After much doubling down and a whole lot of gaslighting (IMO) Brennan says that the defense never asked for meta data in their original preservation order. I guess nobody should be surprised as the CW seems to think chain of custody is merely a suggestion that need not be followed. From my understanding meta data is a chain of custody log for all digital media. Hank seems to think that if the video is dark, grainy and/or skips time who would want the log file for it anyway? Then takes offense at the idea that defense might think there is chicanery going on with the videos. Perish the thought!
The next part of this document gets into the Jen McCabe of it all.
Hank Brennan starts off by throwing shade at the defense which has become his "signature," if you will. Listening to him/reading his filings make me feel gaslit. However, what he's saying here is that when the defense handed over their impeachment material for Jen McCabe, ADA Lally and MSP Sargeant Tully had a meeting with her where they asked her about said impeachment material but did not hand over the report for this meeting until after her testimony. In other words, the defense got Jen McCabe's location data and saw that she went to the first respnding officer's house the day after John O'Keefe's death which they found very interesting and intended to bring it up on cross examination. When preparing her for her testimony they had Sargeant Tully ask her about going to CPD Sargeant Lank's house then much later memorializing it in a written report, after it would've been helpful to the defense.
Brennan then blathers on about how the defendent wasn't somehow "prejuduiced" by this situation. Really? I've also come to understand that witness prep is usually done by the attorneys, not by law enforcement. The whole situation stinks. Well, to be fair, the commonwealth's whole case stinks IMO.
Lastly Brennan addresses the jury tampering allegations.
Then he blathers on about the buffer zone and how Mass state troopers had to come out en masse to keep the peace. He states that Fanning was just one of the people in charge of all of these troopers but it came out in the Mar 5th hearing that he was the sole person in charge. And that somehow he heard rumors about a juror and brought to the attention of the court (from a remote location, allegedly). That juror was subsequently dismissed. Interesting, no?
Much of this document is based on the say so of Hank Brennan and he's proven to be sketchy with the truth, IMO. Since none of the CWs shenanigans have fazed Judge Bev she'll probably embrace all of Hank's factless assertions and deny the motion to dismiss without a hearing. I sure hope the jury in trial 2 are more discerning than those of the first trial.