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

[Curiousobserver]

Good post, I just have one question. What is specifically wrong with the touch DNA argument? It was my understanding that CW witness testified to it being touch DNA. What do you mean nobody touches their girlfriend's taillight? I was bringing groceries in out of my trunk, both my girlfriend and I touched the taillights. We went to a baseball game and were leaning on the back bumper and tailgating, the taillights again were touched. Where does the certainty that it's not touch DNA come from?

It's just my opinion. I doubt you would find my DNA on my tail light. Even less so my DNA on my wife's tail light. I would never say touch DNA on a tail light is impossible, you gave a few examples. The witness testified it could be touch DNA which is a responsible scientific answer

But throw that out- and assume none of his DNA was on the light and I could still support a guilty verdict. In fact throw out many of the things above and an incident with her car is still more reasonable than a fight and a dog bite then a coverup of a murder than didn't even need to be a murder. A stupid drunk fight would be an easy thing for a house full of police officers to explain and would have resulted in no consequences to anyone. He didn't drop dead, he would have been breathing and looked very much alive. The most likely thing is someone would have called an ambulance, not jump right to a coordinated coverup with 10 second phone calls and Google searches how long to die in cold.

To be honest though I don't want her to go to prison. I have a lot of sympathy for Karen Read. She's had a tough time. I don't think she intended to harm John and I think the sequence of events that resulted in his death were not really foreseeable by her or him. This was an accident. Should she be charged with a lesser offense- absolutely.

 

[turaj]

Very interesting point!

I find their leaving early today to be a signal that it is tough in that room and they are not close to a verdict. Most people if close would want to stay and try to finish this up today. I find this concerning and from the look on AJ's face so does he. His demeanor has really changed. Clearly there is disagreement amongst the jurors. I can't believe we start this again tomorrow. At this point I am expecting a note from the jurors.

 

[JenaTaoson]

There have been very few trials that I've watched where I thought going in that the person was guilty only to think otherwise once the trial concluded, Zach Adams vs. The State of Tennessee, for instance. But like that case this one wasn't proven by the prosecution. Just because I want to believe someone is guilty doesn't mean they are guilty. Like that case, I can't say who killed the victim because the LE in both cases already had their own ideas which hurts the justice process. I want the truth and I can except it if everything is done the way it should be done. It hasn't been done here.

 

[turaj]

I agree with everything you said. My hope is that they are just being diligent in going over all of the testimony which could take a while. So thanks again to Lally for putting on a protracted, drawn out case filled with meaningless minutia

Just my opinion if they were on same page they would have gotten thru the high points of the case by now...sorted out each witness and their impressions etc.

 

[turaj]

This is taking me back to a few other cases where I got invested in watching for a long time and the result was not justice in my eyes. Casey Anthony comes to mind.

 

[whitelilac]

Do we know the composition of the jury? Professions?

 

[less0305]

In the interest of science...

-She was there- she is not disputing this
-She was several fold over the legal limit- she is not disputing this
-She was driving her car- she is not disputing this
-Prosecution showed that her car made a highly unsafe backup maneuver recorded by the EDS system that she should know is unsafe; this is the intent (I don't buy the keystroke argument about the count, I trust the mileage argument)
-Her tail light is at the scene (disputed, but testified they were under the snow not on top of it which is difficult to fake without detection by bystanders)
-His DNA is on the tail light (I don't buy the touch DNA argument, nobody touches their girlfriend's tail light, and I don't buy the transfer from the blood in the cups argument. If someone planted this there would be micrograms of his DNA, not nanograms of his DNA). The fact that there is very little DNA is more incriminating, not less.
-Pieces of the tail light are on his clothes
-His phone GPS suggests he was in the exact same spot all night
-Karen Read even thinks hitting him was a reasonable explanation and shouted it in front of multiple witnesses.
-The FBI provided 3000 pages from their investigation to the defense, including Grand Jury Testimony and the only thing they found that they could use that might be exculpatory were some guys firing a glass at the tail light with a pneumatic cannon.
-After seeing what the FBI found the Judge allowed the trial to move forward, subjecting Karen to the possibility of conviction and prison.
-No dog DNA on the swabs from his clothes (you would expect some if he laid on the floor in their house or was attacked by the dog even if they didn't swab the exact spot where she bit)
-Chloe is only in Vermont and is apparently alive and well (it would have been easy for the defense to get a bite impressions but they didn't; it would have been foolish for the prosecution to do it because they would be handing the defense credibility and an easy way to confuse the Jury on cross examination, allowing upteen experts to come in and refute them)
-If they wanted to hide chloe they would have had her put down and cremated

THANK YOU for saying so eloquently what I wanted to say and obviously I can't express myself as well as you did!!

 

[jepop]

i think jury just like short days and some are smokers. They will return ng tomorrow wait and see

 

[turaj]

This jury has really gotten used to Judge C's working hours/short days.

My prediction has changed from NG to hung jury.

IMO MOO

I think they were not even close and lots of sparks flying in there. I am on the verge of thinking hung myself. I would think there would be a big incentive to stay and get it done if they thought they could.

 

[JenaTaoson]

Do we know the composition of the jury? Professions?

The only thing I know is 6 men, 6 women. 2 female alternates.

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

It's just my opinion. I doubt you would find my DNA on my tail light. Even less so my DNA on my wife's tail light. I would never say touch DNA on a tail light is impossible, you gave a few examples. The witness testified it could be touch DNA which is a responsible scientific answer

But throw that out- and assume none of his DNA was on the light and I could still support a guilty verdict. In fact throw out many of the things above and an incident with her car is still more reasonable than a fight and a dog bite then a coverup of a murder than didn't even need to be a murder. A stupid drunk fight would be an easy thing for a house full of police officers to explain and would have resulted in no consequences to anyone. He didn't drop dead, he would have been breathing and looked very much alive. The most likely thing is someone would have called an ambulance, not jump right to a coordinated coverup with 10 second phone calls and Google searches how long to die in cold.

To be honest though I don't want her to go to prison. I have a lot of sympathy for Karen Read. She's had a tough time. I don't think she intended to harm John and I think the sequence of events that resulted in his death were not really foreseeable by her or him. This was an accident. Should she be charged with a lesser offense- absolutely.

We can just agree to disagree then. They charged her with murder and I don’t believe they have proven that beyond a reasonable doubt. I see a tainted investigation and it unfortunately makes me discount “evidence” because it was gathered through a tainted investigation. Bukhenik is up there testifying his name and signature is on an evidence bag but it’s not his signature or handwriting. There was no evidence log for months. That’s why when the jury asks to see a SERT report of evidence collected on 01/29 there isn’t one. I’m supposed to take their word for it but Proctor has lied and another CW witness testifying about KR cell phone extraction (Trooper Nicholas Guarino) “missed” a bunch of texts he was supposed to extract in the Sandra Birchmore case from his cop buddies’ phone. It’s a shame they didn’t put as much into a fellow officer’s death investigation as they put into helping hide their brothers in blue’s misdeeds. JMO

 

[turaj]

I just don't believe there is anything that has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt other than she was drunk.

 

[lilyk]

but that only matters if you believe JO walked into the house instantly walked down the stairs, was bashed in the head and attacked by a dog, then dumped on the lawn within minutes.

i gather you didn't think much of the snow plow driver's testimony?

I was merely commenting I don't believe an Apple Watch that uses an accelerometer, gyroscope and altimeter to count steps will accurately count a hill (while in a moving vehicle) as not only steps but actual stair climbing. Your wrist isn't moving while passively riding in a car in any way that would trigger an Apple Watch step count.

But since you asked I think he was in the house, was pushed or otherwise knocked down (by a person or a surprised dog) in the house and was rendered near dead with a blow to the back of head, from an human propelled object or he accidentally fell back into a hard object. It's also pretty easy to have your foot come out of a cheaply made, terribly unsupportive and hyper flexible Nike shoe that doesn't have adequate lacing when you're just walking backwards and catch the flared heel of the shoe on something, let alone if you drunkingly step on yourself while stepping back, or if someone steps on the back of your shoe while you're moving any direction. It's very easy to slip those shoes on and off even when tied. I also wonder why the one shoe looked impeccably clean vs the other which looked like it had at least walked through dirty snow and grass or even had been sitting on sloggy wet ground or a puddle for some time. I think someone washed the other shoe and then tossed it into the yard scene, with him.

And I found the plow driver genuine and credible. IMO

 

[LaineyJ]

Do we know the composition of the jury? Professions?

I was just going to ask this - don’t we usually know more about the jurors such as jobs, approx age etc ?

 

[shotgun09]

I just don't believe there is anything that has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt other than she was drunk.

It was snowing. There was high top tables at The Waterfall. And Kerry and Jen take their shoes off....KR doesn't.

 

[turaj]

Any speculation why they needed a sidebar at the end of today? Did the jury send a note or something? Yanetti came back and seemed to be discussing it with KR as AJ looked despondent.

 

[turaj]

I was just going to ask this - don’t we usually know more about the jurors such as jobs, approx age etc ?

I assume jury selection was not on camera or audio?

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

It was snowing. There was high top tables at The Waterfall. And Kerry and Jen take their shoes off....KR doesn't.

RBBM -- BAM! That's how we know she's a murderer.

 

[nodamselindistress]

Just a reminder because people keep saying it was an Apple Watch and IT WAS NOT - it was the Heath App on his Iphone.

 

[LaineyJ]

I assume jury selection was not on camera or audio?

Usually the reporters are live tweeting though. Not sure if they did that as I didn’t tune in much until day 1 of actual court/testimony