Everyone has a true crime story that they're obsessed with solving. Join true-crime experts, Rabia Chaudry and Ellyn Marsh, along with special celebrity guests as they break down their favorite true crime cases. With Rabia’s legal expertise and Ellyn’s comedic wit, you’ll be seeing these cases in a whole new light. Tune in to solve the case with Rabia and Ellyn!
…
continue reading
Content provided by Tony Brueski and True Crime Today. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Tony Brueski and True Crime Today or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://staging.podcastplayer.com/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!
Go offline with the Player FM app!
Will the Science Prove Karen Read’s Innocence? Attorney Bob Motta Thinks So
MP3•Episode home
Manage episode 483151133 series 3569233
Content provided by Tony Brueski and True Crime Today. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Tony Brueski and True Crime Today or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://staging.podcastplayer.com/legal.
Will the Science Prove Karen Read’s Innocence? Attorney Bob Motta Thinks So
In the premiere segment, Tony Brueski and Bob Motta cut straight to the most decisive element of the Karen Read case: the forensic evidence. According to Motta, this case isn’t about drama, hearsay, or even Karen Read’s bizarre behavior. It’s about whether the physical evidence proves she hit John O’Keefe with her Lexus — and right now, the science says she didn’t.
Motta places his trust in independent experts — specifically the ARCCA engineers hired by the Department of Justice, who testified that the damage to the Lexus and the injuries to O’Keefe do not match a typical vehicle-pedestrian strike. In other words, no broken bones, no directional wounds, no blood patterns to suggest a hit-and-run. And this testimony, unlike Proctor’s or McCabe’s, doesn’t change. It’s science.
Tony counters with a key question: what happens if new vehicle data does emerge — like black box logs or OnStar records — that shows a collision at the time of death? Motta admits that would be damning. But he’s not holding his breath. If prosecutors had a “smoking gun” like that, he says, they’d have led with it.
This episode explores the growing tension between Karen Read’s self-incriminating statements and the cold, hard science that seems to contradict them. It’s the ultimate courtroom clash: Karen’s words vs. the data.
Hashtags:
#KarenRead #ScienceVsConfession #ForensicEvidence #BobMotta #TrueCrimePodcast #ARCCA #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #BlackBoxData #KarenReadTrial #HiddenKillers
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?
Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod
X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod
Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
In the premiere segment, Tony Brueski and Bob Motta cut straight to the most decisive element of the Karen Read case: the forensic evidence. According to Motta, this case isn’t about drama, hearsay, or even Karen Read’s bizarre behavior. It’s about whether the physical evidence proves she hit John O’Keefe with her Lexus — and right now, the science says she didn’t.
Motta places his trust in independent experts — specifically the ARCCA engineers hired by the Department of Justice, who testified that the damage to the Lexus and the injuries to O’Keefe do not match a typical vehicle-pedestrian strike. In other words, no broken bones, no directional wounds, no blood patterns to suggest a hit-and-run. And this testimony, unlike Proctor’s or McCabe’s, doesn’t change. It’s science.
Tony counters with a key question: what happens if new vehicle data does emerge — like black box logs or OnStar records — that shows a collision at the time of death? Motta admits that would be damning. But he’s not holding his breath. If prosecutors had a “smoking gun” like that, he says, they’d have led with it.
This episode explores the growing tension between Karen Read’s self-incriminating statements and the cold, hard science that seems to contradict them. It’s the ultimate courtroom clash: Karen’s words vs. the data.
Hashtags:
#KarenRead #ScienceVsConfession #ForensicEvidence #BobMotta #TrueCrimePodcast #ARCCA #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #BlackBoxData #KarenReadTrial #HiddenKillers
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?
Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod
X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod
Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
943 episodes
MP3•Episode home
Manage episode 483151133 series 3569233
Content provided by Tony Brueski and True Crime Today. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Tony Brueski and True Crime Today or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://staging.podcastplayer.com/legal.
Will the Science Prove Karen Read’s Innocence? Attorney Bob Motta Thinks So
In the premiere segment, Tony Brueski and Bob Motta cut straight to the most decisive element of the Karen Read case: the forensic evidence. According to Motta, this case isn’t about drama, hearsay, or even Karen Read’s bizarre behavior. It’s about whether the physical evidence proves she hit John O’Keefe with her Lexus — and right now, the science says she didn’t.
Motta places his trust in independent experts — specifically the ARCCA engineers hired by the Department of Justice, who testified that the damage to the Lexus and the injuries to O’Keefe do not match a typical vehicle-pedestrian strike. In other words, no broken bones, no directional wounds, no blood patterns to suggest a hit-and-run. And this testimony, unlike Proctor’s or McCabe’s, doesn’t change. It’s science.
Tony counters with a key question: what happens if new vehicle data does emerge — like black box logs or OnStar records — that shows a collision at the time of death? Motta admits that would be damning. But he’s not holding his breath. If prosecutors had a “smoking gun” like that, he says, they’d have led with it.
This episode explores the growing tension between Karen Read’s self-incriminating statements and the cold, hard science that seems to contradict them. It’s the ultimate courtroom clash: Karen’s words vs. the data.
Hashtags:
#KarenRead #ScienceVsConfession #ForensicEvidence #BobMotta #TrueCrimePodcast #ARCCA #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #BlackBoxData #KarenReadTrial #HiddenKillers
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?
Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod
X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod
Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
In the premiere segment, Tony Brueski and Bob Motta cut straight to the most decisive element of the Karen Read case: the forensic evidence. According to Motta, this case isn’t about drama, hearsay, or even Karen Read’s bizarre behavior. It’s about whether the physical evidence proves she hit John O’Keefe with her Lexus — and right now, the science says she didn’t.
Motta places his trust in independent experts — specifically the ARCCA engineers hired by the Department of Justice, who testified that the damage to the Lexus and the injuries to O’Keefe do not match a typical vehicle-pedestrian strike. In other words, no broken bones, no directional wounds, no blood patterns to suggest a hit-and-run. And this testimony, unlike Proctor’s or McCabe’s, doesn’t change. It’s science.
Tony counters with a key question: what happens if new vehicle data does emerge — like black box logs or OnStar records — that shows a collision at the time of death? Motta admits that would be damning. But he’s not holding his breath. If prosecutors had a “smoking gun” like that, he says, they’d have led with it.
This episode explores the growing tension between Karen Read’s self-incriminating statements and the cold, hard science that seems to contradict them. It’s the ultimate courtroom clash: Karen’s words vs. the data.
Hashtags:
#KarenRead #ScienceVsConfession #ForensicEvidence #BobMotta #TrueCrimePodcast #ARCCA #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #BlackBoxData #KarenReadTrial #HiddenKillers
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?
Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod
X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod
Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
943 episodes
All episodes
×Welcome to Player FM!
Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.