www.lawnerdshop.com/pages/contact Mailing Address: Emily D. Baker 2000 Mallory Ln. St. 130-185, Franklin TN 37067 LAW NERD MERCH! https://www.LawNerdShop.com LONG FORM CONTENT https://www.youtube.com/@TheEmilyDBaker The Emily Show Podcast on YouTube: https://emilydbaker.com/TheEmilyShowPlaylist Apple Podcasts: https://emilydbaker.com/AppleTheEmilyShow Spotify Podcasts: https://emilydbaker.com/SpofityTheEmilyShow On your favorite podcast player Mondays EMILY ON SOCIAL @TheEmilyDBaker Instagram: https://www.Instagram.com/TheEmilyDBaker Twitter: https://www.Twitter.com/TheEmilyDBaker Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheEmilyDBaker MY YOUTUBE TOOLS **My Favorite YOUTUBE TOOL VidIQ https://vidiq.com/LawNerd Follow My Cats on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/fredandgeorge_cat Emily’s glasses lenses are Irlen tint https://www.irlen.com *This video is not legal advice; it is commentary for educational and entertainment purposes. Some links shared are affiliate links, all sponsorships are stated in video. Videos are based on publicly available information unless otherwise stated. Sharing a resource is not an endorsement; it is a resource. Copyright 2020-2025 Baker Media, LLC* Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcribed - Published: 5 August 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on @TheEmilyDBaker YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/live/2Mgfd0YcGsY?si=OvopJ5gtEwz0RntC Sarah Boone Trial Update: Lawyer Drama, Delays, and What’s Next Sarah Boone has been waiting years for her day in court—and in this episode of Case Brief, we break down exactly why that is. From public defenders she didn’t trust to courtroom behavior that raised eyebrows, this is more than just a murder case—it’s a story of entitlement, delays, and legal misfires.Emily walks through: Boone’s rocky relationship with her legal team, The psychology behind her behavior, How the court has handled her requests, and what this all means for the eventual trial RESOURCES:Sarah Boone Trial - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gIpOZ3VSy0hcyIRjHn86Mac Sarah Boone Appellate Letter - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8Ou77B6Eow DOCKET:0:00 Road So Far 0:39 Sarah Boone Trial 2:32 Sarah Boone Appellate Letter 5:01 Attorney's Motion to Withdraw STAY IN THE LOOP WITH EMILY D. BAKER Download Our FREE App: https://lawnerdapp.com Get the Free Email Alert: https://www.LawNerdAlert.com Case Requests & Business Inquiries: [email protected] Help with the shop: https://www.lawnerdshop.com/pages/contact Mailing Address: Emily D. Baker 2000 Mallory Ln. St. 130-185, Franklin TN 37067 LAW NERD MERCH! https://www.LawNerdShop.com LONG FORM CONTENT https://www.youtube.com/@TheEmilyDBaker The Emily Show Podcast on YouTube: https://emilydbaker.com/TheEmilyShowPlaylist Apple Podcasts: https://emilydbaker.com/AppleTheEmilyShow Spotify Podcasts: https://emilydbaker.com/SpofityTheEmilyShow On your favorite podcast player Mondays EMILY ON SOCIAL @TheEmilyDBaker Instagram: https://www.Instagram.com/TheEmilyDBaker Twitter: https://www.Twitter.com/TheEmilyDBaker Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheEmilyDBaker MY YOUTUBE TOOLS **My Favorite YOUTUBE TOOL VidIQ https://vidiq.com/LawNerd Follow My Cats on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/fredandgeorge_cat Emily’s glasses lenses are Irlen tint https://www.irlen.com *This video is not legal advice; it is commentary for educational and entertainment purposes. Some links shared are affiliate links, all sponsorships are stated in video. Videos are based on publicly available information unless otherwise stated. Sharing a resource is not an endorsement; it is a resource. Copyright 2020-2025 Baker Media, LLC* Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcribed - Published: 5 August 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on @TheEmilyDBaker YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/live/2Mgfd0YcGsY?si=OvopJ5gtEwz0RntC Emily discuss the latest developments in the Karen Read case following her acquittal. Her legal team has filed two significant motions: a motion for the return of her seized property and a motion to release impounded sidebar transcripts. First, we delve into the motion to return property. Karen Read's attorneys are pushing for the return of her 2021 Lexus LX 570 and personal cell phone, which were taken by the Massachusetts State Police. We explore the complexities surrounding the damaged Lexus, which was disassembled as part of the investigation, and how this might impact her car insurance claims. Next, we examine the motion for relief from sidebar impoundment. Karen Read's legal team is seeking the release of transcripts from sidebar conferences held during both pretrial proceedings and the trials. The argument is that "good cause" for keeping these discussions sealed no longer exists now that a verdict has been reached. We highlight the video's commentary on the unnecessary impoundment of pretrial sidebar discussions, especially when no jury was present, distinguishing these from the justified sealing of discussions related to the federal investigation. Join us as we break down these motions and their implications for the ongoing legal saga. STAY IN THE LOOP WITH EMILY D. BAKER Download Our FREE App: https://lawnerdapp.com Get the Free Email Alert: https://www.LawNerdAlert.com Case Requests & Business Inquiries: [email protected] Help with the shop: https://www.lawnerdshop.com/pages/contact Mailing Address: Emily D. Baker 2000 Mallory Ln. St. 130-185, Franklin TN 37067 DOCKET: 0:00 Road So Far 1:04 Motion to Return Property 4:28 Motion for Relief from Sidebar Impoundment LAW NERD MERCH! https://www.LawNerdShop.com LONG FORM CONTENT https://www.youtube.com/@TheEmilyDBaker The Emily Show Podcast on YouTube: https://emilydbaker.com/TheEmilyShowPlaylist Apple Podcasts: https://emilydbaker.com/AppleTheEmilyShow Spotify Podcasts: https://emilydbaker.com/SpofityTheEmilyShow On your favorite podcast player Mondays EMILY ON SOCIAL @TheEmilyDBaker Instagram: https://www.Instagram.com/TheEmilyDBaker Twitter: https://www.Twitter.com/TheEmilyDBaker Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheEmilyDBaker MY YOUTUBE TOOLS **My Favorite YOUTUBE TOOL VidIQ https://vidiq.com/LawNerd Follow My Cats on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/fredandgeorge_cat Emily’s glasses lenses are Irlen tint https://www.irlen.com *This video is not legal advice; it is commentary for educational and entertainment purposes. Some links shared are affiliate links, all sponsorships are stated in video. Videos are based on publicly available information unless otherwise stated. Sharing a resource is not an endorsement; it is a resource. Copyright 2020-2025 Baker Media, LLC* Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcribed - Published: 4 August 2025

Get 35% off your entire order at https://Lolablankets.com by using code LAWNERD at checkout. Experience the world’s #1 blanket with Lola Blankets. #ad Save 20% Off Honeylove by going to https://honeylove.com/LAWNERD ! #honeylovepod #ad Get 15% off FlowMarching when you go to https://emilydbaker.com/flomarching Aaron Phypers initiated the divorce from Denise Richards on July 7, 2025, citing "irreconcilable differences." He is representing himself and is seeking spousal support. Denise Richards filed for an ex parte temporary restraining order from Aaron Phypers. Photographs of a black eye were submitted as evidence and she explained that her laptop and phone were stolen. Denise accuses Aaron of disseminating private nude photographs and text messages from her stolen laptop to various news organizations, including the Daily Mail, even after the TTRO was issued. Denise moved out of their shared Calabasas home in 2023 due to marital issues and has since been renting three separate townhouses. Aaron, along with his parents, is still living in the Calabasas rental. On August 8th, a court hearing is scheduled to address the temporary restraining order. The purpose of this hearing is to determine if a more permanent restraining order needs to be issued, or if the existing temporary order should be extended. Alec Baldwin's malicious prosecution lawsuit against the prosecutor and Kari Morrissey, related to the "Rust" prosecution, was dismissed by the judge on July 29, 2025, because no significant action had been taken in 180 or more days. Baldwin's attorneys stated to Law 360 that they have been in good faith settlement discussions and will refile the lawsuit if these talks are not favorably resolved. RESOURCES Alec Baldwin Sues Rust Prosecutors - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqFz_L7lyE4   Adam Lally Testifies - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKcnfgU-Lrk Tom Sandoval Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gID24o55Ov__Xa8QWZLxnF- Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcribed - Published: 4 August 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/1nC4agVCZxo On July 23, 2025, Bryan Kohberger was sentenced to four consecutive life sentences without parole, plus an additional 10 years for burglary. He was also given various fines and civil penalties. The Judge Hippler stated that Kohberger would be imprisoned until he dies and would likely be moved out of Idaho for his own safety. The judge delivered a powerful statement, acknowledging the courage and strength of the victims' families and survivors, and emphasizing that focusing on "why" gives Kohberger undue power. The judge also clarified that while Kohberger waived his right to appeal, he still has the right to file a notice of appeal, though doing so might violate his plea agreement and potentially lead to the state seeking the death penalty. The judge imposed the maximum possible fines and penalties, speculating that this was partly to ensure that any future profits Kohberger might attempt to make from his crimes would go to restitution and fines. RESOURCES Bryan Kohberger Case Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKASBczV3CsUx-t5oRAK0ca Bryan Kohberger Gag Order Hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiCMWBvk-AM Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcribed - Published: 24 July 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/CiCMWBvk-AM In a July 17th hearing, Judge Hippler lifted the non-dissemination (gag) order in the Bryan Kohberger case, emphasizing the public's right to information, especially since a plea has been entered. However, he clarified that the court's prior preservation order remains in place, and sealed documents are still sealed. The media's petition to unseal all documents was denied as premature. The judge stated that after sentencing, scheduled for July 23rd, the court will begin reviewing sealed materials to determine what can be unsealed, starting with the newest documents first. This process will allow counsel to object to unsealing specific documents or request redactions. He warned that this unsealing process will take a considerable amount of time, and public records requests for sealed documents will be denied until they are officially unsealed. The judge also addressed the right to appeal, noting that while Kohberger's plea agreement includes a waiver of appeal rights, the US Supreme Court's ruling in Garza v. Idaho indicates that a defendant's right to file the appeal. Therefore, the appellate process is expected to play out. The investigation into document leaks is ongoing. RESOURCES Bryan Kohberger Case Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKASBczV3CsUx-t5oRAK0ca Leaked Kohberger Information The Emily Show - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHSMQMdNDKE Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcribed - Published: 23 July 2025

Get 20% OFF @honeylove by going to https://honeylove.com/LAWNERD ! #honeylovepod #ad In the Alex Murdaugh case, his defense attorney, Dick Harpootlian, is claiming new, exculpatory evidence was not turned over to the defense during the trial. They are text messages between Murdaugh and Eddie Smith. This is in addition to the ongoing appeal of the murder conviction based on allegations that the clerk of court, Becky Hill, influenced the jury. This could mean that a new murder trial can occur. However, Murdaugh will remain in prison for decades due to his multiple financial crime convictions. The gag order has been lifted in the Bryan Kohberger case and his sentencing is scheduled for Wednesday, July 23rd. While he waived his right to appeal, he can still file one, though it is unlikely to change his predetermined four consecutive life sentences. Tom Girardi has reported to prison as of July 17th, 2025, despite his attempts to delay. Court documents indicate that his motion for bond pending appeal will be heard in September, but the attorneys agreed he would go into custody in the interim. Denise Richards and Aaron Phypers are divorcing. Denise has filed for and received a temporary restraining order, alleging physical violence. The LA County court system is currently down online and I will cover this more in-depth once all court documents are available RESOURCES Bryan Kohberger Stream July 10 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy9rHg9m4xk Alex Murdaugh Appeal - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HKNZBInEso First Girardi Stream - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn16T4ySkec The Emily Show July 14 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ysy5bvjKuac Alex Murdaugh Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gJUHo2XsVhGNBhaMdx9B_cq Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcribed - Published: 21 July 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/tAzbRD_job8 A Massachusetts woman, has been charged with criminal contempt for allegedly disclosing sealed information from a federal grand jury to unauthorized individuals. Media reports suggest this grand juror was involved in the Karen Read case and leaked information related to it, though I caution that grand juries handle numerous cases, and this specific connection is not yet definitively confirmed from official documents. The individual was charged on July 11th and has already signed a plea agreement to plead guilty. Her initial appearance in federal court is scheduled for July 22nd. The plea agreement, dated July 11th, indicates prior conversations between her attorney and the U.S. Attorney's Office. RESOURCES U.S. Attorney's Office Press Release - https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/massachusetts-woman-charged-leaking-grand-jury-information Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcribed - Published: 18 July 2025

Fallout from the Karen Read Retrial continues, focusing on Boston Police Commissioner Cox's statements regarding Officer Kelly Dever and a strongly worded letter from Attorney Alan Jackson asking she be added to the Brady List. Officer Dever testified in the Karen Read Retrial, stating that her initial observations to the FBI about Burkowitz and Higgins in the Canton PD sallyport garage were a "false memory." She claimed she didn't recall the Commissioner telling her to "do the right thing," despite previously telling the defense he said that to her. Commissioner Cox denied knowing Officer Dever was associated with the Karen Read case and that he influenced her testimony, despite her acknowledging a meeting with him where he offered support. He stated he "encourages" many officers. Karen's Defense Attorney, Alan Jackson, sent a formal letter to Commissioner Cox, requesting that Officer Kelly Dever be included in the Brady database. This is due to her changed testimony and "false memory" claim, which he argues irreparably compromises her credibility and reliability as a law enforcement officer. Jackson asserts that if she lied, it's perjury, and if she truly suffers from false memories, she's unfit to serve. Jackson's letter warns that failure to disclose this information would be a constitutional violation, potentially leading to severe sanctions, including the dismissal of any cases Officer Dever is involved in, even post-prosecution, if this information is not disclosed to the defense. RESOURCESKaren Read Retrial Day 25 - https://youtube.com/live/agSsaDTCZJcKaren Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-voBoston 25 News Article - https://www.boston25news.com/news/25-investigates/25-investigates-read-defense-demands-boston-officer-be-placed-brady-list/IEOICYHT4VE4ZKQWLWKM7M5T3M/Alec Baldwin Trial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gLvDml0N_vUJ4wINrMLKHHS Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcribed - Published: 17 July 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/C8Ou77B6Eow In Sarah Boone's latest letter to the court, she is inquiring about the status of her appeal and her court-appointed appellate attorney. She states that her attorney sent one introductory message in February 2025 and has not responded to her five inmate messages, two handwritten letters, or attempts by nine third-party representatives. Boone says her appeal is in jeopardy because an order was issued on June 13, 2025, requiring an initial brief within 20 days, or her appeal may be dismissed due to lack of communication from her attorney.  However, there was a third extension granted on the appeal. She argues that her attorney's failure to perform duties or communicate cannot be held against her and that dismissal would deny her due process and effective assistance of counsel. The trial court judge cannot force the appellate attorney to communicate and that appeals typically take a long time, with minimal client input needed since the brief is based on the record. There might be a desire for Boone to control her lawyer, which is often not how the attorney-client relationship works in appellate cases. RESOURCESSarah Boone Mega Compilation - https://youtu.be/tuMPDDpALh0Sarah Boone Post Trial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gI-eqJ7fySZATvbdXi3hZpz Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcribed - Published: 16 July 2025

Get 15% off OneSkin with the code LAWNERD at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod #adThere are "rumblings" of Karen Read signing both a movie deal, with Alan Jackson involved, and a book deal. Special prosecutor Hank Brennan has billed the taxpayers of Massachusetts over $500,000 for his time. Karen Read's defense attorney, Alan Jackson, has sent a letter demanding that Boston Police Officer Kelly Dever be added to the Brady list due to credibility issues.  Justin Baldoni's team did not refile their counter-claims against Blake Lively's lawsuit, though his alleged facts will still be used in his defense. A hearing is set for July 15th regarding disputes over Lively's deposition, including its location, attendees, and protective orders. The media coalition has requested its lifting, arguing Kohberger's waiver of appellate rights and guilty plea negate the original concerns about a fair jury. A Zoom hearing is set for July 17th at 10:30 AM MT. Tom Girardi is set to surrender to federal prison on July 17th for an 87-month sentence. His lawyers filed a motion for bond pending appeal, but the hearing for this motion is set after his surrender date, and they did not clear the date with the court. The court has directed both parties to confer by July 14th to identify an available hearing date. The divorce case, pending since 2020, is at risk of being dismissed due to inactivity. A hearing is set for August 1st, 2025, where Erika's attorney needs to file a dismissal or judgment, or show cause for the delay. Complications arise due to Tom's conservatorship and assets being tied up in bankruptcy cases. We’ll discuss Donna Adelson this week. RESOURCESKaren Read Retrial Day 25 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agSsaDTCZJc  Special prosecutor in Karen Read retrial billed DA's office over $500K - https://www.nbcboston.com/investigations/special-prosecutor-in-karen-read-retrial-billed-das-office-566k/3764071/ Justin Baldoni opts out of amending claims against Blake Lively - https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/amp/culture/story/blake-lively-justin-baldoni-legal-battle-timeline-117430951 Baldoni Lawsuit Dismissed? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhYuhlpQ6YAKohberger Stream July 10 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy9rHg9m4xkTom Girardi Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gIvaPnEfilr35PrLPfq01qz Depp v. Heard Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gLVeg1x2AInDBfPU6-ffnD0Amber Heard Legal Fees - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTHuaB8Fde0 This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 14 July 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/Yy9rHg9m4xk Bryan Kohberger has signed a factual basis admitting to the burglary and four murders, and a plea agreement for a fixed life sentence without parole or opportunity for reconsideration. This means a life sentence with no possibility of release. He has also waived his right to a fair trial, including the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses. Consequently, the media argues that the non-dissemination order should be lifted, as there is no longer a jury pool to taint or concerns about his right to a fair trial. The prosecution, however, objected to lifting the order. The court initially made a preliminary decision, stating it could be revisited if a reason emerged. The court also noted that no bond was set for the defendant. Bill Thompson emphasized the need for time to provide a full statement, which he claimed was difficult while preparing for sentencing. However, this was deemed not a legal justification, and the media has highlighted that "more time" is insufficient legal grounds to maintain a restrictive non-dissemination or gag order. As of July 10th, more docket entries haven't appeared since the order was filed on July 2nd. There's a possibility the court is backlogged and won't address it until July 23rd, at which point it would become moot and withdrawn. RESOURCESBryan Kohberger Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKASBczV3CsUx-t5oRAK0caBryan Kohberger Change of Plea Hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdOt4zAWjp8 This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 14 July 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/BCja5KnBz4kThe complex civil lawsuits surrounding the estate of Eric Richins, husband of Kouri Richins, who is accused of his murder. These civil cases are stayed (on hold) as the Kouri Richins' criminal case and are being handled by the same judge, which is noted as unusual. A conviction could significantly alter her entitlements under the law (e.g., preventing her from inheriting). The criminal trial's outcome will also impact the ability to depose Kouri Richins for the civil cases. Eric Richins's sister, Katie Richins Benson, acting as the representative of Eric's estate and trustee of his living trust, has sued Kouri Richins, her mother, her brother, and Kouri Richins Reality (KRR) for various alleged improper financial actions. Kouri Richins has countersued the estate, arguing she is entitled to a portion of Eric's assets. She seeks declaratory judgment and quiet title, asking the court to declare that she owns 50% of the home, personal property, and business interest. She also seeks a money judgment against the estate for unjust enrichment. These actions also takes money away from her children's future. RESOURCESKouri Richins New Charges - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43ULdoW-g4wKouri Richins Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gJYyEMQDM_Cn4icqWBV20fW Walk The Dog Letter - https://www.youtube.com/live/9vmnAHDbBJ0&t=3636s This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 11 July 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/BCja5KnBz4kFormer Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator in the Karen Read case, is appealing his termination from the Massachusetts State Police. He was fired in March after an internal investigation sustained allegations of misconduct, including derogatory text messages, sharing information outside the department, and drinking alcohol on duty. Proctor has civil service protections in his job, and his appeal is being supported and paid for by the police union. The union's involvement may also be to prevent his termination from setting a precedent for other officers. Proctor stated in an interview that he wants his job back, claiming that "no one's ever fired for personal texts." A procedural hearing for his appeal was held virtually on Tuesday as part of his appeal to the state's Civil Service Commission, an independent body that handles issues of state and local worker discipline. State Police requested the hearing be made public, which some see as a step towards transparency. A full in-person hearing is scheduled for mid-August. During the procedural hearing, lawyers for Proctor and the State Police indicated they had reached an agreement regarding evidence discovery, although it might take longer than anticipated. Proctor remains certified as an officer in Massachusetts, even without a law enforcement agency. The Karen Read case has also led to other changes within the Massachusetts State Police, including the reassignment of Proctor's supervisor, Yuri Bukhenik, and the relocation of another trooper involved in the case, David DiCicco. The Civil Service Commission will ultimately decide whether Trooper Proctor will get his job back. RESOURCESNBC 10 Boston Reporting - https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/michael-proctor-mass-state-police-appeal-hearing/3761846/Proctor's Post Trial Interview - https://www.youtube.com/live/i7IdKgUQoDU?t=7615s This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 11 July 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/43ULdoW-g4wNew charges against Kouri Richins are building upon her existing charges for the murder and attempted murder of her husband, Eric Richins. A significant portion of the new charges revolves around Kouri Richins's financial dealings and mounting debt. Richins wrote checks from an account with a zero balance and an extended line of credit to her business account (which was negative), then immediately transferred funds out before the checks could bounce. This included a $1,000 transfer to her mother and $2,000 to her personal account. In late 2021, Richins owned a home with substantial short-term, high-interest loans. She unsuccessfully tried to refinance the property into a traditional mortgage. She then "seller-financed" the property for her best friend, her best friend's husband, and their three children, who moved in and agreed to pay $2,900/month in rent with an option to buy. The best friend wired $45,000 as a down payment for a supposed long-term mortgage. Richins immediately spent this money on unrelated personal expenses and other creditors, leaving the best friend vulnerable to foreclosure and eventual eviction from the home. The case is still scheduled for trial in February 2026. The financial charges are separate from the murder case but some information will overlap as evidence of motive and consciousness of guilt. RESOURCESKouri Richins Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gJYyEMQDM_Cn4icqWBV20fWPreliminary Hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCpQt7jwelEBail Hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BL62suOhaD8 This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 10 July 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/43ULdoW-g4wNew charges against Kouri Richins are building upon her existing charges for the murder and attempted murder of her husband, Eric Richins. A significant portion of the new charges revolves around Kouri Richins's financial dealings and mounting debt. Richins wrote checks from an account with a zero balance and an extended line of credit to her business account (which was negative), then immediately transferred funds out before the checks could bounce. This included a $1,000 transfer to her mother and $2,000 to her personal account. In late 2021, Richins owned a home with substantial short-term, high-interest loans. She unsuccessfully tried to refinance the property into a traditional mortgage. She then "seller-financed" the property for her best friend, her best friend's husband, and their three children, who moved in and agreed to pay $2,900/month in rent with an option to buy. The best friend wired $45,000 as a down payment for a supposed long-term mortgage. Richins immediately spent this money on unrelated personal expenses and other creditors, leaving the best friend vulnerable to foreclosure and eventual eviction from the home. The case is still scheduled for trial in February 2026. The financial charges are separate from the murder case but some information will overlap as evidence of motive and consciousness of guilt. RESOURCESKouri Richins Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gJYyEMQDM_Cn4icqWBV20fWPreliminary Hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCpQt7jwelEBail Hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BL62suOhaD8 This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 10 July 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/43ULdoW-g4wSergeant Trooper Yuri Bukhenik, who was involved in the Karen Read investigation, was reassigned to the Division of Standards and Training, where he will perform administrative functions. While NBC 10 Boston's headline states Bukhenik "supervised" the investigation, Trooper Michael Proctor was the lead investigator, and Bukhenik was Proctor's supervisor. Sgt. Bukhenik's position is looking to be filled. The reassignment comes less than three weeks after Karen Read's acquittal. The Norfolk DA's office will face significant challenges with past cases due to the credibility issues of their officers. RESOURCESKaren Read - 2025 Trial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gL3CbMJHvrKiAD1aDNcblnOSandra Birchmore Case - https://youtu.be/sF3VD5cfKnE This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 9 July 2025

Sean "Diddy" Combs has received a split verdict. While acquitted of the more serious racketeering and sex trafficking charges, he was found guilty of transportation to engage in prostitution. What does this mean for his future? Is he still in jail? I break down the charges, the defense's strategy, the government's arguments, and what to expect at his possible October sentencing. Plus, I address all the misinformation circulating about Diddy's current status and potential prison time.Bryan Kohberger has entered a guilty plea to all charges, resulting in max life sentences without parole or appeal. His formal sentencing will be on July 23rd. We also discuss the noticeable changes in Kohberger's court appearance and the highly requested topic: Can Bryan Kohberger profit from his story? Get a clear understanding of "Son of Sam" laws, specifically how Idaho's unique statute works. RESOURCESThe Sean 'Diddy' Combs Cases - What Diddy Do? - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gIsB0qzawUpon2u62BeVSdCThe Idaho College Murders - Defendant Bryan Kohberger - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKASBczV3CsUx-t5oRAK0caBryan Kohberger Change of Plea Hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdOt4zAWjp8Bryan Kohberger Plea Deal Breaking News Stream - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U4g45EG71gClean Court Feed with Closed Captions - https://youtu.be/nJJtSQopo7U This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 7 July 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/TdOt4zAWjp8On July 2, 2025, Bryan Kohberger pleaded guilty to 4 counts of Murder and one count of Burglary. During the plea hearing, Kohberger confirmed he was pleading guilty because he is guilty and waived his appellate rights, including the right to ask for a reduced or lenient sentence. He agreed to the maximum potential sentence, which is life with no parole for the murder counts, served consecutively, and 10 years for the burglary, plus court fees, fines, and restitution. Madison Mogen's family, through their attorney, expressed gratitude to law enforcement, the prosecution team, and the judges, and stated their support for the plea agreement, emphasizing their desire for closure and healing. The Sentencing is scheduled for July 23, 2025, at 9:00am MT with the possibility of extending to the 24th. I'll plan to cover that hearing. Make sure you have the Law Nerd App to join me when I go live. RESOURCESThe Idaho College Murders Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKASBczV3CsUx-t5oRAK0caThe Kohberger Leaks - https://youtu.be/IAF8jCkNKn4Menendez Brothers Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gK2PE7jCHRFumPtH7t7qZWn This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 3 July 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/7U4g45EG71gOn June 30, 2025, it was reported that Bryan Kohberger is taking a plea deal in the Idaho College Murders, with a hearing set for July 2nd. The plea deal, as detailed by ABC News, involves Kohberger pleading guilty to all four counts of first-degree murder and one count of burglary. In exchange, he will be spared the death penalty. He will be sentenced to four consecutive life sentences for the murder counts and a maximum of 10 years for the burglary, amounting to life without parole. Crucially, Kohberger will waive all rights to appeal, bringing finality to the case. The trial was originally slated to begin with jury selection on August 4th, with opening statements on August 18th. Prosecutors stated in a letter to families that Kohberger's defense team approached them last week seeking a plea offer. Prosecutors met with available family members and decided to make a formal offer. They emphasize that this agreement ensures conviction, life in prison, and avoids "decades of post-conviction appeals" that are common in death penalty cases. RESOURCESThe Idaho College Murders Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKASBczV3CsUx-t5oRAK0caABC News Reporting - https://abcnews.go.com/US/bryan-kohberger-plead-guilty-counts-idaho-college-murders/story?id=123356808 The Kohberger Leaks - https://youtu.be/IAF8jCkNKn4Scott Peterson Case - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SremTw2WyZk This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 2 July 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/6U-T0fjM5MMThe post-verdict statements from jurors in the Karen Read Retrial, emphasizing the importance of juror transparency and their reasoning for the "not guilty" verdict. The jurors were described as serious, conscientious, and respectful in their deliberations, focusing on the evidence and defining each charge. There are concerns that threats and harassment against jurors could discourage future citizens from serving, suggesting that juror lists should be sealed by default to protect their privacy unless they choose to come forward. The initial, withdrawn verdict was due to one male juror having doubts at lunch, asking if he could take back his vote, but later confirming "Okay, guilty of OUI." Juror #1 aka The Foreperson, stated there was no single moment that solidified guilt, and the evidence presented was "paper-thin," failing to bring comfort to the victim's family. He highlighted the struggle to reconcile sympathy for the victim's family with the lack of sufficient evidence for a conviction. He worked really hard to make sure that all of the jurors felt heard and confident with their decision. Juror #11, addressed accusations from "internet trolls," clarifying she is an attorney in Brazil but not the US, and her interest in true crime was focused on Brazilian cases, hence her unfamiliarity with the Read case before jury duty. She expressed happiness that Karen Read would not go to jail for something she didn't do, but also anger that John O'Keefe's fate remains unknown. She also confirmed they were largely unaware of the large crowds and chanting outside the courthouse due to precautions taken by jury officers and entering through the back. This reinforces that external pressure did not influence their deliberations. Juror #12 initially leaned towards "guilty" but changed her mind after reviewing the evidence, not finding a specific piece of information she was looking for. She wouldn't share what that evidence was. An anonymous juror spoke with the media and mentioned that during deliberations, they started making more progress when they got "huge poster board paper." They then worked with other members of the jury to write down the definition of every charge on the poster board, essentially workshopping the jury instructions. Despite the challenges, jurors' willingness to speak out fosters transparency and highlights that jurors genuinely strive to make the right decisions based on the evidence presented. RESOURCESJune 24 Live Stream - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7IdKgUQoDUThe Ghislane Maxwell Case - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gL31tnzpu6Du3wLHoQRaIq8Foreperson on w/ Today Show - https://youtu.be/nE-a9MR1oUMJuror #12 on WCVB - https://youtu.be/-Tfoc0OvOf0Anonymous Juror on NBC 10 - https://youtu.be/Vi8bkGvciaIJuror #11 on WBZ - https://youtu.be/Qx9KONKG6RE This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe -...

Transcribed - Published: 26 June 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/i7IdKgUQoDUAfter Karen Read was acquitted of the Murder charges on June 18, 2025, DA Michael Morrissey, & Special Prosecutor, Hank Brennan gave statements to the media that prompted Alan Jackson counter. "The jury has spoken," DA Michael Morrissey simply states. Hank Brennan expresses disappointment in the verdict and states that his independent review, along with a closed federal investigation, led him to conclude that only one person was responsible for John O'Keefe's death, and no other suspects were identified. If Brennan believed only one person was responsible, a prosecutor's job is to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, which was not achieved. He also condemns a "campaign of intimidation and abuse" against witnesses. That sentiment is agreeable but incomplete because he doesn't also condemn it also against the witness, jurors and other participates. Jackson blasts Brennan for an "egregious breach of prosecutorial ethics" by attempting to publicly shame and discredit the jury and supplant his personal views for that of the jury. Jackson argues that Brennan's claims of a thorough investigation are false, given the defense uncovered hidden exculpatory evidence, lies, and perjury by the Commonwealth's own witnesses, cops covering for other cops, a biased and corrupt lead investigator with personal ties to witnesses, and inculpatory and suspicious conduct by a myriad of witnesses. Jackson asserts that the prosecution's effort was a personal vendetta against Karen Read, not a pursuit of justice for John O'Keefe, and that the case never should have gone to trial in the first place. He directly accuses DA Michael Morrissey of having no interest in actually seeking justice for John O'Keefe. RESOURCESDA Michael Morrissey's Statement - https://www.boston25news.com/news/local/norfolk-da-michael-morrissey-gives-statement-karen-read-verdict/6N6N23YM25AQPMEXRLR6HAOTOM/Hank Brennan's Statement - https://x.com/TedDanielnews/status/1937134441505096022Alan Jackson's Statement - https://www.boston25news.com/news/local/karen-read-attorney-alan-jackson-blasts-special-prosecutor-new-statement/NY7R26CSFJETXGFLIEKHRQE6Y4/ This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 25 June 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/i7IdKgUQoDUAfter Karen Read was acquitted of the Murder charges on June 18, 2025, Michael Proctor, The Alberts & McCabes attended video interviews. Michael Proctor was Interviewed by 20/20. He addresses his strong negative feelings and derogatory comments about Karen Read, stating they developed as the case progressed, but admits they were regrettable. Proctor denies planting evidence, calling it a ridiculous accusation. He believes the negative perception from the public is a "loud minority" and maintains he would do nothing differently in the investigation, attributing any issues to the "crazy crazy so-called conspiracy" online rather than acknowledging any potential flaws in his own work. There was a lack of remorse from Proctor for potentially tainting the investigation and no apology to Karen Read. He believes he was unfairly fired for personal texts and that his union rep took his uniforms. Brian, Nicole and Chris Albert were interviewed together with Jen and Matt McCabe by ABC's Nightline. Brian Albert's lack of curiosity and inaction given the situation, especially as a Boston police officer, despite not being Canton PD. Brian's response essentially was, "Why would I go out there?" Brian Albert also describes Jen McCabe barging into his room early in the morning but there was no mention in their recounting of the morning about wrangling the dog. Ultimately, the families felt like they were not protect by the judicial process and told the audience to think twice before becoming a witness in a trial. That is not sound advice as there are consequences for not cooperating with a subpoena. There was a lot of frustration with the clipped nature of the interviews and the perceived lack of accountability or self-reflection from the interviewees. The witnesses seem to be focusing on the "straw man" of public conspiracy theories rather than addressing odd behavior or a poor investigation, leading to unanswered questions. RESOURCESThe Alberts & McCabes Interview from ABC Nightline – https://youtu.be/yIrVOSbx9gMDid Proctor Plant Evidence? https://youtu.be/qZDx1lCJFZY Michael Proctor Wouldn't Change Anything - https://youtu.be/oiuKayU6UQo This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 25 June 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/JaBePBtlqQADay 36 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on June 18, 2025 and a Verdict was reached! After 4 days of deliberation, the jury in the Karen Read murder retrial delivered their verdicts. Karen Read was found not guilty of second-degree murder (Count 1) and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death (Count 3). She was found guilty only on the lesser included charge of operating under the influence (OUI) with a blood alcohol level of 0.08 or greater (Count 2), which is a misdemeanor.Immediately after the verdict, Karen Read was sentenced to one year of probation and a 24D program, which is a standard first-time OUI offer.Outside the courthouse, Karen Read addressed the crowd while standing next to her defense team, David Yannetti, Alan Jackson, and Elizabeth Little, and Robert Alessi. Karen Read thanked her supporters and stated that no one has fought harder for justice for John O'Keefe than she and her team. Her father also acknowledged the strength of Karen and the support of their extended family and the legal team. There was confusion during the reading of the verdicts, likely due to an initial incorrect verdict form. This form was sealed. The Commonwealth cannot appeal the not guilty verdicts. It's unlikely anyone else will be charged in John O'Keefe's death for the same crime, but if there are issues with the investigation itself, those could be charged separately. There is still the civil case against Karen read by the O'Keefe family which I will follow up on in the future but for now, . RESOURCESWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 19 June 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/1FQDyZVIbhoDay 35 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on June 17, 2025. We are on the 3rd day of Verdict Watch and the jurors had questions! 1) They asked about the specific time frame for the OUI (Operating Under the Influence) charge, whether it was 12:45 a.m. or 5:00 a.m. The court responded that the jurors have all the evidence and are the sole fact-finders.2) They asked if video clips of Karen Read's interviews were evidence and how they could consider them. The court affirmed that the videos are evidence and should be weighed like any other evidence. However, before considering any such statement, the jury must determine beyond a reasonable doubt that Read made the statement voluntarily, freely, and rationally. 3) The jury asked if convicting on a sub-charge (specifically offense two, number five, referring to the OUI) would automatically convict on the overall charges. The court introduced and read an amended verdict slip to clarify the process. Later, the jury sent another question while the court was deliberating on how to answer the first 3 questions. 4) They were asking if finding "not guilty" on two charges but being unable to agree on a third, results in a hung jury on all three or just one. The court's initial inclination was to respond that it was a theoretical question and could not be answered, as jurors are not to be concerned with the consequences of their verdict. The defense objected, arguing that it was a question about how to report a verdict, not its consequences, and that the jury instructions already addressed this. Ultimately, the court decided to respond that it was a theoretical question and thus unanswerable. No Verdict was made at the end of day, we'll see what happens on Day 36. RESOURCESWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 18 June 2025

Get 15% off OneSkin with the code LAWNERD at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod #adJoin Emily as she breaks down the latest case outside of the Karen Read Retrial. Donna Adelson's quest for a change of venue is denied and her new trial is date set during the Bryan Kohberger trial. Kouri Richins new trial is set for February 2026 and there’s a possibility of her testifying! Plus, get the full breakdown of the massive dismissal in the Blake Lively/Justin Baldoni lawsuit.RESOURCESKaren Read Retrial Day 33 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wSJeNZph94 Donna Adelson Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKREcVCO0ynq9o9K6A37cuk Kouri Richins Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gJYyEMQDM_Cn4icqWBV20fW Depp v Heard Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gLVeg1x2AInDBfPU6-ffnD0 Last Update - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAF8jCkNKn4 NY Times Sued - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR5ncu7g_Qc Triller v. h3h3 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gLNJ0I6fzFd8uaqDR_BOEw1 Gwyneth Paltrow Ski Crash Trial - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gIlMUdeLtN4mNQCerfWxONy  This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 16 June 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/4wSJeNZph94Day 33 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on June 13, 2025. The Defense's closing argument, delivered by Jackson, focused on the lack of collision and the integrity of the investigation. The Prosecution's closing argument, delivered by Hank Brennan, focused on Karen Read's actions and the data. After lunch, the court read the jury instructions. The court did not include the defense's requested instruction regarding John O'Keefe's hoodie but did include a straight DUI as a lesser included charge. The jury began deliberations just after 2:39 PM local time and deliberated for a little under two hours before asking to go home for the weekend. They were instructed not to discuss the case with anyone, conduct independent research, or follow news about the case over the weekend. Deliberations will resume on Monday morning. RESOURCESKaren Read Retrial Day 32 - https://youtube.com/live/N1az5x1PEkMWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 14 June 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/9W-28UtY1lYDay 31 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on June 11, 2025. Neither Karen Read nor Former Trooper Proctor will be called to testify. A charging conference, where jury instructions will be discussed, is scheduled for tomorrow. The Defense is requesting instructions regarding "missing witnesses" and the hoodie, but not a "third-party culprit" instruction.Dr. Rentschler's testimony focused on the paint transfer test and concluded that the injuries were inconsistent with the Commonwealth's theory, stating that the abrasions on O'Keefe's arm do not correspond to how an arm would interact with the vehicle if struck at a right angle. The Defense effectively used visuals from his Power Point to support Dr. Rentschler's testimony. During cross-examination, Special Prosecutor, Hank Brennan, largely avoided questions about Dr. Rentschler's testing, instead focusing on his independence and expenses. Rentschler maintained his opinions were unchanged by these factors. Brennan's cross-examination strategy undermined the Commonwealth's position, especially given the high payment to their own experts. A significant development is that the Commonwealth will not call any rebuttal witnesses once the defense rests, a surprising move given their prior legal battles over testimony. The introduction of X-rays by the defense, which many believed didn't exist due to Dr. Welcher's testimony, may have influenced this decision. With the evidence phase concluding, the next steps are the charging conference, where jury instructions and lesser-included crimes will be debated, and then closing arguments on Friday. The jury will then deliberate, with the complexity of Count Two (involuntary manslaughter) expected to be a key focus, as it was in the previous trial. RESOURCESWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 12 June 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/qgkQm-VgMu0Day 30 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on June 10, 2025. Defense Attorney Alan Jackson started the day by coming in hot and accused the Prosecution of "burden shifting," implying they were improperly trying to make the defense prove their case. He provided a transcript that the Prosecution opened the door to ask Dr. Laposata about dog bites when Brennan inquired Dr. Russell about Dr. Laposata's report about dos bites. The Judge Denied questioning about dog bites but okay to question about animal bites. The judge offered to give an instruction about burden shifting to the jury but Jackson declined it. There was confusion about whether Dr. Wrenchler had seen X-ray evidence, as he testified there were none done to the arm, while Dr. La Pasada's testimony indicated X-rays did exist. This point raises questions about what evidence was provided to Dr. Wrenchler and how rebuttal will go. During Cross Examination and the Morning Break, Brennan wanted to impeach Dr. Laposata's credibility with past issues from her time as a medical examiner, including an audit and handling of the Station nightclub fire. The court allowed some of this to be brought up during cross-examination but not all. A juror's question led to the court clarifying what it meant when video evidence was "stricken" during testimony showing that all jurors are paying attention and really want to get the understanding right. The Defense's last witness, Dr. Andrew Rentschler, a Biomechanical Engineer at ARCCA, testified about how ARCCA was hired by a government agency and was not given information about the case. They were only give the circumstances and to try to recreate it. His analysis of John O'Keefe's injuries were that the injuries were not consistent with being struck by the Lexus, specifically the tail light. He determined that the force required to produce the skull fracture was significantly higher than what could result from impact with the taillight at a speed of 15 mph. There were several disputes regarding the content of Dr. Rentschler's PowerPoint presentation, with objections to text containing hearsay and ultimate opinions. The court ordered the presentation to be edited, with certain text removed. This will be finalized on Day 31 before the jury comes in. RESOURCESWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 11 June 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/_U9Gv2ieltoDay 29 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on June 9, 2025. On week 8 of the trial, will the jury get the case this week to deliberate? Special Prosecutor, Hanke Brennan, asks Dr. Wolfe, the Director of Accident Reconstruction at ARCCA, about the appearance of holes on the back of Mr. O'Keefe's hoodie and whether these holes are consistent with road rash or other damage. He asked him if he'd ever consider if Mr. O'Keefe may have fallen or landed on his back. Dr. Wolf stated he did not consider whether Mr. O'Keefe had fallen or landed on his back. Defense Attorney, Robert Alessi, asked for a Mistrial with Prejudice due to Intentional Misconduct by the prosecution regarding questioning about the hoodie and its damage. The defense argued the prosecution intentionally left out evidence about the holes on the back of the hoodie being clippings from the crime lab. The judge did not grant a mistrial but agreed to instructed the jury to disregard the questions and give a strong admonishment about the prosecution. When it came time to it, the Judge did not give a strong admonishment or admit the pictures into evidence. At the end of the day, the defense said that they will address this the following day. A Voir Dire of Dr. Laposata was conducted and Judge Cannone ruled she cannot testify that the wounds on John O'Keefe's arm were from a dog, but she will be able to testify about the original opinions about the cause and manner of death. Direct Examination continues on Day 30. RESOURCESWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 10 June 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/fyEtt02zOn8Day 28 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on June 6, 2025. Karen Read spoke to the media and suggested the case might go to the jury the following week. The judge denied the motion to have police procedure expert Michael Easter testify. Today we were all day with Dr. Daniel Wolfe, Direct of Accident Reconstruction at ARCCA. He tests conducted using a pressurized air cannon to fire a drinking glass at a car's tail light to simulate damage. ARCCA also purchased an "exemplar vehicle," a 2021 LX 570, to test damage to the tail light. ARCCA conducted tests to rebut Dr. Welcher's testimony. They tested to see if damage from a thrown rocks glass matched the damage to Karen Read's tail light, and compared that to damage from collisions with a test dummy arm and Resource Randy, a full body dummy. Tests were conducted using a crash test dummy with a hoodie similar to John O'Keefe's, and none of the tests damaged the hoodie. The most helpful part of Dr. Wolf's testimony was explaining the inner and outer plastic layers of the tail light, which helped understand the depth of the damage. RESOURCESWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 7 June 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/-SN-jb2bT-0Day 27 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on June 4, 2025. When prosecution's usually focus on making a case clearer, in this case, the prosecution's strategy seems to be to muddy the evidence. Brian Loughran, a snow plow driver, said he saw a Ford Edge parked on the street going up Fairview around 3-4am. There's a procedure to call in vehicles parked on the street during snow removal, but he did not do so. While Special Prosecutor, Hank Brennan, did the cross-examination, he focused on online activity, specifically about a blogger talking about him. He stated he knew someone was talking about him online, but he didn't feel threatened or harassed. He also mentioned that his wife had recently passed, and he wasn't paying attention to online activity. Karina Kolokithas, a friend of John and Karen who was at the Waterfall Bar, spoke about how everyone was in a celebratory mood and having a good time. John O'Keefe was described as being "over the moon excited" for his niece and her future. She also mentioned that John and Karen were "sweet with one another." She talked to Karen Read for more than 50 minutes and noted that Karen was drinking water all night. She did not perceive Karen Read to be intoxicated. This point was highlighted as potentially persuasive for the jury regarding Karen Read's level of intoxication. Her testimony about the jovial evening was contrasted with the defense's presentation of the waterfall video, which focused on the interactions between Brian Higgins, Brian Albert, and Chris Albert, suggesting potential doubt about the overall mood of the evening. RESOURCESRetrial Day 25 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agSsaDTCZJcWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 5 June 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/VaZWKV-xJkQDay 26 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on June 3, 2025. Dr. Marie Russell, the defense's dog bite expert, is on the stand for cross-examination. There's discussion about Karen Read's statements and whether they changed Dr. Russell's opinion. Dr. Russell states that Read's statements did not change her analysis, citing Read's stressful state and potential acute grief reaction. The defense moves for a mistrial with prejudice due to the prosecution bringing up DNA in front of the jury, which is ultimately denied. Dr. Russell's redirect involves questions about why DNA results not showing dog DNA didn't change her opinion, and discussions of medical journal articles regarding dog bites. Sgt. Nicholas Barros, a Dighton Police Officer, testifies about observing damage to the tail light of Karen Read's SUV. He describes a crack and a missing piece instead of the majority of it gone. Special Prosecutor, Hank Brennan, cross-examines Barros, focusing on inconsistencies in his testimony and report, his meeting with defense attorneys, and the condition of the tail light being potentially obscured by snow. There's a discussion about photos of the tail light and discrepancies in the damage shown, and how his memory of the damage might have been affected by seeing various videos and photos of the vehicle after the initial observation. RESOURCESFirst Trial Day 22 - https://youtube.com/live/_Z1DhJDQj5YWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 4 June 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/agSsaDTCZJcDay 25 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on June 2, 2025. During week seven of the trial, the defense is currently presenting its case, and they are keeping in mind that the prosecution will have rebuttal witnesses. Judge Cannone allowed Former Trooper Michael Proctor's texts to be admitted into evidence while being read by his childhood friend, Jonathan Diamandis. When the texts messages began to get really egregious, the witness didn't feel comfortable reading it allowed so Special Prosecutor, Hank Brennan, read them allowed while the witness confirmed what was said. This didn't offer for the truth of the matter but instead, focusing on his state of mind and potential bias in the investigation. A key witness, Kelly Dever, a former Canton police officer, testified about seeing Chief Burkowitz and Brian Higgins with Karen Reed's SUV for a long time the night of John O'Keefe's death. She later claimed this was a false memory influenced by a timeline. She also mentioned being interviewed by the FBI and being threatened with perjury by the defense team. Dr. Marie Russell, a dog bite expert, discussed John O'Keefe's injuries to his right arm. Dr. Russell believes the injuries are consistent with a dog attack and not with a motor vehicle accident. The cross-examination of Dr. Russell is ongoing, focusing on her expertise, marketing, and opinions. Cross examination will continue on Day 26! RESOURCESLatest Emily Show Episode - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4hWb8uQjsIWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 3 June 2025

Emily unpacks the prosecution’s latest moves, including detailed witness testimony from former associates of Sean “Diddy” Combs. These testimonies describe alleged racketeering, coercion, and disturbing claims about Diddy’s influence over law enforcement. Emily explains what the government is trying to prove, how these allegations could support a broader conspiracy charge, and what this means for the future of the case.Tom Girardi Sentencing - The disgraced former attorney is facing sentencing for stealing from his clients, with a new court date set for June 3rd. Emily walks through what’s at stake, how the court is approaching his health and legal status, and why this case continues to shake the legal industry. The Chrisley Case and Comeback? After convictions for tax evasion and bank fraud, the Chrisleys received a high-profile pardon from President Trump. Now, they’re reportedly planning a new reality show about their legal journey. Emily explains the legal timeline, the public reaction, and what we might expect from their next chapter—both in court and on-screen. Karen Read Trial | The Proctor Problem - The episode then shifts back to the Karen Read trial, now in its seventh week. Emily dives deep into the growing controversy around former lead investigator Michael Proctor, whose text messages have raised serious concerns about bias and misconduct. She explains the complex legal arguments about whether those texts can be admitted as evidence, the defense’s surprise move to not call Proctor as a witness (for now), and the strategic risks involved. RESOURCES Previous Podcast Episode - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAF8jCkNKn4 Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 2 June 2025

Defense Case Starts and they don't want to call Proctor | Case Brief Watch the full coverage of the live stream on  @TheEmilyDBaker  YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/live/0Coi3nBtXcQ?si=5VFXwAl2xxgxxDpBDay 24 of the Karen Read retrial focuses on the defense's case and a motion to dismiss. Initially, the motion to dismiss is discussed, highlighting how it is generally denied unless there's a complete lack of evidence. The court typically favors the prosecution's evidence for this motion. The defense then presents its first witness, a tech expert and accident reconstructionist, who analyzes reports from Burgess and Welchure. The expert discusses the timing of the text stream event (1162-2), the backing event of Karen Read's vehicle, and John O'Keefe's phone time. He simplifies complex slides and presents 30 different timing possibilities between the Lexus text stream time and O'Keefe's phone. He points out that three of these possibilities show the text stream event ending after O'Keefe's phone's last manual button click. The expert also addresses whether Karen Read's car ever registered a collision in its data, concluding there was no registration of a collision during relevant trigger events. Cross-examination by Brennan explores the expert's reliance on others' data and whether the Lexus ever registered a collision before. It is clarified that the system is geared toward vehicle-to-vehicle collisions, not vehicle-to-pedestrian ones. Further discussion includes a second chip-off procedure and an SD card found with date and time information, clarifying the timing of key cycles. Brennan’s cross-examination also focuses on a chart of infotainment calls and the expert’s understanding and assumptions about the data. The discussion highlights that the expert agrees the closest points in time to the 11622 event, specifically the three-point turn maneuver, are the most reliable for syncing the clocks. The day ends with discussion about Michael Proctor's text threads and the defense's attempt to authenticate them without calling Proctor as a witness. The Commonwealth argues Proctor needs to be called for cross-examination. The judge reserves a ruling on this matter. RESOURCES What You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 31 May 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/NqdL0Oq7uMADay 23 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on May 29, 2025. Judge Cannone ruled against allowing the defense to question Dr. Welcher further about Trooper Paul and Dr. Irini Scordi-Bello. The definition of "rely" and its implications in questioning witnesses were discussed. Dr. Welcher remained on the stand for the duration of the half-day session. The defense was allowed to cross-examine the Commonwealth's new accident reconstruction expert about what they relied on from the previous expert, but not necessarily all of their opinions. The defense would have to call Trooper Paul themselves.Dr. Welcher was questioned about the suspension system and height variance of the Lexus were discussed, the 3D modeling process, and about the glass on the bumper that the expert's assumptions was that it was inclusive. Cross-examination concluded after the morning break.The Commonwealth rested its case, and the Defense will argue their motion to dismiss on Day 24 and call their first witness, their tech expert, Matthew DiSogra. RESOURCESWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 30 May 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/IduAs7XWVEUDay 22 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on May 28, 2025. After a brief Direct Examination by Special Prosecutor, Hank Brennan, of their Accident Reconstructionist, Dr. Welcher, Cross Examination took up the whole day and will continue on Day 23. Defense Attorney, Robert Alessi, ross-examination was rigorous and focused on challenging the credibility, methodology, and conclusions of the Commonwealth's expert witness. Dr. Welcher was repeatedly admonished by the court for looking at his computer and searching for information during the cross-examination, rather than answering directly from memory. Alessi questioned Dr. Welchre about the significant amount his firm, Aperture, was being paid by the Norfolk County District Attorney's Office ($325,000), and the details surrounding the purchase and sale of a Lexus exemplar for testing. The defense sought to highlight potential bias due to financial incentives. Alessi challenged inconsistencies in Dr. Welchre's testimony, such as the distance the Lexus traveled in reverse during a test (initially said to be 53 feet, then 87 feet), and the explanation of the 8 mph threshold for tail light breakage. Alessi delved into Dr. Welcher's use of data and images from Trooper Paul's report, questioning the extent to which Dr. Welcher relied on that information in his analysis. There was a dispute about a drone image and other diagrams, leading to a "Voir dire" (examination outside the presence of the jury) to clarify the sources of these materials. The voir dire aimed to clarify the sources of Dr. Welcher's materials and to determine the extent to which he relied on Trooper Paul's report or other evidence. It highlighted the defense's effort to question the independence of Dr. Welcher's analysis and the Commonwealth's attempt to defend it. The voir dire concluded with plans to continue the cross-examination the following day, with the understanding that time was limited due to a juror's scheduling issue. RESOURCESWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 29 May 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/3DAtOqbCSh0Day 21 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on May 27, 2025. Week six of evidence included a voir dire of Dr. Welcher, the Commonwealth's accident reconstructionist. Concerns were raised about updated slides and changes to the presentation at the direction of Special Prosecutor, Hank Brennan, without informing the defense. Dr. Welcher also mentioned being "inundated" with emails about issues with Burgess' CV but he was told by the court not to read or discuss them. The accident reconstructionist focused on the "trigger event," during a three point turn and its connection to Ian Whiffin's last point of contact. There was also discussion of variance, the three-point turn of the Lexus, and the backing event. Dr. Welcher analyzed the Lexus's tech stream data, which records data before and after a trigger event, such as reversing and accelerating. The data showed the backing event occurred about 8 minutes after the three-point turn. There are discrepancies and confusing aspects of Dr. Welcher's testimony and PowerPoint slides. He also revealed that the Lexus's tires were spinning and slipping during the backing event, and the car traveled a total of 87 feet. Dr. Welcher ultimately concluded that the Lexus struck John O'Keefe, which led to objections and a sidebar discussion. Dr. Dr. Welcher struggled to provide exact details, such as the point of impact or speed, and that many of his findings showed “results that were all over the map”. He also mentions he is only certain that damage to Karen Read's tail light didn't come from John O'Keefe's Chevy. Though this expert's testimony was tedious and disorganized, it did provided many areas doubt which is a win for the defense. Direct Examination will continue on Day 22. RESOURCESWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 28 May 2025

Bryan Kohberger’s has filed a 40-page motion to continue the trial, arguing they are not ready and need more time for investigation and preparation, particularly for the death penalty phase. The defense is also concerned about a Dateline special that aired, featuring non-public information allegedly leaked from law enforcement or the prosecution. They argue the special was prejudicial and portrayed Kohberger negatively. In addition, a forthcoming book by James Patterson titled "The Idaho Four: American Tragedy" is also cited as a major concern. The book claims to have "unmatched access" to the investigation and is set to be released shortly before jury selection in July. The defense argues it will further prejudice the jury pool. The court had previously issued a non-dissemination order to restrict the release of certain information. The defense argues that both the Dateline special and the book appear to violate this order. The defense asserts that proceeding with the trial as scheduled would violate Kohberger's constitutional rights, including the right to a fair trial, due process, and effective counsel. The defense suggests that a trial delay might not be the only remedy, hinting at the possibility of further motions, such as removing the death penalty or dismissing the case.RESOURCESPrevious Podcast Episode - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAF8jCkNKn4 Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo  This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 26 May 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/bmNghhaIVikDay 20 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on May 21, 2025. Involving court delays, individual jurors questioned at sidebar, and a shift in witness order. Judge Cannone addressed the jury when they came back from the inquiry and asked them if they refrained from doing research or independent investigations. She noted that she had already asked them about discussing the case with anyone or seeing, hearing or reading information about the case. Their seats were rearranged and the court day moved forward. Dr. Aizik Wolf, a neuro brain surgeon, testified about the injuries to John O'Keefe's head, stating they were consistent with a fall backward. The doctor also clarified that other facial lacerations would not have been caused by this type of fall. Scientific evidence from Christina Hanley, a Trace Analyst, a state crime lab, analyzed the glass and plastic fragments. She linked clear and red plastic pieces from John O'Keefe's clothing to the tail light housing. Defense Attorney, Alan Jackson, presented a demonstrative exhibit showing which evidence items matched and which didn't. The ones that didn't match were collected by Trooper Michael Proctor. RESOURCESRetrial Day 17 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_Lo2vXvHyM What You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 22 May 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/IJgD247smlQDay 19 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on May 20, 2025. Defense Attorney, Robert Alessi, continued cross examining Shanon Burgess. Questions arose regarding the accuracy of dates and timeline in the expert's analysis, with errors of 24 hours. Burgess kept saying that the event happened the night of January 29-30th when in reality is it was January 28-29th. Shanon's analysis of call logs, text streams, and vehicle data was scrutinized. There were concerns about the use of approximate times and potential confirmation bias. The expert did not have the raw data for the techstream information, he instead got it from Welcher's report. During redirect examination, Special Prosecutor, Hank Brennan, attempted to clarify Burgess' credentials and data interpretation. Pointing out that he didn't need that degree to perform his job and that work life balance made it a challenge to complete his degree. On Re-Cross Examination, Alessi pointed out that in a federal court filing in Texas, Burgess' resume stated he was anticipating a BGS - Bachelor of General Science in 2024. There is no Bachelor of General Science degree in Alabama and he has been pursuing this degree since 2008. The use of the Commonwealths presenting video and audio clips, especially the voicemail, appears to be related to establishing a timeline of Karen Read's movements and actions around the time of John O'Keefe's death. The defense may use it to show her actions were consistent, while the prosecution may use it to point out inconsistencies. The 12:25/12:30 timeframe she gives for John's passing may be challenged given her audio from the voicemail at 12:41AM. Later in the day, Christina Hanley, a trace analyst expert witness from the lab testified about a mechanical match on glass. The court adjourned early after sidebar discussions. We'll get back to her on Day 20. RESOURCESRetrial Day 10 - Voicemails - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2vEF0vxG2wWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 21 May 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/Hi_HNpRVySADay 18 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on May 19, 2025. Shanon Burgess, a Digital Forensic Examiner from Aperture, is witness number 35. His testimony revolves around correlating the timing of events from Karen Read's Lexus vehicle data and John O'Keefe's phone location data. Burgess provided detailed explanations of Lexus infotainment system data (Lexus clock and techstream data), key cycles, triggering events (like a three-point turn), and how this data was correlated with the data from John O'Keefe's iPhone. Time variances between the Lexus clock and the iPhone clock and the significance of these variances in relation to when O'Keefe's phone was locked. Defense Attorney, Robert Alessi, strongly challenged Burgess's credibility during cross examination by highlighting discrepancies and potential misrepresentations in his CV (resume), Aperture website information, and LinkedIn profile concerning his educational background and degrees. Questions were also raised about a report Burgess submitted on May 8th, at the request of the prosecution. Burgess stated he did it on his own initiative due to the report from the Defense's expert. It was thought that he did it at the request of the prosecutor but attributed the "per your request" statement to a copy-paste error. Alessi further challenged Burgess's understanding of data storage (megabits vs. megabytes) and the completeness of data extractions from the vehicle's chips. This could significantly impact the jury's perception of Shanon's testimony and the prosecution's case. The errors and inconsistencies in his statements, reports, and qualifications raise serious questions about the reliability of his expert opinions. There's more cross examination to come on Day 19. RESOURCESWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 20 May 2025

Get 15% off OneSkin with the code LAWNERD at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod #adIn today’s episode of The Emily Show, I’m breaking down everything from the Diddy case updates to the explosive developments surrounding "Courthouse Becky" in the Murdaugh trial, and the judge who is not having it with leaks in the Brian Kohberger case!Judge Hippler is MAD! I discuss the closed court sessions, the "Dateline" episode leaked, and the intense measures being taken to find the source. Plus, the potential for a special prosecutor and what this means for the trial. Cassie Ventura previously reached a settlement with Diddy, which the defense alludes to as a potential motive for her testimony. It is also revealed that Cassie is undergoing litigation with the Intercontinental Hotel. The defense argues that it's a domestic violence case, not sex trafficking or RICO.The shocking criminal charges against the former Clerk of Court, Becky Hill, from the Murdaugh trial. I examine the warrants and the allegations of obstruction of justice and misconduct. Plus, how she  perjured herself! The Menendez brothers were resentenced to 50 years to life, instead of life without the possibility of parole. This resentencing is separate from their ongoing clemency proceedings, so they still have two legal avenues moving forward. Now that there is a change for parole, the decision ultimately rests with the parole board, and their release is not immediate or certain.RESOURCESKaren Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-voMenendez Brothers Resentencing? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DDaLjZrjhI Diddy Settled with Cassie - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki-SsG09pKgFeds Mad at Jay Z Civil Suit - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqFz_L7lyE4The Alex Murdaugh Cases Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gJUHo2XsVhGNBhaMdx9B_cqBecky Hill’s Ethics Violations - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I15TNtPfC3w New Murdaugh Trial Evidentiary Hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnUX0njyq4IBecky Hills Emails - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6riKBCov1U New Kohberger Venue Hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go-2Cidrzmk  This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 19 May 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/P_Lo2vXvHyMDay 17 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on May 16, 2025. The court addressed juror conduct issues, with a jurors making facial expressions and muttering. A stipulation was read regarding State Police troopers present at the autopsy, specifically noting Troopers Keefe and Watson were present, not Former Trooper Michael Proctor.Andre Porto, the Forensic Scientist, testimony revolved around DNA evidence found on a piece of glass and the tail light, with John O'Keefe's DNA and DNA from two unknown individuals being present. The defense strategy focused on questioning the thoroughness of the investigation and emphasizing that unknown DNA samples were not tested against other individuals of interest like Brian Higgins. Legal arguments arose regarding the chain of custody of evidence and delays in its submission. The judge ruled on objections and addressed issues related to rebuttal witnesses and ARCA expert testimony. There were discussions about new information and reports from experts causing potential time shifts and debates over whether this information was truly new or if it was previously disclosed. The day ended with testimony from Ash Vallier, a Forensic Scientist who pieced together the tail light, with discussions about which pieces fit and which did not. Some items from evidence bags were not fitting together mechanically and other items from different bags were fitting together. Defense Attorney, David Yannetti, crossed Vallier, highlighting potential issues with the chain of custody and who had access to evidence, particularly with Trooper Proctor. Trooper Michael Proctor was identified as submitting clothing evidence to the lab six weeks after the incident and the person who brought in the all of the pieces in the dash 7 series that fit together. Judge Cannone addressed concerns about new expert reports from Aperture, ruling that they were not grounds for undue surprise or prejudice but were ample ground for cross-examination by the defense. The Judge also addressed the ARCCA expert issue, allowing limited rebuttal testimony of Aperture only as to the new opinions by ARCCA from their May 7th report. The Judge stated the defense could recall witnesses under certain circumstances and addressed the long weekend break, stating it would give the defense the time they had requested. RESOURCESCalling a Witness Back? https://youtu.be/Wzt0SgXLa7k&t=564sFormer Trooper Proctor Did Not Attend The Autopsy - https://youtu.be/etzXdZ2T3D4&t=128s What You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 17 May 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/hC-r7dHxioADay 16 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on May 15, 2025. At the end of Re-Cross Examination, Maureen Harnett, the forensic analyst, wanted to "correct something for the record" from their previous testimony. This implies there might have been an error or omission in their earlier statements that they feel needs to be addressed. However, the court and Special Prosecutor, Hank Brennan, did not seem inclined to allow the correction at that moment. Judge Cannone let them know all of the questions that needed to be asked of them was complete and they were free to go. Next, Dr. Irini Scordi-Bello, Coroner & Medical Examiner, took the stand! A significant portion of the testimony revolves around the coroner's finding that the manner of John O'Keefe's death was "undetermined." This term is defined as when the information pointing to one manner of death is not more compelling than other reasonable possibilities, or when the death investigation lacks sufficient information to opine on a manner of death at the time the death certificate is signed. The coroner stated she examined John O'Keefe's lower extremities as part of the protocol in cases of suspected impact with a motor vehicle. She did not find any evidence of an impact site. The Prosecution asked the coroner repeatedly if she was aware of various pieces of information, including statements that Karen Read allegedly made, such as "I hit him," that she didn't know how she cracked her tail light, and that people had been drinking. The coroner confirms that she was aware of most of this information before making her determination. Despite knowing all this information, Dr. Scordi-Bello still concluded that the manner of death was undetermined. The coroner recalls two individuals being present at the autopsy. Initially, she doesn't remember their names, but after looking at a log, she identifies them as Mr. Keefe and Mr. Connor. There's confusion, because Trooper Connor Keefe's testimony is that he attended the autopsy alone but the person next to him looks a lot like Former Trooper Michael Proctor. After the Jury was dismissed, disputes over expert witnesses involve issues of late discovery, changing reports, timing discrepancies, and procedural fairness. Defense attorney, Robert Alessi, is concerned that the Commonwealth is trying to adjust Aperture, their expert's testimony, to align with other witness, Ian Whiffin. This new report shifts the estimated time of impact from between 12:31:38am-12:31:43am to 12:32:16am. The Commonwealth, in turn, argues that they need more time to review the defense's voluminous reports from ARCCA and to ensure their expert can provide a complete and accurate analysis. These conflicts are creating significant tension and procedural challenges in the trial. Judge Cannone has taken under advisement and will make a determination soon. RESOURCESFormer Trooper Proctor Did Not Attend The Autopsy - https://youtu.be/etzXdZ2T3D4&t=128sWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 -

Transcribed - Published: 16 May 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/onTVtSxM5QwDay 15 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on May 14, 2025, after an unexpected court cancellation the day before due to Karen Read reportedly feeling unwell. The day began with the prosecution presenting two clips of Karen Read that were difficult to hear. Testimony was then given by John O'Keefe's niece (not broadcast), followed by several scientific witnesses from the Massachusetts State Police and Needham PD. Key testimony focused on evidence collection and documentation related to Karen Read's SUV. Trooper Zachary Clark presented photos of the SUV, while Trooper Evan Brent provided photos of John O'Keefe's Chevy Traverse. Sergeant Brian Gallerani testified about collecting swabs for DNA testing from Proctor and Bukhenik. Marine Hartnett from the state police crime lab discussed the processing of Karen Read's SUV, including documenting glass pieces, scratches, dents, and a hair found on the vehicle. An unexpected moment occurred when Hartnett opened an evidence bag in court and found items she did not expect, leading to a sidebar, recess, and lunch break. This raised concerns about evidence handling and the accuracy of what was in the bag. During cross-examination, defense attorney Robert Alessi questioned Hartnett about the number of stickers used to mark glass on the bumper, suggesting there might only be one sticker and a reflection, thus potentially doubling the amount of perceived glass. Alessi also focused on a hair found on the SUV, questioning if it had moved or changed position between photos due to different angles or other factors. The court also viewed previously unseen video footage from the Sallyport showing snow melting and falling off Karen Read's SUV. Alessi highlighted this footage, suggesting the snow hit the car bumper and glass should have fallen off. The day concluded with continued questions regarding the hair on the vehicle and its potential movement or presence despite the melting snow. The scientific foundation is being laid for the reconstructionist from both sides. The possibility of ending with the Commonwealth's accident reconstructionist is discussed. RESOURCESWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 15 May 2025

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/Yr5TBpqiqaQDay 14 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on May 12, 2025. Sgt. Yuri Bukhenik Testimony concluded today. Topics discussed included accessing Michael Proctor accessing the Ring app on John O'Keefe's cell phone instead of an image of his phone, context of the derogatory text messages by Michael Proctor and Bukhenik's glowing performance review of Michael Proctor despite acknowledging those vile messages. The defense questioned Sergeant Buchanan about Brian Higgins' movements and activities in the early morning hours, based on video footage. They also inquired about the investigation's handling of Higgins' text messages and potential motives. The defense highlighted areas they believed the investigation did not adequately explore, such as Higgins' potential jealousy and his whereabouts at the time of the incident. Discussion also revolved around text messages between Higgins and the Read, and whether the police properly verified those messages. The court has not yet made a decision on motions filed by the Commonwealth, including motions to preclude hearsay and introduce evidence about the relationship between the defendant and the victim. If granted, the witnesses at the Aruba trip could be called in to testify. RESOURCESWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKUeCUzApgsEuQRXu5IXeTS This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/ Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Transcribed - Published: 13 May 2025