Rentschler testified that O'Keefe's injuries were inconsistent with being struck by Read's SUV; the prosecution challenged his analysis.
What the record shows
Rentschler disputed the prosecution's proposed sequence. Cross-examination addressed dummy properties, unknown arm position and possible variation in taillight damage when test conditions change.
Rentschler said the arm abrasions were inconsistent with taillight contact and disputed a glancing arm impact propelling O'Keefe into the yard. He maintained that the injuries did not support a Lexus strike. These were his expert conclusions, not an observed event or a court finding. On cross-examination, he acknowledged that arm position could change test damage; his biomechanical analysis did not establish how or when the scene fragments arrived.
Limits and disputed context
The experiments evaluated selected configurations. They did not record O'Keefe's actual movement. No hypothetical elbow swing is presented here as an observed event.
S12: Rentschler: collision testing and cross-examination
ARCCA testimony
Open publisher sourceS24: Laposata and Rentschler discuss injury mechanisms
Defense medical and biomechanical testimony
Open publisher source