VERDICT WATCH MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #13

[keek]

I grew up in the city of Boston and taught high school (and frequently patronized food/drink/entertainment) in Canton and know people who testified. All below is just my opinion with no inside information.

Like Cathy, I don’t believe in a grand conspiracy either. But this wouldn’t need to be a grand conspiracy.

All it takes is a 3 or 4 people in the house keeping quiet purely out of their own self interests. And a single investigator (Proctor). Nothing more.

And I honestly believe that Proctor didn’t think he was participating in any kind of conspiracy at all. The moment he learned the law enforcements connections to inside the house he was going to always implicitly believe them. No questions asked.

The outcome from there was predetermined: All fingers are pointed in one direction. Karen did it, right? She must have done it. Couldn’t have been them.

And add to that the sense of urgency. The last thing you want to do is not secure a conviction in this type of case. The victim? Dead cop. Family needs justice.

I think Proctor quickly saw the holes in this case. Saw how weak it was. So he sought out places where he could take evidence that wasnt strong and bolster it. JMO.

In my opinion the taillight is a perfect illustration of this. Did Karen break her taillight when she hit John or was it already cracked from bumping into the car? I honestly couldn’t tell you and I’m not sure it mattered to Proctor. JMO

It’s not that far a leap when you really think about (all my opinion and should be read in jest): She did it. Right? The taillight was already cracked from her doing it right? It’s already evidence against her. Is it strong evidence? No. How do we make it a little stronger? What if we took a little piece of our existing evidence and say we found it at the scene? We KNOW she did it so is it really that wrong?

For most of us the answer to that question would be: yes, it’s wrong. But when there’s a dead cop and a family needs justice and your alternative suspects are all cops you just don’t ask yourself these kind of questions. JMO

Sorry for sounding crass. That is just my opinion.

So when someone asks me “do you think Karen did it?” I always reply with “it doesn’t matter if she did it or not”. And that’s the sad thing for the OKeefe family. They’ll never get justice.

MOO

Exactly

 

[RANCH]

Time limitation
Counsel for each party shall be allowed fifteen minutes for an opening statement and thirty minutes for argument; but before the opening or the argument commences, the judge, on motion or sua sponte, may reasonably reduce or extend the time.

Looks like the Judge extended the closing argument time limit to a full hour.

https://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-24-opening-statements-arguments-instructions-to-jury

 

[MyJoey]

Question: can the jury deliberations go on as late as they want or will they quit at 4:30ish and come back? Another words if they want to keep going are they allowed?

 

[mzmarymac]

A little feedback on the "John deserved a better girlfriend" tweet posted earlier from the reporter.

I know that JOK is a victim and he deserves better than all of this. And from all accounts a great man and a great father to those kids, who stepped up when needed. But that doesn't mean that JOK was a great boyfriend. And in being as respectful as possible considering the circumstances, I present you this:

She helped out with the kids a LOT. She didn't live there and not sure if that was her wish or his, but I would be willing to bet they didn't have a lot of time at her home. She likely made the trip to his home to spend time with his family and his friends. And while he had his own life challenges, she had her own. She had a demanding career amidst a very difficult health battle she was dealing with while supporting JOK and his kids.

As far as her jealousy issues, were they valid? Was he a flirt? Why wasn't there a bigger commitment after 2 years of dating, particularly at their age. Did she want more, i.e. living together, marriage, their own kids? As far as the kids go, they saw them arguing and naturally take John's side. But they did argue about her spoiling the kids.

So the anguish and anger in her voice sounds to me like someone who has put up with a lot of stuff from him and felt he was pulling away and taking advantage of her. JMO

 

[Slick762]

The timeline from the defense makes a lot more sense imo. Especially considering the phone data from both JO and KR. The evidence of the "impact" on the car/tail light and JO's injuries not being consistent with being hit by a vehicle is something that SHOULD NOT be ignored. The CW's own ME could not say it was due to a vehicle. This is worrying considering the nature of the case and accusations against KR. Also, something interesting that I didn't pick up before, was that Higgins said a tall dark-haired man came into the Albert house that night, which according to Jackson appeared to be a slip up. jmo.

I have a bias towards feebs but even still, I think there's enough to show that Higgins is dirty as hell and did something that night.
At the very least, he admitted that he drove a leo vehicle while drunk, did leo work while drunk, and implied that he committed fraud on the military base (cops, even feebs, aren't supposed to have access to the tax-free stores on a base and he said he goes there occasionally to shop). I understand that Jackson probably didn't understand the no no about shopping tax free but I don't know why Jackson didn't hammer him harder on the drunk driving.

 

[Maat99]

What big fight? He must not have been bothered or he wouldn’t have been trying to get her to stay all weekend with him. What about the FBI experts? They just made up their testimony?

I think if someone can acknowledge that there wasn’t enough evidence to prove guilt yet still maintain someone is guilty, it is a belief that is not related to the evidence. In some cases, no actual evidence is going to shake that belief.
This applies to many aspects of life not just trials. For example, when my 17 year old daughter tells me she won’t be late for curfew, I believe this is a possibility. Even though the evidence from this summer tells me otherwise!

 

[Moonstrawbs]

I have a bias towards feebs but even still, I think there's enough to show that Higgins is dirty as hell and did something that night.
At the very least, he admitted that he drove a leo vehicle while drunk, did leo work while drunk, and implied that he committed fraud on the military base (cops, even feebs, aren't supposed to have access to the tax-free stores on a base and he said he goes there occasionally to shop). I understand that Jackson probably didn't understand the no no about shopping tax free but I don't know why Jackson didn't hammer him harder on the drunk driving.

I suppose because KR drove whilst under the influence so maybe that would have highlighted that and fed further into the character assassination from the CW. I'm not sure. I'm with you though. How utterly REPULSIVE to drive in that condition, and I mean that for KR too, totally unacceptable. Then for Higgins to work whilst drunk, just beyond shocking. JMO.

 

[keek]

and what vehicle evidence.all the cw proved were the lies and incompetence.

Commenter may have not watched that there is no vehicle evidence. All I can think of for comment to make sense ? When car towed Dighton cop said no big damage on tail light like later shown after the fakery at sally port with Proctor there

 

[mickey2942]

The investigation and securing the crime scene was a mess, epic "Keystone Cop" trophy awarded for sloppy work on every level. I consider this mess almost as screwed up as the scene and investigation of Jon Benet Ramsey.

Both murders are clear cut, and should have been easily solved without drama or doubt of the killer. But, in both cases, the LEO on location fumbled what should have been "police work 101".

I won't be surprised if KR is found NG.

 

[Moonstrawbs]

A little feedback on the "John deserved a better girlfriend" tweet posted earlier from the reporter.

I know that JOK is a victim and he deserves better than all of this. And from all accounts a great man and a great father to those kids, who stepped up when needed. But that doesn't mean that JOK was a great boyfriend. And in being as respectful as possible considering the circumstances, I present you this:

She helped out with the kids a LOT. She didn't live there and not sure if that was her wish or his, but I would be willing to bet they didn't have a lot of time at her home. She likely made the trip to his home to spend time with his family and his friends. And while he had his own life challenges, she had her own. She had a demanding career amidst a very difficult health battle she was dealing with while supporting JOK and his kids.

As far as her jealousy issues, were they valid? Was he a flirt? Why wasn't there a bigger commitment after 2 years of dating, particularly at their age. Did she want more, i.e. living together, marriage, their own kids? As far as the kids go, they saw them arguing and naturally take John's side. But they did argue about her spoiling the kids.

So the anguish and anger in her voice sounds to me like someone who has put up with a lot of stuff from him and felt he was pulling away and taking advantage of her. JMO

I completely agree and in a way feels like yet another attack towards KR. Let the verdict come out before saying she could have been a better girlfriend! We are all human, we could all do better I'm sure! That comment just seemed like a toxic low blow, passive-aggressive and defeats the point of refocusing it onto JO himself. jmo.

 

[arielilane]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1805677312933085565

 

[arielilane]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1805597732830097471

 

[JenaTaoson]

and excluded the 'Did I'

I could be persuaded to think that KR accidentally hit him, didn't know, and went home to curse him out on voicemail. But the CW went all in on murder and did a terrible investigation and there's too many added problems with crap like letting all the Alberts get their story straight before being interviewed and poor evidence control.

THIS!! 100 %

 

[jepop]

I wasn't even on the fence. I was firmly on the guilty side. But the deleted calls, more 'buttdials' in one night then most of us have in our entire life, the constant cross examnesia (hat tip to Legal Bytes for that phrase), failure to look at the house where a dead cop was found in the yard, failure to interview people in the house for weeks, no chain of custody on evidence for over a month, a federal agent destroying evidence (he admitted that at the time he thought the subpoena for his phone was still valid when he destroyed it), the texts from Proctor to his friends showing his bias (charming understatement).
All of that quickly moved me from a hard 'Guilty' to 'Probably guilty but haven't proved it to me' to 'Not guilty, probably an accident and too focused on KR', to 'Oh my god, I think they really did coverup who really killed him'.

From the start not guilty. As soon as I saw the wounds to JO's right arm. And now Imo it's proven beyond any reasonable doubt that vehicular impact could not have caused them and that the most reasonable explanation is dog bite and claw marks. Then as soon as I learnt that there was not even bruising to any part of JO's body, that also proved to me that he could not have been hit by a vehicle and landed where his body was found.

Moo If the jury vote guilty then it will be based on prejudice against KR or some kind of fear of consequences for them if they don't, rather than reason and evidence. IMO

Eta and clearly from the variety of journalistic/Xreporter tweets posted here commenting on trial, KR, her demeanor, her 'worth' as a girlfriend etc ad nauseum, there's a lot of prejudicial thinking out there and has been out there well before this jury was selected. One can only hope the jury will consider the real evidence and vote accordingly. They don't need to untangle an alternative theory. They just need to be open to the evidence telling them that KR and her lexus could not have caused JO's death. moo

 

[kittythehare]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1805677312933085565

Exactly this.
Intimidation.

 

[Slick762]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1805597732830097471

Tooo be faaaair, JO has been dead for 2 1/2 years and KR has been looking at God knows how many photos of his body and countless hours of discussion about what happened to him all while being told to show as little emotion as possible in front of the public and jury. It's probably a coping mechanism to think of that as 'the body' instead of 'John O'Keefe, her dead boyfriend'.

 

[ch_13]

The investigation and securing the crime scene was a mess, epic "Keystone Cop" trophy awarded for sloppy work on every level. I consider this mess almost as screwed up as the scene and investigation of Jon Benet Ramsey.

Both murders are clear cut, and should have been easily solved without drama or doubt of the killer. But, in both cases, the LEO on location fumbled what should have been "police work 101".

I won't be surprised if KR is found NG.

I started where you were. NG because of a bungled investigation.

But then after hearing Trooper Paul explain the commonwealth's theory of the crime, John's arm was hit by the SUV which caused the lacerations, then he was spun around and hit his head on the pavement then he was launched 30' backwards, none of it made sense. It was just Wile E. Coyote cartoon physics.

And then just yesterday listening to the two ARCCA PhDs explain how neither the damage to the SUV nor the wounds to John were consistent with the prosecution case cemented it for me. If the crime couldn't have happened physically, how could she be guilty?

Additionally, it's striking that the medical doctors were also all pretty much in agreement, both on the prosecution and defense side. They all said that the wounds to John's head were caused by blunt force trauma, that it completely incapacitated him and made him unconscious. Meaning that he couldn't have walked or crawled after the head injury. The doctors also said that a vehicle/pedestrian strike was not consistent with John's wounds. The defense expert was more strident about it, but even the state ME agreed it was unlikely. And the doctors all agreed to one degree or another that the wounds on John's arm could have been caused by a dog. Of course the defense experts said it was the most likely explanation, but even the ME said it was a possibility.

Frankly it's unusual to see a case where the experts (everyone with a PhD or MD by their name and excluding Paul) were so much in agreement, and their testimony lines up with the defense case rather than the prosecution.

 

[keek]

Tooo be faaaair, JO has been dead for 2 1/2 years and KR has been looking at God knows how many photos of his body and countless hours of discussion about what happened to him all while being told to show as little emotion as possible in front of the public and jury. It's probably a coping mechanism to think of that as 'the body' instead of 'John O'Keefe, her dead boyfriend'.

Even meaning that body as …that body as I took it.

 

[Wishbone]

I grew up in the city of Boston and taught high school (and frequently patronized food/drink/entertainment) in Canton and know people who testified. All below is just my opinion with no inside information.

Like Cathy, I don’t believe in a grand conspiracy either. But this wouldn’t need to be a grand conspiracy.

All it takes is a 3 or 4 people in the house keeping quiet purely out of their own self interests. And a single investigator (Proctor). Nothing more.

And I honestly believe that Proctor didn’t think he was participating in any kind of conspiracy at all. The moment he learned the law enforcements connections to inside the house he was going to always implicitly believe them. No questions asked.

The outcome from there was predetermined: All fingers are pointed in one direction. Karen did it, right? She must have done it. Couldn’t have been them.

And add to that the sense of urgency. The last thing you want to do is not secure a conviction in this type of case. The victim? Dead cop. Family needs justice.

I think Proctor quickly saw the holes in this case. Saw how weak it was. So he sought out places where he could take evidence that wasnt strong and bolster it. JMO.

In my opinion the taillight is a perfect illustration of this. Did Karen break her taillight when she hit John or was it already cracked from bumping into the car? I honestly couldn’t tell you and I’m not sure it mattered to Proctor. JMO

It’s not that far a leap when you really think about (all my opinion and should be read in jest): She did it. Right? The taillight was already cracked from her doing it right? It’s already evidence against her. Is it strong evidence? No. How do we make it a little stronger? What if we took a little piece of our existing evidence and say we found it at the scene? We KNOW she did it so is it really that wrong?

For most of us the answer to that question would be: yes, it’s wrong. But when there’s a dead cop and a family needs justice and your alternative suspects are all cops you just don’t ask yourself these kind of questions. JMO

Sorry for sounding crass. That is just my opinion.

So when someone asks me “do you think Karen did it?” I always reply with “it doesn’t matter if she did it or not”. And that’s the sad thing for the OKeefe family. They’ll never get justice.

MOO

<modsnip> it <mod edit> is clear just how corrupt MP's manipulations and actions were in addition to the tail light issue. I can't make an excuse for his behavior or give him a pass. JMO

 

[texaslb218]

What piece(s) of evidence made you fall off the fence in the direction you did?

I will respect any disagreement because this tragedy has been discussed until there is no breath left. If there had been a minimal discussion, I would jump in. My opinion developed over time due to the great information on both sides.