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

[jepop]

But the problem with all of that is the alternative/ defence is the idea that this all happened to frame karen read.

RSBM for focus

No way could they get so much to align...and... who is 'they' anyway??
Hiding behind big man on campus Procter .
That man isn't smart enough to keep lewd jokes off his work phone.

Way too much credit given to this idea.
Im shocked it is the defence and people buy it.

moo

RBBM

But for the jury, the problem you envisage is not their problem. Jmo

If the jury deliberate the way they are supposed to, by considering the evidence and applying that to reason, then I don't think there is actually a problem. Or the problem you are envisaging isn't one the jury needs to struggle with. This is not a problem the jury is required to resolve. Nor should it be. Moo

The evidence simplified:

(1) On the one hand you have evidence that JO did not receive injuries in any way consistent with the cw's contention. On top of that you have injuries that have been reasonably shown to be attributable to the teeth and claws of an animal and that animal is most likely to have been a dog. On top of that, JO's body lacked even the minimal injuroes any reasonable person would expect to see from being hit by a car. There is no significant bruising to speak of.

(2) On the other hand you have tail light pieces at the scene.

The evidence presented under (1) above is not open to manipulation. It is simply sound scientific evidence which the cw was unable to counter. You cannot plant bruises on a dead body. You cannot manipulate animal bite and claw injuries to make them look as if they were caused in some other way.

In contrast, the evidence presnted by the cw at (2) above was open to manipulation during the course of the investigation. The defense's exposure of the shoddy investigation shows that it is not beyond the realm of possibilty that the evidence could have been tampered with, could have been contaminated (in the case of JO's shirt). Moo

But the jury itself does not have to figure out how the tail light pieces discovered in February 2022 ended up on the lawn of 34 Fairview. Neither does the jury have to figure out how it was that JO was killed and ended up at the location he was found. That was the job of the cw and they failed at that task imo.

Another way of putting it is the jury do not have to believe in a 'conspiracy' to come to the reasonable conclusion that KR could not have murdered JO by hitting him with her lexus. moo

It will be up to a future investigation to figure out these things in the event that the jury does it duty and brings back the correct verdict of NG based on the evidence. Moo

 

[fluffypaste]

I'm never sure about anything until the verdict comes back and is read. I'm all too aware that the way I see the case and the way the jury sees the case might be vastly different.

MOO

I agree. This is why I have remained so nervous about the verdict, even after being convinced of Karen's innocence. We won't really know anything until the verdict is actually delivered.

But, I see a lot of reason for optimism. I believe Karen will be acquitted on all charges.

 

[K.T]

I’ve been passively reading all the arguments on X and YouTube, freekarenreaders vs absoluteguilty people! lol

I think the ‘guilty’ people have such visceral dislike of Karen Read’s appearance and demeanour, skinny, harsh features, resting bface, sneering antics - using words she’s been called - means there’s so much antipathy that the fbi report will not sway. Plus LE enthusiasts and contrarians.

If there are a couple of those type of people on the jury, it could be a hung jury? But I’m guessing not guilty by Wed!

 

[mrjitty]

RBBM

But for the jury, the problem you envisage is not their problem. Jmo

If the jury deliberate the way they are supposed to, by considering the evidence and applying that to reason, then I don't think there is actually a problem. Or the problem you are envisaging isn't one the jury needs to struggle with. This is not a problem the jury is required to resolve. Nor should it be. Moo

The evidence simplified:

(1) On the one hand you have evidence that JO did not receive injuries in any way consistent with the cw's contention. On top of that you have injuries that have been reasonably shown to be attributable to the teeth and claws of an animal and that animal is most likely to have been a dog. On top of that, JO's body lacked even the minimal injuroes any reasonable person would expect to see from being hit by a car. There is no significant bruising to speak of.

(2) On the other hand you have tail light pieces at the scene.

The evidence presented under (1) above is not open to manipulation. It is simply sound scientific evidence which the cw was unable to counter. You cannot plant bruises on a dead body. You cannot manipulate animal bite and claw injuries to make them look as if they were caused in some other way.

In contrast, the evidence presnted by the cw at (2) above was open to manipulation during the course of the investigation. The defense's exposure of the shoddy investigation shows that it is not beyond the realm of possibilty that the evidence could have been tampered with, could have been contaminated (in the case of JO's shirt). Moo

But the jury itself does not have to figure out how the tail light pieces discovered in February 2022 ended up on the lawn of 34 Fairview. Neither does the jury have to figure out how it was that JO was killed and ended up at the location he was found. That was the job of the cw and they failed at that task imo.

Another way of putting it is the jury do not have to believe in a 'conspiracy' to come to the reasonable conclusion that KR could not have murdered JO by hitting him with her lexus. moo

It will be up to a future investigation to figure out these things in the event that the jury does it duty and brings back the correct verdict of NG based on the evidence. Moo

BBM

This is why the Judge should dismiss the case IMO. I don't see how the jury can resolve the contradictions because the prosecution case is incomplete.

Especially the defence expert evidence is not countered by the state experts and ME.

 

[jepop]

BBM

This is why the Judge should dismiss the case IMO. I don't see how the jury can resolve the contradictions because the prosecution case is incomplete.

Especially the defence expert evidence is not countered by the state experts and ME.

INAL but if the judge had dismissed the case, could KR have been recharged?

Fact remains judge refused defense's request or motion to direct not guilty verdict. Maybe the judge was remiss and if jury brings in a guilty verdict surely that will be a prime grounds on appeal.

My question is, I guess. is it really the jury's job to resolve the contradiction's between sides in this particular scenario? They can simply leave the tail light evidence unexplained because in fact the cw failed to reasonably explain it, and find KR not guilty based on the unchallenged expert evidence brought by the defense. But I see your point. If the jury come back with guilty then it would seem that is an impossible verdict based on the lack of evidence brought by cw. So I agree that this case should never have been allowed to go to trial and the judge has probably erred badly. moo

 

[K.T]

If a case is dismissed with prejudice the case cannot be retried. If a case is dismissed without prejudice the case may be reopened.

What Does Dismissed with Prejudice Mean?

What Does it Mean to Have a Criminal Case Dismissed with Prejudice? These Massachusetts criminal defense attorneys have answers.

www.paultolandlaw.com

 

[ch_13]

This is a case that should have never come to trial once the Feds released the Touhy information. Especially the Proctor texts, learning that Higgins destroyed his phone and the report of the accident reconstructionist should have all made the DAs office realize that this case did not have legs. They should have dismissed the charges and insisted that the investigation be re-opened.

Instead, they plowed ahead [no pun intended] and the DA even had the gall to claim in front of the judge that the released documents were in agreement with the prosecution's case. Frankly the Norfolk County DA's office looks like a joke and I hope that there are some serious repercussions for their conduct.

 

[Wishbone]

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.

Yes, all the tail light pieces that didn't fit into the assembled tail light the lab tech put together.Tail light pieces galore that didn't match up with the Lexus tail light.

 

[Moonsie]

Of course, the jurors would also want to put a quick end to KR's misery.

And their own!

moo.

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

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

Yes kittyhare, I agree too. And IIRC that testimony was elicited early in the day from the forensic pathologist, Dr. Frank Sheridan. I also found all of his testimony and opinions to be quite convincing. He was the soft spoken gentleman on the stand before the two experts hired to review the investigation.

I do not have Twitter / x access and can’t read all of that entry. IMO it is unfortunate that the scribe posting isn’t clarifying who is making those remarks. MOO

 

[arielilane]

KAREN READ's Body Language Reveals Cracks!​

Karen Read interview analyzed by top body language and behavioral analysts as they meticulously decode her gestures, expressions, and demeanor following accusations of killing her boyfriend, John O'Keefe. Gain profound insights into the case through their professional analysis.

 

[arielilane]

@pennylikeacoin

Sharing a photo of John O’Keefe because, regardless of what the jury decides in the #KarenRead trial, an innocent man lost his life.


4:24 PM · Jun 24, 2024

 

[HarmonyE.]

Proven innocent. That's what the verdict should be. "Not Guilty" isn't enough, the verdict should be "proven innocent of all charges."

While I don't disagree, "Proven innocent" isn't an option in the US system. It's Guilty or Not Guilty.

 

[Knitty]

This thread is closed. Please continue at Thread #13