ATLANTA (Court TV) — The courtroom is where science meets storytelling — and in 2025, some of the year’s most jaw-dropping moments came courtesy of expert witnesses whose jobs ranged from rare to downright bizarre.
From crash test reenactments to sweatpants set on fire in controlled demos, the experts who took the stand this year pushed the boundaries of forensic testimony. Whether they helped or hurt the case… well, that was up to the jury.
Here are the strangest — and most unforgettable — expert witnesses Court TV covered in 2025.
Dog Bite Expert: “The Canine Confuser”
Case: The Karen Read Retrial
Expert: Dr. Marie Russell (Defense witness)
Date: June 4, 2025
Why It Stands Out: Karen Read was acquitted of second-degree murder in the death of her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe, following a lengthy and contentious retrial. The defense argued that O’Keefe’s arm injuries were not caused by Read striking him with her SUV, but instead by a dog, and Dr. Marie Russell was called to support that theory.
Under cross-examination, however, her opinion began to unravel.
Russell struggled to explain how a dog could bite the top of O’Keefe’s arm without leaving any marks on the underside. She suggested that only the top jaw may have made contact — a scenario the prosecutor described as biologically unlikely. When confronted with a video of earlier testimony suggesting the bite pattern was reversed, Russell initially denied making the statement.
She ultimately acknowledged the wounds could possibly have been caused by a dog, but could not identify which teeth were involved or how the bites occurred.
“It’s possible,” she said, “but I don’t know.”
Bloodstain Pattern Analyst: “The Drip Detective”
Case: IA v. Karina Cooper: Widow’s Words Murder Trial
Expert: Forensic Analyst Kenneth Martin
Date: July 8, 2025
Why It Stands Out: An Iowa jury convicted Karina Cooper in July of first-degree murder in the shooting death of her husband, Ryan.
At trial, bloodstain expert Kenneth Martin focused on a single circular “drip stain” at the base of a staircase — with no visible trail connecting it to the body — and told jurors it meant very little.
The more striking testimony came when Martin reviewed body camera footage showing Cooper straddling her dying husband and pressing her face to his. Martin testified that her actions could have altered blood evidence by smearing stains or transferring blood to other surfaces.
Even the home’s porous flooring and a closed floor vent became part of his analysis, all pointing to a crime scene that had been altered — intentionally or not.
Fire Investigator: Real Life “Pants on Fire” Test
Fire investigator Robert Trenkle showed the jury videos of him demonstrating fire consuming sweatpants with and without gasoline as he criticized the state’s investigation into Todd Stermer’s death. (Court TV)
Case: MI v. Linda Stermer | Battered & Burned Murder Trial
Expert: Robert Trenkle
Date: April 9, 2025
Why It Stands Out: Linda Stermer was sentenced to life in prison after a jury convicted her in May of the death of her husband, Todd Stermer, who was beaten, set on fire, and run over with a van. To challenge the state’s claim that gasoline was used as an accelerant, the defense called veteran fire investigator Robert Trenkle.
VIDEO | Stermer Defense Expert: Fire Investigator ‘Totally In Error’
Trenkle testified that investigators never excavated the fire’s origin or tested for accelerants, yet still concluded gasoline was involved. To illustrate the flaw, he showed videos of 100% polyester sweatpants burning with and without gasoline, saying Stermer’s clothing lacked the telltale signs of an accelerant. He also rejected the idea that the fire must have been intentional because it happened during the day and only one “able-bodied” person survived, calling that reasoning “totally in error.”
Molotov Cocktail Expert: “Dropping Car Bombs”
Kid Cudi’s torched Porsche is seen in this government exhibit from Sean “Diddy” Combs’ federal sex trafficking trial. (U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York via Court TV)
Case: Sean “Diddy” Combs
Expert: Lance Jimenez
Date: May 28, 2025
Why It Stands Out: With no cameras allowed inside the courtroom in the trial against Sean “Diddy” Combs, testimony transcripts show Los Angeles Fire Department arson investigator Lance Jimenez testified about one of the most bizarre allegations: a Molotov cocktail attack on Kid Cudi’s Porsche.
VIDEO | Arson Expert Says Kid Cudi’s Car Was Targeted
Jimenez said this was no random fire. The Porsche was parked close to a house, hidden from street view, and the other car in the driveway was untouched. His conclusion: the arsonist targeted the Porsche on purpose.
As for how it was done? Jimenez theorized that someone cut the convertible roof and dropped a lit gasoline bottle inside. The bottle didn’t even break — the flames were “self-contained,” yet concentrated around the driver’s seat.
To Jimenez, this wasn’t vandalism. It was a message.
Crash Test Experts: “ARCCA vs. Aperture”
Case: The Karen Read Retrial
Expert: ARCCA Reconstructionist (Defense)
Date: June 9, 2025
Why It Stands Out: To challenge the theory that Karen Read ran over John O’Keefe with her SUV, the defense brought in a crash expert who ran a 29 mph impact test using a dummy named Rescue Randy.
The test showed extensive road rash, torn clothing, and broken glass — all documented in photos. But the expert said none of that matched O’Keefe’s condition. His sweatshirt was intact (aside from being medically removed), his shoes were still on, and his body lacked the abrasions seen in the dummy test.
When asked if the crash results were consistent with the state’s theory, the expert was blunt: “It is inconsistent.”
BONUS – Knife-Throwing Expert: “The Pig-Stabber”
(2024 Case Too Wild to Leave Out)
Case: Onlyfans Model Murder Case
Expert: Dr. John Marini (Defense Consultant)
Why It Stands Out: At the center of the Courtney Clenney case is a single, deadly question: did she fatally stab her boyfriend in a fit of rage — or did she throw the knife in self-defense?
Dr. Marini was hired to evaluate whether a thrown knife — rather than one used in a stabbing — could have fatally wounded the victim. He teamed up with a knife-throwing hobbyist, used pork shoulder as a human analog, and conducted video-documented tests to see how deep the blade could go.
Marini said the wounds lacked telltale signs of close-range stabbing (like hilt bruising or defensive injuries) and concluded it was more likely the knife was airborne when it struck. Under cross, he acknowledged he wasn’t present at the scene and that the throwing distance was chosen by the defense. Still, he doubled down: the wound “favors a thrown knife over a thrust.”
While jurors were tasked with weighing the facts, viewers couldn’t help but wonder: Who knew pig-stabbing, blood “drip trails,” or dog bite patterns would one day be presented as courtroom evidence? If 2025 taught us anything, it’s this — when the stakes are life and liberty, no expert field is too niche, no test too strange, and no science too weird for the witness stand.
