IrishDevil93

Last point on the Google search controversy: Many have criticized the DA for filing this motion as part of a strategy designed more to "defend" the McCabes and Alberts than prosecute Karen Read. That is too narrow an understanding of the DA's motive for filing what is an almost unprecedented motion asking a court to exclude a witness based on the DA's pinky promise that their experts are correct and the defense's expert is a fool with a "debunked opinion." For reasons that many don't understand (including me), the DA is all-in on trying to convict Karen Read for killing John O'keefe, lack of credible evidence notwithstanding. If you accept this premise, it is easy to understand why the DA is bent on doing anything to wipe out any evidence that supports the possibility of a 2:27 am search: either they annihilate this argument entirely or they lose because they cannot satisfy their burden of proof. It really is that simple. If the jury finds it even plausible that Jennifer McCabe made that search at 2:27, it obviously follows that such a search cannot be explained by the prosecution (and Jennifer McCabe's credibility is torched) and without more, there is clear reasonable doubt as to Karen Read's guilt. Even worse, this is a multi-layered problem for the DA, in which Green's presumed opinion is but one of several parts. A 2:27 am search would be in perfect sync with a timeline of other bizarre activities on various McCabe, Albert (and Higgins') cell phones, including the butt dials and texts. Moreover, Jennifer McCabe has exacerbated the DA's problem by materially altering her story about the timing and circumstances surrounding the Google search 2-3 times. Some of these statements will be exposed by state police testimony and dash camera video. This is in addition to her materially inconsistent statements surrounding Karen Read's alleged statement about "hitting" John O'Keefe. Recall this is the witness who testified that she wanted to see all of the evidence from the DA before she testified. In this context, it is easy to understand why the DA is seriously concerned with Green's opinion being heard at all by the jury: the defense likely will argue it is bolstered and corroborated by the other evidence. Real lawyers, which Brennan and all of the defense attorneys are, understand that to argue effectively, evidence must not be considered in a vacuum, but marshaled. And if Green stands by his opinion, combined with the other evidence described above, it may very well convince jurors that there is a reasonable possibility that the search was made by Jennifer McCabe at 2:27 am. Thus, the bottom line is that the Google search is a "must have" compelling fact for the DA and house money for the defense--if the jury CONCLUSIVELY concludes Karen Read sought the search after 6 am, this is in no way devastating to her, whereas a conclusion that the search MAY HAVE been made by Jennifer McCabe at 2:27 am is a guaranteed acquittal. This is why the DA is filing such an unprecedented and seemingly desperate motion to keep Green away from the stand altogether. It's much more than personally "defending" Jennifer McCabe; it is trying to make sure their case doesn't collapse.