Red Solo Cups, an Inappropriate Witness, Fake Videos, and the Absolutely Inept trial of Karen Read. (Part 4, Jenn McCabe, Act 2)

According to the Commonwealth in their first statement of the case, "Ms. McCabe stated that the victim was lying on his back covered with approximately six inches of snow, with his phone on the ground underneath him. The defendant yelled at Ms. McCabe twice to Google, "How long do you have to be left outside to die from hypothermia?"

There are two interesting factoids related to this statement that put Jen McCabe right in the middle of whatever you want to call this fiasco, a cover up, conspiracy, or just plainly an absolute shit show of an investigation.  Those interesting factoids are as follows:

1.  The less interesting point, but interesting nonetheless, is that on the 911 call Jen that was played in court during her testimony, Jen stated to the dispatcher, "We just flipped him over", meaning the victim was first found lying face down.  It may not be a big deal in the grand scheme of things, but I don't believe in coincidences or honest mistakes when it comes to information like this.  I have tried to come up with reasons why the Commonwealth would not want the fact that he was found face down to be known publicly, but I can't think of a good one.  However, I have no doubt they did not include this information for some reason, and it's probably not an honest reason.  

2.  The second interesting factoid probably amounts to the most shocking and controversial piece of evidence that, if corroborated, would be all but 100% proof of Karen Read's innocence.  This piece of evidence is Jen McCabe's Google search.  As you can see, the Commonwealth claimed in their first statement of the case that Karen yelled to Jen, while she was performing CPR on the victim, to Google "How long do you have to be left outside to die from hypothermia?"  This might have been the end of it had Karen not hired one of the most renowned defense attorney's in the nation, Alan Jackson.  

Once the defense was finally given access to a portion of Jen McCabe's phone records, they had a renowned computer and phone expert, Richard Green, examine the Cellebrite report from Jen McCabes extraction that was done by the Massachusetts State Police.  For reference,  Cellebrite is the leading digital forensics company that provides resources to law enforcement agencies across the country.  One of those resources is cellular data analyses.  Here is the actual Cellebrite report that was entered into evidence during trial in relation to Jen McCabe's google searches on January 29, 2022 with the relevant parts highlighted and in red writing:  

Mr. Green concluded, and I can't see how one would disagree, that Jen McCabe googled "hos long to die in the cold" at 2:27 am on January 29, 2022.  If this is true, the significance of this cannot be overstated.  If she indeed made this Google search, and I believe she did, then there is no reason that Karen Read should have been charged with any crime.  Remember, the victim was found at 6:04 am, almost 4 hours after Jen McCabe allegedly made this Google search.  The significance being she had to know there was someone dying on the lawn of 34 Fairview and was wondering how long he had to be out there for before he died, or someone else was wondering and asked her to google it.  There are three separate Google searches:  1.  "hos long to die in the cold" at 2:27 am.  2.  "how long ti di in cikd" at 6:23.  3.  "hos long to die in cold" at 6:24 am.   Mr. Green, a nationally renowned forensic computer analyst, is going to testify that the time stamps of the above searches are true and accurate.  One would think that when he does testify to this it would be game over right?  Not so fast according to the Commonwealth.  

Before Mr. Green gets a chance to testify, the Commonwealth is going to call Mr. Ian Wiffin.  Mr. Wiffin is also a digital forensics expert and he actually works for the Cellebrite company itself in Canada.  The only information I can find from Mr. Wiffin in regards to this Google search is from a November 2023 blog of his that states the following:

"This timestamp value is being mistakenly used as an indication of the visit time of the URL in the same record...Note that some records were perfectly correct and that’s what makes this source even harder to understand… So the good news is that if you have relied on this timestamp before, it doesn’t necessarily mean it was wrong. In fact, it probably wasn't (not by much anyway).”

I take this statement to mean that the time stamps COULD be accurate and are not necessarily accurate, but if they aren't, they aren't off by much.  The Commonwealth appears to take this as concrete evidence that Karen Read is guilty.  Lucky for us, I have a complete and thorough report from Richard Green that appears to "conclusively" prove that the Google Search was done at 2:27 am, thus significantly supporting Karen Read's innocence.  The following is a portion of that report and one that I find extremely compelling when considering this matter:  

From the Commonwealth's perspective, they believe the 2:27 am time stamp is when the tab was opened and not when the words "hos long to die in the cold were first searched."  They are suggesting there were only two searches that were done at 6:23 and 6:24 when Karen allegedly yelled to Jen McCabe to "Google how long to die from hypothermia" while she was performing CPR on her dying boyfriend.  From my own experience with time stamps, I don't believe that there would be a time stamp for a search at 2:27 if there was no search performed at 2:27.  There also is nothing in the Cellebrite report that details anything about last viewed time or when the tabs were actually opened.  The clincher for me is that the alleged 2:27 am search that was done by Ms. McCabe was deleted by her, as shown in the Cellebrite report I shared above.  

Sadly it will be up to the jury, as finders of facts, to determine which expert is correct.  For me, first impressions have shown Mr. Green to be a far more competent analyst than Mr. Wiffin, but information on Mr. Wiffin's work in the past is hard to come by.  I have a strong instinct that says that Ms. McCabe Googled "hos long to die in the cold at 2:27" and then tried to cover it up by deleting that search and googling again almost 4 hours later.  It seems pretty straight forward, but I am just a lowly middle school math teacher and true crime enthusiast.