To me the bigger problem is either the state's "expert" is that incompetent and did not bother to check the device for water or dirt, OR he did look for and knew there was no water or dirt in the port, but NM didn't ask about it because he didn't want the jury to know there was no such damage because lack of such damage screws up his timeline, and excludes RA based on the State's timeline.
"Cecil was asked if he examined Libby’s phone for water damage.
He said it did not. He was asked if dirt was on the phone when it was found. He said he did not know." (bold and italics added by me). -
https://fox59.com/news/delphi-murde...d-into-libbys-phone-removed-in-dead-of-night/
So yeah no, not buying that water triggered the headphone connection alert on the software. This is a critical failure on part of the State imo. They had the evidence to know that their timeline was incorrect and imo tried to hide it from the jury.