MISTRIAL MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #17

[Curiousobserver]

1 in 3 pedestrians hit at 25 miles per hour are severely injured, 4% will die.

Pedestrian Crash Analysis 2022

MoneyGeek analyzed data from the NHTSA to learn more about pedestrian crashes; we found that even crashes at slow speeds can lead to severe injury.

www.moneygeek.com

Based on a US Department of Transportation study.

 

[thebedbug]

snipped.


Only two-thirds of the jury is not great. In fact, I would say it's very bad. If the prosecution doesn't have additional evidence that they can bring forth then they shouldn't bother to retry KR because they will lose again.

On a personal note, I'll say that for me, the ARCCA witnesses were dispositive. Before that, I didn't believe that the commonwealth had proven their case. However, after their testimony, I no longer thought JO was hit by a car. But I knew something the jury didn't: I knew these witnesses were hired by the FBI and truly were independent. They didn't go into the case with a preset agenda like most defense experts do.

Had I been on that jury, I wouldn't have known that. Maybe I would have given their testimony less weight, thinking that the defense was shading the truth about their independence. Maybe they were hired by KR's insurance company, or some similar entity, to avoid liability.

If/when the jury talks, it will be truly interesting to hear what they thought of the various expert witnesses and how that affected their deliberations.

edit - In a retrial, it's quite possible that the next jury will know that the ARCCA experts were independently hired by the Feds. That will be a difficult hurdle for the prosecution to overcome.

Who knows if it's good or bad. I don't. I bet we've all watched enough episodes of 48 Hours and Dateline to have seen cases where the murderer almost got off in the 1st or even 2nd trial, only to be unanimously convicted in the 3rd. Heck, wasn't Danny Masterson like 1 vote from being found not guilty, only to end up serving 75 years now?

What we do know about this jury is that, while they were unanimous in not believing the CW proved intent - thus the 0-12 votes on charges 1 and 3 - 8 of 12 jurors do believe KR killed JO with her SUV.

 

[Forest_Wood]

<modsnip -quoted post was removed for rudeness>

<modsnip - response to quoted post>

Some keep repeating the same old line, he got hit by the vehicle, yet not producing evidence of how he got hit in that manner by a vehicle, just on his arm, and with a deep gash on the back of his head that killed him, even after the most educated minds in that field stated no, it could not have happened that way. I originally thought Lucky's snowplow scooped him up without seeing him and tossed him up to 30' (which looked to be only 6-10 ft by the pics). But the experts debunked that too because his body told the tale that that could not happen without bruising/broken bones on his body. We have to believe science in this case since the investigation was entirely botched. And science was not what Trooper Paul was spewing. Had Proctor and the rest done a proper investigation, we would not be questioning what happened.
MOO.

 

[adot0902]

Who knows if it's good or bad. I don't. I bet we've all watched enough episodes of 48 Hours and Dateline to have seen cases where the murderer almost got off in the 1st or even 2nd trial, only to be unanimously convicted in the 3rd. Heck, wasn't Danny Masterson like 1 vote from being found not guilty, only to end up serving 75 years now?

What we do know about this jury is that, while they were unanimous in not believing the CW proved intent - thus the 0-12 votes on charges 1 and 3 - 8 of 12 jurors do believe KR killed JO with her SUV.

You absolutely do not know the last highlighted bolded part. You are assuming and most likely very incorrectly. MOO Unless you are one of the 12.

 

[ch_13]

I don't feel like people are applying the same critical thinking skills to this case as they would if the defendant was an less likable man.

rsbm.

I just want to address this point. I I really don't know much about Karen Read as a person. I don't particularly care if she's "likable" or not.

I became interested when I randomly watched one of the preliminary hearings and saw a photo of the scratches on JO's arm, and then heard the DA basically scoff and say they were from a collision with a car.

I don't know what happened, but the evidence in this case is severely lacking, and there are so many holes in the prosecution's theory of the crime. Heck, they can't even put forth a reasonable timeline of when John was hit because their own witness's testimony and the physical evidence is so contradictory.

 

[Forest_Wood]

1 in 3 pedestrians hit at 25 miles per hour are severely injured, 4% will die.

Pedestrian Crash Analysis 2022

MoneyGeek analyzed data from the NHTSA to learn more about pedestrian crashes; we found that even crashes at slow speeds can lead to severe injury.

www.moneygeek.com

Based on a US Department of Transportation study.

But nowhere was it proven she backed her vehicle up.
In fact, JN, RN, his girlfriend Heather(?) and their driver all stated they were behind her the entire time and nothing out of the ordinary happened for those 5 crucial minutes when they all pulled up together. And the defense proved that the reversing happened during testing in police custody of the vehicle. When did she back up then?
MOO

 

[OldCop]

No. This is not true. You are stating something as fact, which is only the opinion of experts (based on looking at pictures). One might prefer their opinion or believe it to be accurate with respect to what really happened, but it definitely isn't fact that JOK was not hit by KR's SUV.

I will reiterate that 8 of the 12 jurors, apparently, also believed JOK was hit by KR's SUV.

They did not just “look at pictures” which seems to be an oft repeated statement here by folks who believe that John was hit by a car.
The folks who prepared the report are PHD’s in their related fields. They were NOT hired by the defense to spout out opinions that would mimic what the defense wanted them to conclude like so many “professional experts” that testify in courts around the country every day.
These scientists studied photos yes, but they also studied medical reports, autopsy reports, applied the laws of physics, medicine, and kinetics to the KNOWN facts, and concluded decisively that JOK did not die from being struck by a motor vehicle.
Their reports were prepared independently for another agency which was trying to determine how JOK died. Copies of their report were provided to BOTH the prosecution and the defense. Obviously, the CW decided to ignore their conclusion.
ETA The prosecution decided to go with their associates degree state trooper who concluded “It just did”. Very compelling evidence……

 

[Curiousobserver]

<modsnip - quoted post was snipped>
Some keep repeating the same old line, he got hit by the vehicle, yet not producing evidence of how he got hit in that manner by a vehicle, just on his arm, and with a deep gash on the back of his head that killed him, even after the most educated minds in that field stated no, it could not have happened that way. I originally thought Lucky's snowplow scooped him up without seeing him and tossed him up to 30' (which looked to be only 6-10 ft by the pics). But the experts debunked that too because his body told the tale that that could not happen without bruising/broken bones on his body. We have to believe science in this case since the investigation was entirely botched. And science was not what Trooper Paul was spewing. Had Proctor and the rest done a proper investigation, we would not be questioning what happened.
MOO.

Those were not the best minds.

1/3 of low speed crashes with pedestrians result in severe injuries.

These guys testified for free so that every defense attorney in America would know their company's name. They are laughing all the way to the bank.

IMO

 

[thebedbug]

You absolutely do not know the last highlighted bolded part. You are assuming and most likely very incorrectly. MOO Unless you are one of the 12.

We having been having a discussion based on the Yannetti/Jackson filings and presuming the information within to be an accurate reflection of the opinions of the jurors.

 

[ShadyLady]

Forensic scientist continues testimony at Karen Read murder trial​

Watching

BUT, only shows a short sleeve shirt. JO was also wearing long sleeves, yet it was not shown here.

Can anyone direct me to the YT vid where they showed the long sleeved shirt? If ever?

EDIT: ok defense did show long shirt, but took only one swab on all marks on sleeve.

 

[Universecalling]

No. This is not true. You are stating something as fact, which is only the opinion of experts (based on looking at pictures). One might prefer their opinion or believe it to be accurate with respect to what really happened, but it definitely isn't fact that JOK was not hit by KR's SUV.

I will reiterate that 8 of the 12 jurors, apparently, also believed JOK was hit by KR's SUV.

Then they shouldn’t be on a jury. You’re a fact finder, not a personal beliefs pusher.
Fact is, physics and math tell it like it is.
Also, reasonable doubt definition is everyone’s friend. I encourage everyone to read it.

 

[Forest_Wood]

I don't feel like people are applying the same critical thinking skills to this case as they would if the defendant was an less likable man.

The same could be said both ways about critical thinking. Not applying critical thinking to the evidence presented by science is illogical.
MOO.

 

[ch_13]

Who knows if it's good or bad. I don't. I bet we've all watched enough episodes of 48 Hours and Dateline to have seen cases where the murderer almost got off in the 1st or even 2nd trial, only to be unanimously convicted in the 3rd. Heck, wasn't Danny Masterson like 1 vote from being found not guilty, only to end up serving 75 years now?

What we do know about this jury is that, while they were unanimous in not believing the CW proved intent - thus the 0-12 votes on charges 1 and 3 - 8 of 12 jurors do believe KR killed JO with her SUV.

You can keep posting 8 of 12 over and over again, like a football fan whose team just won the national championship. But it's not really the "win" for the prosecution that you seem to think it is.

 

[Seattle1]

No. This is not true. You are stating something as fact, which is only the opinion of experts (based on looking at pictures). One might prefer their opinion or believe it to be accurate with respect to what really happened, but it definitely isn't fact that JOK was not hit by KR's SUV.

I will reiterate that 8 of the 12 jurors, apparently, also believed JOK was hit by KR's SUV.

Huh? There's no basis for this statement as fact that the Jurors believed JOK was hit by KR's SUV. Just the opposite!

To be clear, the Jurors were unanimous that the vehicle did NOT collide with JOK, and he did not die as a result of any collision:

Charge three -- leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death.

To convict on this charge, Cannone told the jurors they must find the prosecution proved six elements.

"First, that the defendant operated a motor vehicle. Second, that she operated on a public way or in a place in which the public has a right of access. Third, that the defendant knowingly collided with John O'Keefe. Fourth, that the collision caused injury to John O'Keefe resulting in his death. And fifth, that after causing such injury, the defendant failed to stop and provide a name, home address and registration number of the motor vehicle. And sixth, that the defendant failed to do so for the purpose of avoiding prosecution or apprehension," Cannone explained.

Six Elements to prove Charge Three

 

[thebedbug]

They did not just “look at pictures” which seems to be an oft repeated statement here by folks who believe that John was hit by a car.
The folks who prepared the report are PHD’s in their related fields. They were NOT hired by the defense to spout out opinions that would mimic what the defense wanted them to conclude like so many “professional experts” that testify in courts around the country every day.
These scientists studied photos yes, but they also studied medical reports, autopsy reports, applied the laws of physics, medicine, and kinetics to the KNOWN facts, and concluded decisively that JOK did not die from being struck by a motor vehicle.
Their reports were prepared independently for another agency which was trying to determine how JOK died. Copies of their report were provided to BOTH the prosecution and the defense. Obviously, the CW decided to ignore their conclusion.

I don't think that's true. I thought they explicitly said they just looked at pictures. They didn't reconstruct the scene. They didn't even go to the scene. They never saw the vehicle in person. I know they said they did not consider information re: DNA or vehicle residue.

Sure, they did use their knowledge to reach a conclusion. I don't doubt their expertise in their fields. On a daily basis, I work with experts who are often wrong (for all the right reasons) about things. This is certainly a weakness in the CW's case and I would expect they will need to present a much clearer and confident picture of the incident to secure a conviction in the next trial.

Still... even with Lally's bungling... 8 of 12 jurors believe KR killed JO with her SUV.

 

[Universecalling]

But she said it didn't she-

This is another piece that doesn't fit the defense narrative that you have to ignore.

And when the defense implies he injured his knuckles in a fight with JO, but proves that by showing a picture from a month later??? Every 18 year old boy I know would heal in about 3 days.

The Albert's were very wise to want to distance themselves from this right away- some people will always believe the worst of you no matter what the evidence says and you can never get that reputation back. I can see myself saying something like- don't insert yourself into this, just tell them he didn't come into the house because we have no idea what happened.

<modsnip - off topic>

If we start going tit for tat on “This is another piece that doesn't fit the defense narrative that you have to ignore.” the prosecution side of the notepad would be miles long.

 

[Derph]

Who knows if it's good or bad. I don't. I bet we've all watched enough episodes of 48 Hours and Dateline to have seen cases where the murderer almost got off in the 1st or even 2nd trial, only to be unanimously convicted in the 3rd. Heck, wasn't Danny Masterson like 1 vote from being found not guilty, only to end up serving 75 years now?

What we do know about this jury is that, while they were unanimous in not believing the CW proved intent - thus the 0-12 votes on charges 1 and 3 - 8 of 12 jurors do believe KR killed JO with her SUV.

It was 6-6 for the majority of the time the jurors were debating and it very well could've not changed at all. It wasn't until they were sent back with further instruction that 2 of them changed their mind and flipped their vote for what ever reason. They may have just wanted to get out and be done with it so I'm not really hanging onto any belief that 8 or 12 is ANY kind of victory for the CW. They were deadlocked @ 6-6 and in my opinion that's a HUGE issue for the CW.

 

[thebedbug]

You can keep posting 8 of 12 over and over again, like a football fan whose team just won the national championship. But it's not really the "win" for the prosecution that you seem to think it is.

It's not a "win" it's the reality of the jury's opinion. A verdict requires the jury to be unanimous. The majority of the jury believed KR killed JO with her SUV.

Can this even be disputed - other than to say Yannetti's filings are not accurate?

 

[Universecalling]

"...and understand that JOK was not hit by a vehicle. Physics, kinetics, science, and medicine all prove that JOK was not hit by a vehicle."

"...we do know that he did not die from being struck by a motor vehicle, anyone’s motor vehicle."

Those are not facts, those are opinions. This is not settled science. This was essentially the findings of one team of experts... who looked at pictures.

One can certainly choose to believe those findings and disregard others... but it isn't as you are presenting and it's continually worth noting that 8 of 12 jurors also did not believe those conclusions. 8 of 12 jurors believe KR killed JO with her SUV. Presumably, they weighed the totality of all of the evidence and testimony.

You do realize trooper Paul looked at the same pictures, right?
He wasn’t there where and when it happened.
He had nothing more or less than what fbi gave to their hired experts.
And no, touch DNA and random glass sprinkled all over would not change the math. The experts even testified to that.
Math is math. Unless you believe “it just did” to be a valid formula.

 

[Forest_Wood]

Those were not the best minds.

1/3 of low speed crashes with pedestrians result in severe injuries.

These guys testified for free so that every defense attorney in America would know their company's name. They are laughing all the way to the bank.

I obviously disagree with your assessment of these professionals here. So you're stating they were hired by a federal agency to do their tests without knowing the purpose or any details, then provided a report, went to court and swore an oath merely to get media coverage, but lied????
That seems ridiculous to me.
MOO.