Expert Testimony, AirTag Evidence, and the Family’s Digital Trail

Day 4 of Tracey Grist’s trial gave jurors a more detailed look at both the crime scene and the digital evidence surrounding Matthew Restelli’s death. Prosecutors used expert testimony to sharpen their claim that the scene was staged, then followed with evidence about device seizures, search history, tracking, and family communications in the lead-up to the shooting. The defense, meanwhile, added more testimony about the family’s fear of Matthew and the conduct they say shaped the case long before July 12.

Crime scene expert says the scene showed signs of staging

Patrick Zuroli, a crime scene expert with experience in staged scenes, testified about the physical evidence inside the home. He walked jurors through shell casing locations, bullet slugs, and the layout captured in the Pharaoh 3D scan.

Zuroli said the Sig Sauer’s ejection pattern helped him estimate the shooter’s position near the end of a tan couch. That testimony mattered because it gave jurors a more specific reconstruction of where the shots were fired from, rather than just a general description of the scene.

He also focused on timing. Zuroli testified that the roughly eight- to nine-minute gap between reports of gunshots and Tracey Grist’s 911 call created an opportunity for the scene to be altered. That point fit neatly into the prosecution’s argument that the knife and self-defense narrative were put in place after Matthew Restelli had already been shot.

Zuroli also clarified one bloodstain issue for the jury. He said what had initially been viewed as possible blood spatter from the victim was actually an artifact created while EMTs were performing life-saving efforts. That helped narrow the physical evidence and separate what came from the shooting itself from what happened afterward.

Detective testimony tied the scene to the phones and timeline

Lead investigator Detective Joseph Nordine then took jurors deeper into the case timeline, starting with the night of July 12, 2024. He testified about the seizure of electronic devices, including phones belonging to Kevin Ellis, Katherine Restelli, and Matthew Restelli.

Nordine also highlighted internet searches found on defendants’ devices, including searches tied to high-profile true crime cases such as the Adelson case, along with searches for local news reports about shootings. That evidence appears aimed at showing not just interest in violent cases, but a possible effort to study how such cases unfold publicly.

Jurors also heard about tracking evidence. Nordine testified that an AirTag had been placed in Matthew Restelli’s truck to monitor his movements. That detail gave prosecutors another piece of evidence to support their theory that Matthew’s arrival was being watched in real time.

He also referenced an email from Grist to “My Tactical Promos” concerning the shipment of mystery boxes. In the broader context of the case, that digital trail added to the jury’s growing list of communications prosecutors say point to preparation rather than panic.

Family witnesses described fear, tracking, and constant communication

Rachel Jorgensson testified about the family dynamic and described interactions around Matthew Restelli as volatile. Her testimony focused in part on how family members monitored communications and discussed the possibility that Matthew might come to Utah and harm them.

She also described the family’s shared attention to Matthew’s location and the ongoing conversations between Grist, Katherine Restelli, and others. That testimony added context to the AirTag evidence and to the prosecution’s larger theory that Matthew’s movements were being closely followed before the shooting.

The defense, though, can also draw from that same testimony. Jorgensson’s account supported the idea that fear of Matthew was real inside the family, an issue that could matter as jurors weigh motive, credibility, and the self-defense claim.

Terlyn Fischer described what she saw and what her mother told her

Terlyn Fischer, Grist’s daughter, testified about Matthew Restelli’s behavior during family visits. She described what she called his “volatile explosive behavior,” including an incident at Disneyland involving the children.

Fischer also said Katherine had sent her videos and audio recordings of Matthew acting aggressively. One of those clips, described as the “wet tortilla” video, was identified in court.

Her testimony became more directly connected to the state’s theory when she said Tracey Grist instructed her to help with the plan for Katherine to bring the children to Utah. That line gave prosecutors another witness tying Grist to actions taken before Matthew arrived.

At the same time, Fischer acknowledged an important limit to her own testimony: she admitted that while the recordings showed Matthew at his worst, he was not always like that. That concession may matter, especially if the defense continues trying to frame the family’s fear of Matthew as genuine and longstanding.

Why Day 4 matters

This was one of the more layered days of the trial so far. Prosecutors did not rely only on the image of the crime scene. They tied physical evidence, timing, phone data, tracking evidence, and family communications together in a way that pushed their planning theory further.

Zuroli’s testimony gave the state another expert-based argument that the scene was manipulated. Nordine’s testimony added the digital backbone. And the family witnesses filled in the emotional and personal context around the lead-up to the killing.

That combination is significant because the case is not just about who shot Matthew Restelli. Kevin Ellis’s role in the shooting is already known. The central question for this jury is whether Tracey Grist helped create the conditions for it to happen and then helped shape the story afterward.

What comes next

With the jury now hearing both forensic reconstruction and family testimony about fear, planning, and communication, the case is moving closer to the heart of the conspiracy allegation. Prosecutors still need to keep connecting those details directly to Grist’s intent and actions.

The defense, meanwhile, has started building out the family’s explanation for why they were so focused on Matthew in the first place. That means the next phase of the trial may turn on whether jurors see the family’s conduct as evidence of coordinated planning, or as the product of fear that spiraled into something deadly.