Another reporter's perspective straight from the courtroom:
Defense attorney David Yannetti raises his voice as he says he needs to be heard on this, steps to the lectern. The judge seems to be annoyed by his demeanor, reminds him she is the person he is trying to convince on this issue.
"This is the hyperbole I don't need," Judge Beverly Cannone tells Yannetti, who replies his integrity has been attacked and he needs to defend himself.
Yannetti says this motion comes on top of the video the prosecution presented last week.
The prosecution is also seeking more info about the opinions to be expressed by defense witness Chris Van Ee, an expert in biomedical and mechanical engineering. Judge says defense needs to give prosecution more info by the end of Tues about how he came to his conclusions.
The defense says it wants to call three witnesses who took part in the federal investigation. Says it has never coordinated with them about their testimony. Judge says the three will need to be evaluated in a hearing this week. Same goes for Dr. Marie Russell, she says.
Judge says this looks like "at least a day of voir dire" to learn more about these defense witnesses. The judge reminds attorneys she told the jury they'd likely get case by last week of June. Yannetti says hearing will take "about two hours”.
Judge says they will have a hearing later this week to hear from the defense witnesses without the jury. The judge will then decide if they can testify.
The judge seems annoyed at the possibility of another delay. She calls a recess while the jury is brought in and today's testimony begins.
Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik returns to the stand. Defense attorney Alan Jackson resumes cross-examination about the video of Read's SUV at the Canton Police Department. Bukhenik confirms the person seen slipping in front of the vehicle is the tow truck driver.
Jackson is asking where Tpr. Michael Proctor appears in the video. Bukhenik says he cannot e sure where Proctor is.
Jackson: You did not mention that this video is inverted, did you? Bukhenik: It did not come up.
Jackson: Do you agree with me that an inverted video is not accurate? Bukhenik continues to insist it is an accurate representation of what happened.
After a sidebar, the judge tells the jury that both sides have agreed to when the video starts and stops. Jackson resumes questioning and says about 2/3 of the video is missing. Bukhenik says, "It was never there. It was never recorded.”
Jackson asks if Bukhenik notices that some people appear out of nowhere in the video? Bukhenik says the video is triggered by motion. "It's not missing. It just wasn't recorded," Bukhenik says.
Jackson asks Bukhenik about timestamp on video. Bukhenik says he can't see it. Judge asks Bukhenik to get up and go closer to the screen. Back on the stand, Bukhenik agrees that the timestamp is 5:38:07pm.
Sidebar. Judge excuses jury. Sidebar continues.
@BienickWCVB