MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #11

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
@BienickWCVB

Scordi-Bello says O'Keefe's arm injuries could have been caused by "road rash" but agrees with Little that this is not normally how they appear.

View attachment 512073
How can she call these "superficial abrasions"?? That's what I would call a skinned knee. These are lacerations, cuts, puncture wounds, definitely go below the surface of the skin, not superficial. I can see INTO his arm underneath his skin. They are cuts and tears caused by something hard and sharp that punched through his skin and dragged with force. His skin is cut or lacerated, not scratched or abraded, imo, and from what I can SEE in the picture!
 
@JHall7news

Greene says he is aware of their conclusions. From Greene disagrees with those experts including Ian Whiffin. Greene says he has no certifications as an expert on cellebrite.

Whiffin had testified Cellebrite is looking at omitting time stamps in its reports because they are misleading. He said the alleged 2:27am google search actually happened after 6 am on 1-29-22 in an open tab.The report showed the search happened when the original tab was opened.
 
And again I'll point out that we don't know what part of the shirt the DNA testing swabs were taken from! They didn't send ANY part of the shirt off to the lab to test for DNA. All they got were 2 swab sticks! No pieces of fabric were sent. No swatches of material from the shirt were sent. NOTHING but the swabs. We don't know what part of the shirt was tested therefore we can not rely on the swabs. JO or even an EMT could have ate a pork rind for all we know and wiped his hand on the underside of his shirt days before the shirt was swabbed! The pig DNA was introduced to show how bad the chain of custody was.
Agree and ultimately the bottom line is that the wounds were not swabbed for dog dna or for that matter anything else. The wounds were not investigated medically in any way at all. They were totally ignored. Just because dog dna was not detected on the selective swabs taken from the shirt does not mean those wounds were not caused by a dog. It was negligent of LE not to direct a medical investigation of those wounds. This was a symptom of the wider unprofessional investigation fueled by Proctor's tunnel vision. Jmo
 
What are you talking about? The defense didn't intoduce dog DNA. That was a prosecution witness. Have you been watching this trial?
To be fair, I can see how one might be confused into thinking the previous prosecution witnesses were actually defense witnesses because they were just SO BAD for the prosecution.
 
not a great witness for the defense. this guy seems like someone that is good at tech support and using tools - but really doesn't know much about how things work behind the scenes.

this guy's further testing doesn't exactly sound like expert analysis.
 
So I guess Green is trying to say he has different results due to the specific IOS system on Jen McCabe's phone?

Having a hard time following this.
he doesn't know. he's just saying he saw other examples on this phone (this version of IOS - this model of phone - this browser version) that seemed to show the same behavior. he couldn't tell you WHY he sees the corresponding behavior.
 
To be fair, I can see how one might be confused into thinking the previous prosecution witnesses were actually defense witnesses because they were just SO BAD for the prosecution.

I mean, this was brought up by a CW witness like 2 weeks ago. Unsure how the "defense entered PIG DNA" <modsnip> JMO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
151
Guests online
3,173
Total visitors
3,324

Forum statistics

Threads
599,912
Messages
18,101,474
Members
230,955
Latest member
ClueCrusader
Back
Top