MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Charlot123 said:
Here is a question. Any document needs someone to work at it. Lawyers charge their clients a lot of money. Now, if there is a court's order to provide the records, they'd probably be provided free for the court. But to everyone else? The lawyers? At least the time spent on preparing the documents (meaning, Verizon is using own workers), should be reimbursed to Verizon, or am I wrong?
Click to expand...
Verizon doesn't charge for subpoena responses. It's considered a cost of doing business.
 
ch_13 said:
Despite a request from prosecutors and Read’s defense, Judge Cannonne said she wasn’t going to make a decision Thursday to delay the March 12 trial date.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1758206599829573994
Click to expand...
She couldn't have done anything today with so much discovery still not in evidence. Next hearing is 2/26 and it wouldn't shock me if the same discovery is still pending.
 
HarmonyE. said:
She's entitled to a speedy trial, but her attorneys are also requesting a delay.
Click to expand...

Yes, entitled to, but I’d delay as well if I didn’t have potentially exculpatory evidence within the unprovided discovery information. I wasn’t referring to delays in the process, I was referring to the delays in the prosecution providing the defense their evidence yet the hearing process actually is moving forward without delay allowed despite that.
 
LvsAMystry said:
Yes, entitled to, but I’d delay as well if I didn’t have potentially exculpatory evidence within the unprovided discovery information. I wasn’t referring to delays in the process, I was referring to the delays in the prosecution providing the defense their evidence yet the hearing process actually is moving forward without delay allowed despite that.
Click to expand...
Just my speculation ahead.

This isn't a typical case. The involvement of the Feds makes things tricky.
I personally believe this may be much bigger than the death of one police officer, as awful as that was. In Boston, the Acting US Attorney for Massachusetts has been bringing forth multiple charges involving corrupt state cops and has made it clear he won't tolerate any corruption. He has a reputation as a tough, straight shooter and is no doubt auditioning for a permanent position. Just two weeks ago he charged six state troopers with multiple counts of bribery, extortion, fraud, falsification of records and perjury for giving out Commercial Driver’s Licenses to individuals who could not pass the driving test in exchange for goods and services. Scary stuff. That tractor trailer next to you on the highway may be totally unqualified.

The FBI is extraordinarily thorough in their investigations and they like to make sure every I has been dotted and T crossed and are loath to bring forth charges or even let anyone know what they are working on until they have done so.

Now comes the Karen Read case. I have no idea what was going on - no one does - with this investigation. But if it involves corruption connected to O'Keefe's death and/or the investigation into what happened, the Feds are in a bit of a bind if they have exculpatory evidence in the Read case, but aren't ready to go forth with the case they are working on and don't want to tip anyone off.

If she's innocent, that's really tough because her attorneys are very expensive and I'm sure she just wants this to be over. But the delays may be entirely necessary because the Feds wouldn't want to let any cats out of the bag prematurely. They may be trying to figure out how to thread that needle.
 
Charlot123 said:
Here is a question. Any document needs someone to work at it. Lawyers charge their clients a lot of money. Now, if there is a court's order to provide the records, they'd probably be provided free for the court. But to everyone else? The lawyers? At least the time spent on preparing the documents (meaning, Verizon is using own workers), should be reimbursed to Verizon, or am I wrong?
Click to expand...
What happens is that a company gets a subpoena from a party in a lawsuit, criminal or civil. The company has to comply, if they don't the party issuing the subpoena can go to court and make a motion asking the court to order the company to comply with the subpoena. At this point it is a court order so much more serious not to comply. Nobody at the company gets reimbursed for their time. So sometimes in civil case, companies drag their feet knowing that the requester will have to get a court order for their to be teeth. Now if the prosecution has issued the subpoena (be that state prosecutor or federal) you are risking more because it is the state or federal government issuing the subpoena. If the company feels a subpoena is unduly burdensome (would cost too much money) they can make a motion to quash the subpoena or, when the party goes to get a court order file a response saying "this is really burdensome, we aren't likely to have responsive records, etc." MOO (as an attorney who has written/issued numerous administrative subpoenas).

LvsAMystry said:
At what point do delays of defendant discovery without delay of the process become a prejudice to the defendant’s defense and infringement on rights to due process?
Click to expand...
There is a point (probably would be years though) or the court can impose other sanctions for example, say that all inferences from the documents are deemed admitted - so if the defense says "google search was performed at 2 pm" the prosecution is not allowed to refute this because they had the records but failed to turn them over in a timely manner. Or the court could say that the prosecution can't use the documents in their case because the failed to turn them over. Honestly probably every case has some "discovery disputes" and they have to get really bad for it to be a due process violation such that the case is dismissed. It's a good thing KR has lots of money because all of these motions, etc. cost her dearly in attorney fees. I'm disappointed if KR had communication with Turtleboy. She had such a great reasonable doubt case if she just sat tight and let the prosecution bumble along with all the conflicts, withholding evidence, absurd assertions (google search is from the time you open the tab), confusing evidence (tail light shards which contradict video evidence) and flat-out exculpatory evidence (JO apple watch showing he walked up and down stairs).
 
Last edited:
momsof3 said:
She had such a great reasonable doubt case if she just sat tight and let the prosecution bumble along with all the conflicts, withholding evidence, absurd assertions (google search is from the time you open the tab), confusing evidence (tail light shards which contradict video evidence) and flat-out exculpatory evidence (JO apple watch showing he walked up and down stairs).
Click to expand...
John wasn't wearing an Apple watch. The data supposedly came from the health app on his phone. The prosecution contends this data is often faulty because elevation changes while driving or walking can appear as stair climbing.

I don't know either way as I don't have such an app, but I wonder how it's accuracy compares with a watch, which would be consistently up against a person's body. But what troubles me a bit is his actual phone. It was supposedly found directly under his body (not sure if or how this was confirmed). Supposedly the phone stopped moving at around the time Karen would have dropped him off. If he went in the house and was later moved outside, short of someone having the presence of mind to immediately putting it in airplane mode, the phone should have kept moving until he was finally deposited outside. If this goes to trial, this is something Read will have to address.
 
HarmonyE. said:
John wasn't wearing an Apple watch. The data supposedly came from the health app on his phone. The prosecution contends this data is often faulty because elevation changes while driving or walking can appear as stair climbing.

I don't know either way as I don't have such an app, but I wonder how it's accuracy compares with a watch, which would be consistently up against a person's body. But what troubles me a bit is his actual phone. It was supposedly found directly under his body (not sure if or how this was confirmed). Supposedly the phone stopped moving at around the time Karen would have dropped him off. If he went in the house and was later moved outside, short of someone having the presence of mind to immediately putting it in airplane mode, the phone should have kept moving until he was finally deposited outside. If this goes to trial, this is something Read will have to address.
Click to expand...

This is a sticking point for me because having an iPhone I know how it works. Yes the phone stopped moving and only moved again after he was found presumably as it was carried by law enforcement as evidence etc. if the phone had been carried out of house with JOK those steps should’ve registered as well.
 
LvsAMystry said:
This is a sticking point for me because having an iPhone I know how it works. Yes the phone stopped moving and only moved again after he was found presumably as it was carried by law enforcement as evidence etc. if the phone had been carried out of house with JOK those steps should’ve registered as well.
Click to expand...
There is a Health app that came embedded in the iphone that I have. It rarely mirrors my apple watch info and/or my cardiogram info. I may have gone up stairs 6x and it will show 2x etc - none of these apps are an exact measurement of what actually occurs on any given day IMO.
 
www.bostonglobe.com

Karen Read case shouldn’t be dismissed, prosecutors say in court filing slamming defense claims of police coverup - The Boston Globe

Prosecutors in the murder case pending against Karen Read said in court papers that her lawyers have made “sensationalized” claims of a police coverup.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com

In a response to a motion to dismiss from the defense team, prosecutors say that the case has turned into “a national conspiracy theory premised upon the defendant’s variety of flawed, unfounded, and sensationalized claims.”

Two interesting pieces of information in the filing...
  1. No canine DNA was found on JO's clothing.
  2. An expert from the forensic software company Cellebrite will testify that the internet searches of "how long to die in the cold" were only made after the discovery of John's body the next morning.

One odd thing, however. While the prosecution response is public, the original defense motion was impounded by the court so no one knows exactly what was claimed.
 
momsof3 said:
What happens is that a company gets a subpoena from a party in a lawsuit, criminal or civil. The company has to comply, if they don't the party issuing the subpoena can go to court and make a motion asking the court to order the company to comply with the subpoena. At this point it is a court order so much more serious not to comply. Nobody at the company gets reimbursed for their time. So sometimes in civil case, companies drag their feet knowing that the requester will have to get a court order for their to be teeth. Now if the prosecution has issued the subpoena (be that state prosecutor or federal) you are risking more because it is the state or federal government issuing the subpoena. If the company feels a subpoena is unduly burdensome (would cost too much money) they can make a motion to quash the subpoena or, when the party goes to get a court order file a response saying "this is really burdensome, we aren't likely to have responsive records, etc." MOO (as an attorney who has written/issued numerous administrative subpoenas).
Click to expand...

(Respectfully deleted for brevity.)

However - turning records at the demand of a party in a lawsuit is exactly where privacy turns into absence of one. This is specifically because many times, there might be plain civil (divorce) cases. Understanding that a subpoena from the court is a serious thing and more or less protects them from future lawsuits by one of the parties for violation of privacy, whereas a subpoena from one of the parties' lawyer does not - what does the law says today? Again, it is the privacy issue.
 
Documents indicate that a piece of O'Keefe's hair and pieces of the glass from the drink he was carrying were found stuck under Read's SUV. The documents also paint a picture of relationship turmoil. They say Read was angry at O'Keefe for allegedly cheating on her.

Read's trial is scheduled to start on March 12.

Also on Monday, the controversial blogger "Turtleboy" was expected to be in court for a hearing, but his court appearance ended up being postponed. Aidan Kearney was just released from jail on Friday after being indicted on two new charges last week.
www.nbcboston.com

Karen Read expected in court Monday in connection with Canton murder case

Monday is the final pretrial hearing for Karen Read, who is accused of killing her Boston police officer boyfriend in Canton, Massachusetts, back in 2022. Last week, prosecutors said they have DNA evidence that links Read to John O’Keefe’s death. Documents indicate that a piece of O’Keefe’s hair...
www.nbcboston.com www.nbcboston.com
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 69 more.
Total: 4,014 (members: 70, guests: 3,944)

Online statistics

Members online
70
Guests online
3,944
Total visitors
4,014
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,584
Messages
17,989,474
Members
229,167
Latest member
just_a_shouthern_gal
Back
Top