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 #14

[bobbymkii]

At this point I imagine that there are many people who could watch Karen Read eat a bowl of Rice Krispies and come away with several observations that demonstrate that she’s some sort of psycho

 

[themonk]

Clearly, anything could happen with the verdict especially if the jury is composed in part, or wholly, of people who 'don't trust experts' or view unbiased testimony as 'noise', or consider the demeanor or appearance of the defendant as somehow pertinent, etc.

 

[KSwizzle]

I don't know if I truly believe a cover up, there is a lot of evidence pointing in that direction. I do believe all these officers involved are corrupt, and the investigation was egregiously bad, to the point of criminal negligence bad. I also do not think she hit him with her car, at all, period. So what happened? who knows, the investigation was so bad, so terrible we cannot say how he died.

Just to speculate, and anything could have happened for all we know, included Karen getting out of her car and having a boxing match with JoK resulting in his death, a circus car full of clowns could have shown up, there's just no way to prove beyond a reasonable doubt what happened

 

[Moonstrawbs]

You do remember her messages to Higgins, I don’t really think she’s into kids….just saying.

She sure helped JO out a lot considering then!

 

[Spectrix]

Also said it couldn’t have happened bumping into John’s car, so that leaves the question how?

To be clear, the scenario they were commenting on involved a completely destroyed tail light, not a slightly damaged one.
IMO if that little bump was enough to shift a 7000 pound vehicle, it was enough to slightly damage a tail light.

 

[weepingangel]

okay so I do know someone who was at a dog park and a German Shepard attacked another dog..in the scuffle the other dog owner reached in to try to dully punch the dog to get his mouth off her dog..well she ended up hitting the owner of the German Shepard in the nose and broke her nose because she also was moving towards the dog at the same time.

is it possible someone took a bat to try and get the dog off of John and inadvertently hit him in the head?

just thoughts. The scrapes and scratches could be caused by a human..did they ever check his body for DNA? Dog DNA?

mOO

I was just going to post the same idea! Dog was attacking JO and someone swung something (a bat, weight bar,shovel) to hit the dog but hit JO by mistake.

 

[MyJoey]

She sure helped JO out a lot considering then!

Agree but I think she was being truthful that kids are not really her thing.

 

[ObsessedNightOwl]

I'd be the holdout. I believe she hit him with her vehicle, and that scenario rings truer to me than the whole went in the house, gets beat up, and dog attack, and thrown out in the cold to die by other law enforcement officers, and there be some grand cover-up scheme - and for what?? Too many people for somebody not to have come clean.

.......she was drunk off her *advertiser censored*, they were fighting,......Hell, SHE even thought she hit him.

Good points IMHO.
If the evidence of vehicle moving at 24 MPH in reverse can be
believed (and that is a big "IF") then she may have hit him intentionally.

Granted, the Albert / McCabe clan and friends seem like a bunch of
alcoholic low-lifes, they do not seem to be bright enough to pull off
some type of conspiracy and then keep everyone keeps silent about it.

KR being so drunk at the time makes your points believable.
I think she was totally freaking out from the 12:30 AM time w/ JOK
in front of 34 Fairview, and freaking out during those early morning hours,
and then still freaking out at 6:00 AM in front of Fairview.
Again.....MOO

 

[jepop]

I'm sure she's having the time of her life. You know. No job. No money. Fighting for her life. Having her entire personal business played out for the world, including her very personal and private health issues. Good times! I kid, but I hope that she takes whatever comes from this and uses it for good. Like she did with the boy. That was awesome!

I thought so too and whatever was on the poster that was so awful (which I missed and cannot be seen in the video) KR removed it from the boy's hands when he approached her for a photo.

 

[arielilane]

lol.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1806401476043870355

Curious if they are actually reliving their dream of being a cheerleader/making the cheerleading squad??? idk.
Do they really know why they are there? Just a manic day on the streets...
moo

 

[keek]

I was just going to post the same idea! Dog was attacking JO and someone swung something (a bat, weight bar,shovel) to hit the dog but hit JO by mistake.

John was a tall man. The dog wouid of obeyed his owners command I’d say. Deep wound on upper back of the head and I feel safe to say no one was going to bash the dog to pretty much kill or harm her greatly. She was BA dog for about 7 years

 

[RANCH]

The area is missing. What I’m saying is what was described when Kerry and the tow driver seen the car. It looked the same when it was shown to Kerry.

I understand your point.

If I look at a damaged tail light and part of the lens is missing how could I tell how many pieces it was broken into?

You can't tell from looking at the damaged lens, you have to find the missing pieces and count them. JMO.

 

[fluffypaste]

Clearly, anything could happen with the verdict especially if the jury is composed in part, or wholly, of people who 'don't trust experts' or view unbiased testimony as 'noise', or consider the demeanor or appearance of the defendant as somehow pertinent, etc.

I consider the demeanor the defendant to be quite pertinent with regards to how she reacted to John's body being discovered. Based on what can be heard in the 911 call and based on the testimony of the various eyewitnesses, I don't see any possibility that she could have been faking or exaggerating her reaction; she was in a state of extreme emotional disturbance.

Because of this, I don't think that she could have had prior knowledge of the body being there.

 

[arielilane]

@KristinaRex

Many people asking how long the jury is staying to deliberate today - we don't know. They didn't formally ask to be out early (like they did yesterday), so technically they're able to deliberate until 4:30/5. Lawyers asked to be back to the courthouse at 3:30 regardless.


3:18 PM · Jun 27, 2024

 

[Leilei]

You do remember her messages to Higgins, I don’t really think she’s into kids….just saying.

Wasn't one of JOK's issues with her that she spoiled his niece and nephew? Not the behavior of someone who is anti-kid.
IMO.

 

[themonk]

I consider the demeanor the defendant to be quite pertinent with regards to how she reacted to John's body being discovered. Based on what can be heard in the 911 call and based on the testimony of the various eyewitnesses, I don't see any possibility that she could have been faking or exaggerating her reaction; she was in a state of extreme emotional disturbance.

Because of this, I don't think there is any possibility that she could have had prior knowledge of the body being there.

ah I should have specified as she sits in the courtroom

she has resting b face she did it!!!11!!!!!! etc

 

[Maat99]

At this point I imagine that there are many people who could watch Karen Read eat a bowl of Rice Krispies and come away with several observations that demonstrate that she’s some sort of psycho

She looked so angry as she was chewing. That’s not normal. And did you see her smirk when she took that third bite? She was definitely up to something.

 

[less0305]

the only disagreement i'd have with this is that i think her subsequent actions indicate she probably did know she'd hit him. perhaps, she didn't know how severely - but i think she knew and it started to dawn on her as the early hours of the morning ticked by.

Yes, that could be.

 

[TTF14]

At this point I imagine that there are many people who could watch Karen Read eat a bowl of Rice Krispies and come away with several observations that demonstrate that she’s some sort of psycho

Well, it can be argued that anyone who would eat a bowl of Rice Krispies instead of turning them into Rice Krispy treats IS a psycho.

IMO MOO JKIALRK

 

[OldCop]

I'd be the holdout. I believe she hit him with her vehicle, and that scenario rings truer to me than the whole went in the house, gets beat up, and dog attack, and thrown out in the cold to die by other law enforcement officers, and there be some grand cover-up scheme - and for what?? Too many people for somebody not to have come clean. If it were reversed and the prosecution were presenting that kind of case, then I'd have reasonable doubt. But I still feel strongly, and without reasonable doubt, that she was drunk off her *advertiser censored*, they were fighting, she was not intending to hit him or kill him, but accidentally hit him and didn't know it. And for that she's guilty of a lesser charge. Hell, SHE even thought she hit him.

I really like to try and understand people’s thought processes and how different people listening to the same witnesses reach different conclusions. This is why thousands of dollars are spent on studying potential jurors. It could be upbringing, background, life experiences and a slew of other factors that work together to influence how a juror forms an opinion on a case.
Can I pick your mind?
You said you would be the holdout because you believe KR hit JOK with her vehicle and killed him. You also say the other possibilities do not ring true. Interestingly, you said that if the prosecution presented the alternative, it would give you reasonable doubt.
Does this mean you would always believe a prosecutor over a defense attorney?
Besides thinking the alternative defense did not ring true, what evidence leads you to conclude KR is guilty?
If neither the vehicle nor JOK’s body showed any signs that he was killed in this manner, what prompts you to disregard that evidence?
Do you disregard an eminently qualified witness because he testified for the defense instead of the prosecution?
Please do not think I am trying to pounce on your opinion. I am genuinely interested in your thought process.