The Emily Show

Get 15% off OneSkin with the code LAWNERD at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod #ad There 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. RESOURCES Karen 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=BhYuhlpQ6YA Kohberger Stream July 10 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy9rHg9m4xk Tom Girardi Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gIvaPnEfilr35PrLPfq01qz  Depp v. Heard Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gLVeg1x2AInDBfPU6-ffnD0 Amber 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

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. RESOURCES Bryan Kohberger Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKASBczV3CsUx-t5oRAK0ca Bryan 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/BCja5KnBz4k The 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. RESOURCES Kouri Richins New Charges - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43ULdoW-g4w Kouri 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/BCja5KnBz4k Former 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. RESOURCES NBC 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/43ULdoW-g4w New 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. RESOURCES Kouri Richins Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gJYyEMQDM_Cn4icqWBV20fW Preliminary Hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCpQt7jwelE Bail 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/43ULdoW-g4w Sergeant 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. RESOURCES Karen Read - 2025 Trial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gL3CbMJHvrKiAD1aDNcblnO Sandra 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

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.  RESOURCES The Sean 'Diddy' Combs Cases - What Diddy Do? - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gIsB0qzawUpon2u62BeVSdC The Idaho College Murders - Defendant Bryan Kohberger - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKASBczV3CsUx-t5oRAK0ca Bryan Kohberger Change of Plea Hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdOt4zAWjp8 Bryan Kohberger Plea Deal Breaking News Stream - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U4g45EG71g Clean 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/TdOt4zAWjp8 On 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. RESOURCES The Idaho College Murders Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKASBczV3CsUx-t5oRAK0ca The Kohberger Leaks - https://youtu.be/IAF8jCkNKn4 Menendez 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/7U4g45EG71g On 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. RESOURCES The Idaho College Murders Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKASBczV3CsUx-t5oRAK0ca ABC News Reporting - https://abcnews.go.com/US/bryan-kohberger-plead-guilty-counts-idaho-college-murders/story?id=123356808 The Kohberger Leaks - https://youtu.be/IAF8jCkNKn4 Scott 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/6U-T0fjM5MM The 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. RESOURCES June 24 Live Stream - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7IdKgUQoDU The Ghislane Maxwell Case - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gL31tnzpu6Du3wLHoQRaIq8 Foreperson on w/ Today Show - https://youtu.be/nE-a9MR1oUM Juror #12 on WCVB - https://youtu.be/-Tfoc0OvOf0 Anonymous Juror on NBC 10 - https://youtu.be/Vi8bkGvciaI Juror #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 - https://podscribe.com/privacy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/i7IdKgUQoDU After 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. RESOURCES DA 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/1937134441505096022 Alan 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/i7IdKgUQoDU After 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. RESOURCES The Alberts & McCabes Interview from ABC Nightline – https://youtu.be/yIrVOSbx9gM Did 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/JaBePBtlqQA Day 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, . 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/1FQDyZVIbho Day 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. 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Get 15% off OneSkin with the code LAWNERD at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod #ad Join 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. RESOURCES Karen 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/4wSJeNZph94 Day 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. RESOURCES Karen Read Retrial Day 32 - https://youtube.com/live/N1az5x1PEkM 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/9W-28UtY1lY Day 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. 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/qgkQm-VgMu0 Day 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. 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/_U9Gv2ielto Day 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. 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/fyEtt02zOn8 Day 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. 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 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices