Lauren Johnson-Norris on @ABCNews 6/2/25 Karen Read trial

[Speaker 2]

How impactful do you think she was as a witness for the defense here, given the overall narrative they're trying to paint that this was collusion among several people in law enforcement or connected to law enforcement to try to cover up whatever really happened to John O'Keefe that night and pin this on Karen Reed instead?

[Speaker 3]

Well, she did a better job for the defense than I think she would have liked because she came out in the first hand saying that she saw key figures near the car. Then she took that back saying it was a false memory. And the defense was able to show that she wouldn't tell that she wasn't telling the truth the second time, not the first time, because she wants to save her job.

So they did a great job. So Ike, what else are you watching for today?

[Speaker 1]

We're going to look at the defense, try to really poke holes, continue to poke holes in the prosecution's entire case. We're going to look for more analysis about the forensic data and the interpretations of that. We saw Matthew DeSogra come onto the stand and say essentially that the vehicle data does not support the prosecution's claim that there was a collision at that time of the incident.

Further technical testimony will probably be seen to dispute the entire crash, the whole crux of the prosecution's claim. Also look for more witnesses to come out and try to paint a more rosy picture of Karen Reed. We can expect the defense to try to humanize Karen Reed and really try to distance herself from the prosecution's betrayal that she's a reckless or some kind of self-absorbed individual.

That could probably happen later on today, Diane.

[Speaker 2]

And Lauren, the timeline of how everything happened has been a source of a huge debate over the course of this trial. We have seen them have to take break after break after break, even dismissing court early while they debate whether or not their experts can change the potential timeline. How big is that now that we're at that part in this case where they're expected to start bringing out some of that data?

[Speaker 3]

The timeline discrepancies can be the reasonable doubt in this case. And that's why the defense has gone there to show that it just doesn't add up.