MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #12

[KSwizzle]

You're not paying attention.

I said that experts often testify differently in trials and I wasn't surprised in this case.

Trooper Paul is so under qualified to be the “expert” for the state, and with all we know now and the fbi investigation I could be convinced he was set up to take the fall with the rest of the MSP knowing how poorly he would look

My opinion and speculation

 

[Pyrite]

Like I said in other post for every expert that says one thing, there’s another with a totally different view. Number one eye witness has already told us what happened. I hit him, I hit him, I hit him.

I’ve always thought eyewitness testimony is rather weak evidence. Not as weak as drunken/hungover eyewitness testimony, but weak.

I can agree with your thoughts on expert testimony, but these experts were paid for by another LE agency, not the defense, so in the case I expect the most honest answer they can give. The Lexus damage was inconsistent with hitting JO and JO’s wounds were inconsistent with a vehicle strike.

MOO

 

[keek]

Trooper Paul is so under qualified to be the “expert” for the state, and with all we know now and the fbi investigation I could be convinced he was set up to take the fall with the rest of the MSP knowing how poorly he would look

My opinion and speculation

The difference in their background education and careers are beyond any comparison

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

This post lands at random.

Members do not deserve to be personally attacked for their opinion, let alone for a mild observation/comment.

Move on, and any further bickering in this regard will result in Time Outs being issued.

 

[MassGuy]

I’ve always thought eyewitness testimony is rather weak evidence. Not as weak as drunken/hungover eyewitness testimony, but weak.

I can agree with your thoughts on expert testimony, but these experts were paid for by another LE agency, not the defense, so in the case I expect the most honest answer they can give. The Lexus damage was inconsistent with hitting JO and JO’s wounds were inconsistent with a vehicle strike.

MOO

Yeah, that’s such a big difference. The defense can find an expert to testify to just about anything, as there are experts who make their living based on exactly that.

That is not what happened here, as they were hired by the FBI. They had no horse in this race, and I’d argue they would be inherently more believable than someone hired by either the prosecution or defense.

 

[MyJoey]

Ok, I get this, I would say the ramblings of a very drunk person can be erratic and nonsensical especially if other (drunk) people are telling you ideas, which, I personally don’t think takes precedent over factual scientific information.

I believe the evidence even if the investigation was horrible, I don’t believe any evidence was planted. Given that with her behavior, I think she’s guilty. Nothing is factual, only to the person saying it and those believing. Freak accidents happen that can’t be totally explained…..just how I see it. Really don’t want to debate it, it’s been gone over already……it’s in the jury’s hands.
My thoughts will be with John’s family.

 

[RANCH]

Yeah, that’s such a big difference. The defense can find an expert to testify to just about anything, as there are experts who make their living based on exactly that.

That is not what happened here, as they were hired by the FBI. They had no horse in this race, and I’d argue they would be inherently more believable than someone hired by either the prosecution or defense.

The FBI hired these experts for a reason. I guess we will find out more on that in the future. JMO.

 

[MyJoey]

The CW’s witness, the ME, also couldn’t say that his injures were consistent with a car accident.

And the witness said KR said “could I have hit him?”

Interesting choice to weight that kind of comment over experts saying this couldn’t possibly be from a car, the damage couldn’t be from striking JO, the black box data registered no collisions or impacts, the key cycle data registered no trigger events when she was driving that night, a witness was there nearly the entire time KR was outside Fairview and didn’t see or hear anything, etc.

Yeah I watched the same trial and seen much of that differently. Let’s let the jury do their job….

 

[Aquarian]

The FBI hired these experts for a reason. I guess we will find out more on that in the future. JMO.

I really want to know why. The info they believe and have, might change my mind on things . But
Innuendo alone is not enough. Nobody really knows what prompted the investigation . Just unanswered questions .

 

[MassGuy]

Yeah I watched the same trial and seen much of that differently. Let’s let the jury do their job….

If a jury convicts her, I think it would be one of the biggest miscarriages of justice I can recall in a long time. And I say this as someone who thinks she did it.

 

[iamshadow21]

If a jury convicts her, I think it would be one of the biggest miscarriages of justice I can recall in a long time. And I say this as someone who thinks she did it.

Yeah, the evidence just isn't there. There is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

I don't think she had anything to do with his death, but the way the system is supposed to work, I'm really aghast this made it to trial. I've been looking in vain for what made LE and the DA hang their hat on this defendant and this scenario of JOK's death, and it's all completely speculative. There's nothing solid anywhere.

Did KR drink too much? Yes. Was she angry at JOK? Absolutely. Did she call her family late? Sure. But where's the actual substance connecting her not just to JOK's death, but to intent?

I kept waiting for it to appear in the Commonwealth's case, but like Godot, it never materialised.

MOO

 

[MyJoey]

I’ve always thought eyewitness testimony is rather weak evidence. Not as weak as drunken/hungover eyewitness testimony, but weak.

I can agree with your thoughts on expert testimony, but these experts were paid for by another LE agency, not the defense, so in the case I expect the most honest answer they can give. The Lexus damage was inconsistent with hitting JO and JO’s wounds were inconsistent with a vehicle strike.

MOO

Understand but there was still her tail light pieces all around John, and other evidence that I believe. I don’t believe it was planted evidence. That’s tells me a different story.

 

[louvillian08]

Yeah I watched the same trial and seen much of that differently. Let’s let the jury do their job….

I think that’s the point a lot of commenters here are trying to make. There isn’t another way to see the car data. This kind of evidence is black and white. There were no events, no collisions, no impacts, etc. until police seized the vehicle. So do you think the vehicle data is wrong?

KR leaves at 12:28/12:29. JO answers a phone call at 12:29, his phone keeps moving until 12:32am. How can KR hit him if she’s gone and he’s still walking around?

 

[MassGuy]

Yeah, the evidence just isn't there. There is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

I don't think she had anything to do with his death, but the way the system is supposed to work, I'm really aghast this made it to trial. I've been looking in vain for what made LE and the DA hang their hat on this defendant and this scenario of JOK's death, and it's all completely speculative. There's nothing solid anywhere.

Did KR drink too much? Yes. Was she angry at JOK? Absolutely. Did she call her family late? Sure. But where's the actual substance connecting her not just to JOK's death, but to intent?

I kept waiting for it to appear in the Commonwealth's case, but like Godot, it never materialised.

MOO

I’m a big fan of Occam’s razor, but you don’t convict people based on that.

 

[MyJoey]

If a jury convicts her, I think it would be one of the biggest miscarriages of justice I can recall in a long time. And I say this as someone who thinks she did it.

I totally understand, it was a horrible investigation. I believe she will be found not guilty. Can’t say I’m not hopeful tho. Really makes me sad for his family, watching them each day has been heartbreaking.

 

[louvillian08]

I’m a big fan of Occam’s razor, but you don’t convict people based on that.

Might have said this already but Occam’s Razor is that the theory with the least amount of assumptions is the correct one. Which is often incorrectly interpreted as the simplest one. But here we have a situation where you have to assume so much, and discount so much concrete evidence, to even get close to believing she could have done it

 

[kittythehare]

For me, this was the most powerful testimony yesterday.
The lack of bruising and fractures.
It's the simplest but most profound truth.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1805231558363640161

https://twitter.com/x/status/1805238598876152162

 

[MyJoey]

I think that’s the point a lot of commenters here are trying to make. There isn’t another way to see the car data. This kind of evidence is black and white. There were no events, no collisions, no impacts, etc. until police seized the vehicle. So do you think the vehicle data is wrong?

KR leaves at 12:28/12:29. JO answers a phone call at 12:29, his phone keeps moving until how 12:32am. How can KR hit him if she’s gone and he’s still walking around?

Seriously I don’t want to debate it all. I seen things differently. Actually it don’t matter what anyone thinks….its in the jury’s hands.

 

[iamshadow21]

I’m a big fan of Occam’s razor, but you don’t convict people based on that.

Yeah, absolutely not.

Used to be we'd just round up and lock up or hang people who were suspicious, had a past, had a possible motive, or were of a racial or religious background or had a disability that made them stand out and call it job done.

We have the systems we have now because of the deep flaws in that approach. They're not perfect systems, but they are better than policing and imprisoning by choosing who we wanted to have done it without evidence.

MOO

 

[SteveS]

I think the best evidence - objective Experts, the best of the best, who didn't speak for either side, and simply presented their observations as Experts - made it literally impossible that KR did anything wrong. They even said that. Not possible. They concluded, on a scientific basis, it was "not possible" that she hit him, and "not possible" that the taillight was damaged by collision with JOK, not in light of those injuries and that setting.

The only person who said otherwise was Paul, whose theories and testimony were so unprofessional and convoluted that it was literally laughable to observers. He was clearly no expert. But his job was to spout the prosecution line - he works for them, so very far from an objective evaluator - so what else was he gonna say? He admittedly made up as good a tale as he could to fit the prosecution claims, with no real backing, because they made it his job. He actually said, while under oath, that the evidence didn’t fit the scenario of a vehicular collision so he made it fit because that’s what his buddies said had happened.

But the science speaks. It wasn't his lack of ability, but rather that the science says KR could not have hit JOK and caused such injuries, leading to JOK being found where he was and his death.

The cherry on top was the testimony from the defense Experts on the arm injuries being dog bites. It was clear and obvious, and was actually either directly supported or not contradicted by any medical testimony by the prosecution. It's informative that Lally said he'd easily bring a rebuttal witness re the defense's dog bite testimony, but then did not -- obviously no one who wants to stick to the truth and who is concerned about their integrity could contradict the fact that JOK's arm was injured by a dog attack. It is what it is.

Once we know JOK's injuries (and the taillight damage) aren't scientifically possible from a vehicle accident as proposed, and that his arm was injured in a dog attack, it's obvious KR didn't do it. She didn't kill him. Couldn't have. How it all REALLY played out? Hope we find out and the perps are brought to justice. It had to be something very different than these people claimed - with no vehicle accident and with dog bites, it couldn't have been her - and it feels like the FBI will weigh in at some point. But it wasn't KR.