The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s recent decision has far-reaching implications for the Karen Read case and similar trials involving digital evidence. The court upheld David Cronin Jr.’s conviction for possession of child sex abuse materials, affirming that testimony on data extracted with Cellebrite software could be admitted without the witness being an expert.
Cronin’s appeal rested on claims that Police Officer Michael McLaughlin, who testified on the Cellebrite report from Cronin’s phone, was not qualified to do so as an expert. McLaughlin admitted he lacked technical expertise but explained that Cellebrite’s software presented data in a layperson-friendly format. The court concluded that McLaughlin’s testimony “required no scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge,” making it admissible as lay testimony. However, the court also found parts of his testimony, such as claims about Cellebrite’s reliability, ventured into expert territory but ruled that this did not unfairly influence the trial’s outcome.
This decision is particularly relevant to the Karen Read case, where Cellebrite plays a pivotal role. Read, accused of causing the death of her boyfriend, John O’Keefe, is building her defense around allegations that a prosecution witness, Jennifer McCabe, conducted suspicious Google searches. According to Read’s expert, Richard Green, McCabe searched phrases like “how long to die in cold” at 2:27 a.m., hours before O’Keefe’s body was found.
Green, who reviewed Cellebrite data from McCabe’s phone, testified that the searches were in a “deleted state” and that several phone calls had been erased. However, prosecutors argue Green’s findings are flawed, citing their own Cellebrite expert, Ian Whiffin, who found no evidence of such searches or deletions. Additionally, Cellebrite software updates introduced after Read’s initial trial have reportedly invalidated the 2:27 a.m. timestamp central to Green’s claims.
Prosecutors noted that Cellebrite’s new software update prevents manipulation of timestamp data and removes unreliable timestamps from Safari searches. When McCabe’s phone was re-analyzed with the updated version, the searches were shown to have occurred at 6:24 a.m., closer to when O’Keefe was found, and without evidence of deletion.
The defense’s reliance on Green’s earlier analysis has led prosecutors to file a motion to bar him from testifying, asserting that his opinions are “completely discredited” by both Cellebrite and their own expert. They argue that presenting Green’s findings in court risks confusing jurors with inaccurate information.
A hearing to determine the admissibility of Green’s testimony is scheduled for Jan. 31, a critical juncture in Read’s case as her team seeks to challenge the prosecution’s narrative.
This latest legal development underscores the complexities of using Cellebrite software in criminal cases. As digital forensics evolves, courts continue to grapple with how best to evaluate and admit such evidence, setting significant precedents for future trials.
#DigitalForensics #KarenReadCase #Cellebrite #LegalPrecedent #Massachusetts #CourtRuling #ExpertTestimony
Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj
Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK’s Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
続きを読む
一部表示
7 分
8 分
11 分
13 分