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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
fluffypaste said:
I don't know what to think. I consider the medical testimony and the engineering testimony to be so overwhelmingly exculpatory that I can't imagine how any jury could find her guilty of anything. But for deliberations to continue this long, there must be individuals on the jury who are pushing for a guilty verdict. It's certainly disconcerting.

There is still hope; it's not over until a verdict is actually delivered, but I'm definitely not so confident anymore.
Click to expand...
Nothing will hold on appeal anyway. This could be appealed successfully 20 ways to Sunday. moo
 
RANCH said:
So at a later time she tried to reconstruct a timeline by using phone data?

That could allow for some time discrepancy in my opinion. Like was it before or after this text type of thing.

JMO.
Click to expand...
Her husband also testified to looking out the window with her, and as far as I recall, there wasn't any discrepancy in their times.
 
JenaTaoson said:
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.
Click to expand...
A wise person is one who, upon sufficient evidence to the contrary, is willing to change one's mind. moo
 
geevee said:
Her husband also testified to looking out the window with her, and as far as I recall, there wasn't any discrepancy in their times.
Click to expand...
Their testimony was extremely precise. And impossible given the time KR’s phone connected to WiFi at home. If this isn’t perjury, I don’t know what is.
 
RANCH said:
So at a later time she tried to reconstruct a timeline by using phone data?

That could allow for some time discrepancy in my opinion. Like was it before or after this text type of thing.

JMO.
Click to expand...
More like she tried to make her texts make sense in a way that didn’t look suspicious IMO. So she said things along the lines of “I looked out the window and saw Karen’s SUV and texted John this”. Etc. The texts have obvious time stamps. So if her story is true, the SUV has to be sitting there outside the window during the time frame of the texts.

Except… it wasn’t.
 
Warwick7 said:
My favorite part: Getting Jen McCabe to admit she butt dialed and butt hung up (just in time to avoid voicemail) 14 times in a row. Lol!!!

The worst part for her is she says she was texting in between those times LOL!!!!
Click to expand...
How can anyone listen to this and believe it?

And while it might not actually mean she’s guilty of conspiring or framing or whatever nefarious action, it CERTAINLY means she’s not credible. At all. In any way.
 
Elliot_Alderson said:
Is it? Is a watch or phone more accurate? Are they both inaccurate in the same exact way for the same exact reasons? I have no Earthly idea but could you offer some insight? TIA
Click to expand...
I am not a tech expert by any means, far from it, but my general understanding is they have comparable systems - gyrometer, altimeter, and accelerometer that work together to identify movements, including steps. An iPhone carried in a hip pocket is more accurate acting as a pedometer than a watch is only because your hand movements won't be measured if you are say pushing a grocery cart (why a lot of women it seems hold on to their carts with only one hand, because they want their step credits), or walking with your hand steady in a pocket and not swinging your arm to trigger the accelerometer. And similarly extra steps may be credited if you are an animated talker and flail your arms around a lot, or do some other activity where large arm motions may be counted erroneously towards steps: kneading bread or standing and playing ping pong for example. With ping pong you may not be walking much but a watch will count more "steps" than the phone that is in a hip pocket doing the same activity because you're swinging at a ping pong ball regularly but not necessarily taking a lot of full steps. Then add GPS location tracking to the other tools and that's how they both know you're moving at 30 or 65 MPH in a car and not out on a casual 2.0 mph walk, or 6.0 mph run.

Another thing apple health does is estimates step length as you go about your day, which normally is about 0.4 of someone's height but can vary especially with short or long legged folks. But it's typically consistent as it's averaged dozens of times a day when walking on level ground outside. So theres a record of what JO's average step length has been, somewhere in his health data. Was anything said about the nearly doubled step length of his phone at one point"? 1.992 feet per step for 170 steps at 12:21 vs 3.598 feet per step for 80 steps at 12:24? These are actual steps counted, based on triggering an accelerometer in his phone 170 or 80 times, not flying in the air or riding in a car once. That doesn't seem like the same person casually walking with his phone at 12:24 as it was at 12:21 IMO.

The 3.598 feet per step would be about 1,467.5 steps per mile, which is less than a 10 minute mile running pace for a 6'2" male per the American College of Sports Medicine. Seems someone was sprinting.
IMG_0474.jpeg



Related to this particular situation where we are questioning the cell phone location, there's also the concept of Bayesian probability - a measure of believability or confidence that an individual may possess about the occurrence of a particular event. That's how and why that "blue circle" changes sizes when you locate yourself on a mapping app. The smaller the circle or blue dot, the stronger the signal and confidence (probability) the phone is in that circle or spot. But confidence level changes as information is continually gathered, and with cellphone signal and wifi strength especially. When the blue circle is large it's giving an estimate that it's in that area based on signal strength but other info as well. Such as if you're moving 40 MPH, the dot is likely going to be placed on the road moving along due to probability, and not in the forest you're driving next to. If you're sitting in your home as I am, the circle should be small because I have good cell signals and wifi and spend a lot of time at home, it knows this. And sometimes it pinpoints me in the correct corner of the house. And sometimes (usually) the circle is big enough it looks like I could be in my neighbors house, as it currently thinks I could be. But I am not, nor have I ever. It's always adjusting and guessing, and it's never 100% accurate. Who hasn't panicked when they think their kids car is in a ditch because the gps puts them there and it hasn't moved in ten minutes and then you go check on your kid only to find they are not in said ditch and did in fact make it to practice a half mile away from the ditch and the gps didn't update just because the signal was weak and you feel stupid because your kid was just ignoring your texts again? Just me? Probably.

Anyhoo, I'm off the rails now from the original question and I have not watched or read everything but I also found it unbelievable the defense didn't discuss how these locating probability laws work to potentially place his phone in the house, not the yard. Unless I missed that. So when it was argued the blue circle didn't put him in the house, I disagree, because the blue circle did in fact overlap part of the house. I can't find that photo for some reason if anyone has it. Assuming geolocating is turned on, a cell phone is always taking in information and making a best GUESS to pinpoint its location, based on prior experiences and signal strength. Geolocating is just probabilities, and they will change when new evidence is brought to light. Sit and watch your location on a map for bit and you'll see the circle get bigger and smaller as it gathers info and you're not even moving. My guess is the one blue circle picture they used (or at least I saw) was the one that was most favorable to him not entering the house, and yet it still overlapped part of the house. And if the phone was in the basement, well we all can probably accept that the signal strength isn't going to be as great in a basement as it would be in a front yard without walls interfering. I'd expect that circle to be a lot smaller if the phone was in fact never in the house as it would likely have a stronger cell signal and I doubt a cop has free open auto connect wifi for JO's phone to use be more accurate to pinpoint the phone location.

Sorry for the ramble, no idea if these things were covered here previously, I can't keep up. Hope this makes sense, I'm a wee tired.

MOO IMO some professional, some not.
 
Warwick7 said:
Yes, it was.

Why were their extra tail light pieces that didn't belong to KR's tail light after it was completely assembled?

Why were the tail light shards never tested for dna, blood, bodily material?

Why was there no blood or skin on any of the tail light shards?

Why was there no blood or skin on the tail light housing or area on rear hatch where Trooper Paul claimed JO's right arm made contact with KR's lexus?

Why?
Because tail light evidence was planted.
Click to expand...
Yes!! All of this!!

If we are to believe that the tail light is what gouged his arm up, there should be a heck of a lot more than touch DNA on the tail light pieces.

Never mind the pieces that were “found” but didn’t fit.
 
nightowl1975 said:
How can anyone listen to this and believe it?

And while it might not actually mean she’s guilty of conspiring or framing or whatever nefarious action, it CERTAINLY means she’s not credible. At all. In any way.
Click to expand...

And her sister has been charged with assaulting Turtle boy . It runs in the family. Horrible people.
 
lilyk said:
I am not a tech expert by any means, far from it, but my general understanding is they have comparable systems - gyrometer, altimeter, and accelerometer that work together to identify movements, including steps. An iPhone carried in a hip pocket is more accurate acting as a pedometer than a watch is only because your hand movements won't be measured if you are say pushing a grocery cart (why a lot of women it seems hold on to their carts with only one hand, because they want their step credits), or walking with your hand steady in a pocket and not swinging your arm to trigger the accelerometer. And similarly extra steps may be credited if you are an animated talker and flail your arms around a lot, or do some other activity where large arm motions may be counted erroneously towards steps: kneading bread or standing and playing ping pong for example. With ping pong you may not be walking much but a watch will count more "steps" than the phone that is in a hip pocket doing the same activity because you're swinging at a ping pong ball regularly but not necessarily taking a lot of full steps. Then add GPS location tracking to the other tools and that's how they both know you're moving at 30 or 65 MPH in a car and not out on a casual 2.0 mph walk, or 6.0 mph run.

Another thing apple health does is estimates step length as you go about your day, which normally is about 0.4 of someone's height but can vary especially with short or long legged folks. But it's typically consistent as it's averaged dozens of times a day when walking on level ground outside. So theres a record of what JO's average step length has been, somewhere in his health data. Was anything said about the nearly doubled step length of his phone at one point"? 1.992 feet per step for 170 steps at 12:21 vs 3.598 feet per step for 80 steps at 12:24? These are actual steps counted, based on triggering an accelerometer in his phone 170 or 80 times, not flying in the air or riding in a car once. That doesn't seem like the same person casually walking with his phone at 12:24 as it was at 12:21 IMO.

The 3.598 feet per step would be about 1,467.5 steps per mile, which is less than a 10 minute mile running pace for a 6'2" male per the American College of Sports Medicine. Seems someone was sprinting.
View attachment 513859



Related to this particular situation where we are questioning the cell phone location, there's also the concept of Bayesian probability - a measure of believability or confidence that an individual may possess about the occurrence of a particular event. That's how and why that "blue circle" changes sizes when you locate yourself on a mapping app. The smaller the circle or blue dot, the stronger the signal and confidence (probability) the phone is in that circle or spot. But confidence level changes as information is continually gathered, and with cellphone signal and wifi strength especially. When the blue circle is large it's giving an estimate that it's in that area based on signal strength but other info as well. Such as if you're moving 40 MPH, the dot is likely going to be placed on the road moving along due to probability, and not in the forest you're driving next to. If you're sitting in your home as I am, the circle should be small because I have good cell signals and wifi and spend a lot of time at home, it knows this. And sometimes it pinpoints me in the correct corner of the house. And sometimes (usually) the circle is big enough it looks like I could be in my neighbors house, as it currently thinks I could be. But I am not, nor have I ever. It's always adjusting and guessing, and it's never 100% accurate. Who hasn't panicked when they think their kids car is in a ditch because the gps puts them there and it hasn't moved in ten minutes and then you go check on your kid only to find they are not in said ditch and did in fact make it to practice a half mile away from the ditch and the gps didn't update just because the signal was weak and you feel stupid because your kid was just ignoring your texts again? Just me? Probably.

Anyhoo, I'm off the rails now from the original question and I have not watched or read everything but I also found it unbelievable the defense didn't discuss how these locating probability laws work to potentially place his phone in the house, not the yard. Unless I missed that. So when it was argued the blue circle didn't put him in the house, I disagree, because the blue circle did in fact overlap part of the house. I can't find that photo for some reason if anyone has it. Assuming geolocating is turned on, a cell phone is always taking in information and making a best GUESS to pinpoint its location, based on prior experiences and signal strength. Geolocating is just probabilities, and they will change when new evidence is brought to light. Sit and watch your location on a map for bit and you'll see the circle get bigger and smaller as it gathers info and you're not even moving. My guess is the one blue circle picture they used (or at least I saw) was the one that was most favorable to him not entering the house, and yet it still overlapped part of the house. And if the phone was in the basement, well we all can probably accept that the signal strength isn't going to be as great in a basement as it would be in a front yard without walls interfering. I'd expect that circle to be a lot smaller if the phone was in fact never in the house as it would likely have a stronger cell signal and I doubt a cop has free open auto connect wifi for JO's phone to use be more accurate to pinpoint the phone location.

Sorry for the ramble, no idea if these things were covered here previously, I can't keep up. Hope this makes sense, I'm a wee tired.

MOO IMO some professional, some not.
Click to expand...
Love this whole post!!!

What do you think about the sprinting steps? I didn’t catch that at all but you’re 100% right. He must’ve been sprinting… where? Why?

Also, you’re spot on about the circle location data points. I’ve also panicked over where my kids were… and patiently kept refreshing to see if the circle moved to where I expected it to be.
 
less0305 said:
If she gunned her car to speed off it could have thrown him.
Click to expand...
data logger on the car does not show this....
nightowl1975 said:
Yes!! All of this!!

If we are to believe that the tail light is what gouged his arm up, there should be a heck of a lot more than touch DNA on the tail light pieces.

Never mind the pieces that were “found” but didn’t fit.
Click to expand...
If you believe it was the taillight that gouged his arm, there would be plastic shards in the holes in his sweatshirt too
 
nightowl1975 said:
More like she tried to make her texts make sense in a way that didn’t look suspicious IMO. So she said things along the lines of “I looked out the window and saw Karen’s SUV and texted John this”. Etc. The texts have obvious time stamps. So if her story is true, the SUV has to be sitting there outside the window during the time frame of the texts.

Except… it wasn’t.
Click to expand...
I think I understand now.

So the idea for this to fit into a conspiracy is she made this false text within a short period time of the murder of John O'Keefe?

I always have a problem with instant conspiracy's. Very hard for them to work in my opinion.
 
JerseyWasHome2 said:
Good point. But it’s still strange to me that JMcC was all over him texting him as to where he was and where he’d park, and then never texted or called him from 12;30 or thereabouts til they found him dead outside. If you were so on someone as to where they were parking would you not then wonder why you didn’t see them enter the home immediately? Hmm.
Click to expand...
Unless you did…….
 
@OldCop Guessing you were in LE, your name might be a give away! This situation is a disaster for the reputation of the Police in general. Presumably the FBI investigation is about the Police (thugs) handling of this case. In your opinion, how likely is it that some of the players in this travesty will end up in jail? MOO
 
nightowl1975 said:
Love this whole post!!!

What do you think about the sprinting steps? I didn’t catch that at all but you’re 100% right. He must’ve been sprinting… where? Why?

Also, you’re spot on about the circle location data points. I’ve also panicked over where my kids were… and patiently kept refreshing to see if the circle moved to where I expected it to be.
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily have an opinion, just that it's odd and stands out. I'd like to know what his average step length is over the last year and how often he sprinted though. JO doesn't strike me as a runner so averaging under a 6.0 mile pace for any distance is probably pretty quick for him. I would be interested to hear what others think why his phone was moving that fast for 80' at 12:24. Suspect it depends on what one thinks was happening in the timeline then. And for clarity a sprint is just a fast burst usually towards top speed with any activity, whether it's running or biking or rowing etc. I am also pretty sure that since there weren't steps registered for 3 minutes before that, that this was an average step length over the 80', including speed ramp up from 0 / standing not moving and ramp down (if there was one, maybe he stopped very suddenly).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 136 more.
Total: 2,390 (members: 137, guests: 2,253)

Online statistics

Members online
137
Guests online
2,253
Total visitors
2,390
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
598,051
Messages
18,075,003
Members
230,514
Latest member
soraxtm
Back
Top