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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
HarmonyE. said:
So says David Yannetti. We really don't know who or what the FBI is/was investigating. Morrissey sure was interested to know though. That's a fact.
Click to expand...
IMO, a DOJ reminder that Morrissey and the truth are not close friends...

Derph said:
Karen Read updated her Facebook profile picture with a copy of this letter. Why today? Is something brewing and coming up soon? Hmmm..

View attachment 526066
Click to expand...
 
Seattle1 said:
From the quoted MSM --

Hard to say which party had the responsibility to poll the jurors before the mistrial declared and to first record those charges acquitted (unanimous not guilty vote), and declare a mistrial on only the remaining count. IMO, this MA procedure is at the Judge's discretion but why would Cannone want to take accountability today....

“The Court finds it hard to believe that when counsel heard that the jury was at an impasse for a third time and a mistrial was inevitable, at perhaps the most crucial point in the trial, counsel would sit silently if they did not consent to a mistrial,” she wrote.
Click to expand...
The judge should be responsible for asking about each charge. The precedent the Prosecutor relied on, was a case with one charge. Will see how the appeals court rules. Experienced judges are experienced at doing things the wrong way. And dumb judges hate smart Attorneys. MOO
 
Seattle1 said:
From the quoted MSM --

Hard to say which party had the responsibility to poll the jurors before the mistrial declared and to first record those charges acquitted (unanimous not guilty vote), and declare a mistrial on only the remaining count. IMO, this MA procedure is at the Judge's discretion but why would Cannone want to take accountability today....

“The Court finds it hard to believe that when counsel heard that the jury was at an impasse for a third time and a mistrial was inevitable, at perhaps the most crucial point in the trial, counsel would sit silently if they did not consent to a mistrial,” she wrote.
Click to expand...

I find it harder to believe the judge did not!
 
There's a very interesting interview with a juror that is making the rounds that came out today. Any google search should bring you to it. After reading it I think the CW is in a lot of trouble. The jury seemed to line up with the general way we felt here about certain witnesses and the judge. They also felt intimidated by having Brian and Collin Albert as well as Jen McCabe in the courtroom on that final day.
 
bobbymkii said:
How on earth did this judge fail to get the jury to record verdicts that they had reached unanimously? That's like, the most important role/responsibility a judge has. Isn't it?
Click to expand...

Never mind Rule 27 calls for the consent of the Judge to record the unanimous verdicts on multiple count indictment, based on the the Judge denying the defense motion, seems this Judge is blaming it on the defense! I guess the defense was supposed to request the Judge do her job....


Seattle1 said:
MA Statute (Rule 27 - Verdict) provides doing so requires the consent of the Judge who clearly did not tell the panel she wanted to learn if/when they reached a unanimous verdict on any of the multiple counts filed against KR, and would record these verdicts. IMO, when the Statute puts the discretion on the Court, this does not fall on the attorneys but squarely on the Judge. It certainly didn't fall on the jurors!

For example, pursuant to Rule 27, when there are two or more offenses (or defendants tried together), the jury may, with consent of the judge at any time during its deliberations or be required by the judge to return a verdict or verdicts where a verdict has been reached; and thereafter the jury may in the discretion of the judge resume deliberations.

It doesn't follow that the CW and the Court both want to punish the defendant when they failed to guide and/or inform the panel of the very remedy available-- at the discretion of the Judge.
Click to expand...
 
Derph said:
There's a very interesting interview with a juror that is making the rounds that came out today. Any google search should bring you to it. After reading it I think the CW is in a lot of trouble. The jury seemed to line up with the general way we felt here about certain witnesses and the judge. They also felt intimidated by having Brian and Collin Albert as well as Jen McCabe in the courtroom on that final day.
Click to expand...
imo moo

On a cold read of the article ( has an annoying advertisement layout)
the juror did not say they felt intimidated. The writer of the article, surmised that, from answers to his questions. The juror stated, and used words like, " inappropriate, and polite gesture," about the cops.

The writer editorialized and drew conclusions from the juror, which I didn't. Thus, clickety-clack gossip gains ground.

To get to the truth takes time and accuracy.

jmo
 
TIGER0822 said:
The judge should be responsible for asking about each charge. The precedent the Prosecutor relied on, was a case with one charge. Will see how the appeals court rules. Experienced judges are experienced at doing things the wrong way. And dumb judges hate smart Attorneys. MOO
Click to expand...
And judges who lash out when the defense requests that the jury form be edited for clarity have no business being on the bench, imoo. She's completely recalcitrant, and a disaster behind the bench. AMOO
 
bobbymkii said:
How on earth did this judge fail to get the jury to record verdicts that they had reached unanimously? That's like, the most important role/responsibility a judge has. Isn't it?
Click to expand...
Because the form, that she created, was screwed up, along with her instructions. The defense requested that she correct the form. She refused and totally went off on them.
 
GoBuckeyes said:
And judges who lash out when the defense requests that the jury form be edited for clarity have no business being on the bench, imoo. She's completely recalcitrant, and a disaster behind the bench. AMOO
Click to expand...
It will ne interesting to see how the appeals court rule. Worst case they send it back to the judge! Best case dismiss the charges. In this case I suspect there may be an element of ‘it’s better to know the judge than to know the law’! Hope I am wrong. Moo
 
TIGER0822 said:
It will ne interesting to see how the appeals court rule. Worst case they send it back to the judge! Best case dismiss the charges. In this case I suspect there may be an element of ‘it’s better to know the judge than to know the law’! Hope I am wrong. Moo
Click to expand...

Most of the YouTube lawyers seem to think the appeals court won't overturn the judge's decision because there is no precedent or caselaw in Massachusetts to support overturning it. But several think the court will establish new rules for judges in such situations on a go forward basis. This judge was so unbelievably sloppy all around here.
 
Forest_Wood said:
I watched a review of the case. Who do you think Pam mimics in relation to this case?
Click to expand...

I think the case itself mimics this case. The lead investigator didn’t investigate properly, the DA rushed to judgement and made what little evidence there was fit her theory, the judge was bias and didn’t like the out of town “expensive” defense attorney, at first the husband was found guilty; an appellate court overturned his conviction and said it should have never made it to trial. A “very helpful” witness (Pam) was their star in the first trial and impeached herself claiming she “didn’t remember” lots of things - which is why her testimony kept changing. The DA was eventually investigated for botching the case. I hope some of what happened in that case comes to pass in this case.

I am sure many, many people didn’t believe that LE and the DA laser focused on the wrong person and botched the investigation. In fact, everyone kept saying how “nice” Pam is and how helpful - she inserted herself into the investigation at every turn
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 101 more.
Total: 339 (members: 102, guests: 237)

Online statistics

Members online
102
Guests online
237
Total visitors
339
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,475
Messages
18,239,928
Members
234,385
Latest member
johnwich
Back
Top