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 #15

[jepop]

Same! He changed so many facts during closing from what he presented as testimony during the trial and that’s unforgivable. Especially when there is no transcript for the jury to look back on, which he knew would be the case. Two of the bigger ones were the time she allegedly hit him and when she was seen outside 34 Fairview, which in his opening was 1245 but that was debunked by her arriving back to JOK home at 1236, and the other huge one was him saying the only DNA found on JOK clothing was his own and that’s simply not true. The testimony indicated 2 others’ DNA found. There were a multitude of other things he changed too.

This was discussed a bit on the last thread. Do you have an opinion on if a PA actually telling lies, as in untruths (only JO dna on shirt for eg), in a closing argument would be a ground for appeal in and of itself? The other question was could Lally receive the consequences he deserves for this unethical conduct through a bar complaint or some other civil body? Any chance of criminal charges for the equivalent of perjury by the PA with the intent of misleading a jury? Seems to me the system must hold PAs to high' standards of professional conduct and Lally has totally missed the bar with his conduct jmo. And I'm sure if I had the time I could find other examples that fit the bill throughout the trial.jmo

To semi quote a line from Pulp Fiction, Lally actually lying in his closing is "...pretty far from being ok..." (Marcellus).

Eta the word damn in last line to align correcty with quote
eta x2 removed the above as not right after all

 

[keek]

sane paramedic that testified he removed JOK'S COAT EVEN THOUGH jok WASN'T WEARING ONE?

There was the female Canton paramedic who tried distance herself from knowing one of the daughters, maybe McCabe's, saying on the stand she had heard her name in HS. Lots of recent pix were uncovered of her with her and other friends, close groups, so it was cringy to have that position and called out for really not telling the truth on the stand, for what? Got in the mix with the others and their hiding truths, making up times. She had how long to 'get the memo', almost two years is it? You know no one and nothing.

 

[OldCop]

I’ll tell you…. I really believe Karen’s Tail light pieces were around John’s body, I really believe John’s phone stayed in the same area. I really believe all Karen’s words and actions screamed guilt. I don’t see a conspiracy to frame Karen, I don’t believe he was ever in the house. In my eyes and I know others disagree, all that over rides the expert opinion's (which I never have put much into, since each side can say something different). I think the holdouts are a few NG VS Guilty. I really feel it’s hard for many like myself to get past her own words and actions. I realize it was a horrible investigation, and LE needs to get their act together but there is still enough evidence that tells me it was Karen that caused John’s death. Not debating what I feel, just giving insight.

Thanks for replying @MyJoey. I think a lot of folks are voting against the conspiracy theory. It does sound preposterous, doesn’t it? Other than that, the tail light evidence is a toss up between the G and NG folks I think. Yes, there were some pieces found in the street and near the body, but not all of them belonged to KR’s SUV. There have been two versions of what KR said the morning John was found. Some heard “I did it” while others think it was “Did I do it?”
KR was really drunk. Is it possible that maybe even she doesn’t know what she said or did?
Next we come to the crux of the charges. What proof do we have that John died as the result of being hit by a motor vehicle? If the prosecution can not prove that, KR can’t be guilty of doing that, can she?
John’s body doesn’t tell us how exactly he died, but it does tell us how he didn’t die. He didn’t die from being hit by a motor vehicle. Witnesses for both the prosecution and the defense admit they can’t conclude that JOK definitely died as a result of being hit by a motor vehicle. His injuries, the lethal head wound and the deep scratches and puncture wounds on his arm, were not caused by impact with a vehicle, any vehicle. Furthermore, his body lacked the injuries that he should have sustained had he been hit by a vehicle; broken bones or fractures, heavy bruising, and those types of injuries should have been present, especially below the neck. His body is the most important piece of evidence in this case, not tail light fragments, not deleted texts, not butt dials, not a completely incompetent investigation. Extensive testing was done by highly qualified experts. Their conclusions were not theories or guesses. They were based on the laws of physics, medical evidence, kinetics, and pathology.
We, as law abiding citizens, want justice for victims. However, we can’t get justice for a victim or protect the rights of an accused by finding them guilty based on feelings. We need good solid evidence with no reasonable doubt in order to convict. I do not believe that we have that in this case. A wrongful conviction is justice for nobody.

 

[jepop]

Thanks for replying @MyJoey. I think a lot of folks are voting against the conspiracy theory. It does sound preposterous, doesn’t it? Other than that, the tail light evidence is a toss up between the G and NG folks I think. Yes, there were some pieces found in the street and near the body, but not all of them belonged to KR’s SUV. There have been two versions of what KR said the morning John was found. Some heard “I did it” while others think it was “Did I do it?”
KR was really drunk. Is it possible that maybe even she doesn’t know what she said or did?
Next we come to the crux of the charges. What proof do we have that John died as the result of being hit by a motor vehicle? If the prosecution can not prove that, KR can’t be guilty of doing that, can she?
John’s body doesn’t tell us how exactly he died, but it does tell us how he didn’t die. He didn’t die from being hit by a motor vehicle. Witnesses for both the prosecution and the defense admit they can’t conclude that JOK definitely died as a result of being hit by a motor vehicle. His injuries, the lethal head wound and the deep scratches and puncture wounds on his arm, were not caused by impact with a vehicle, any vehicle. Furthermore, his body lacked the injuries that he should have sustained had he been hit by a vehicle; broken bones or fractures, heavy bruising, and those types of injuries should have been present, especially below the neck. His body is the most important piece of evidence in this case, not tail light fragments, not deleted texts, not butt dials, not a completely incompetent investigation. Extensive testing was done by highly qualified experts. Their conclusions were not theories or guesses. They were based on the laws of physics, medical evidence, kinetics, and pathology.
We, as law abiding citizens, want justice for victims. However, we can’t get justice for a victim or protect the rights of an accused by finding them guilty based on feelings. We need good solid evidence with no reasonable doubt in order to convict. I do not believe that we have that in this case. A wrongful conviction is justice for nobody.

Just wow. Thank you for this post. You have such a gift. jmo

 

[OldCop]

Just wow. Thank you for this post. You have such a gift. jmo

Awe, thanks @jepop.

 

[seekingjustice**]

sane paramedic that testified he removed JOK'S COAT EVEN THOUGH jok WASN'T WEARING ONE?

Not the only paramedic to testify to the same statement.

Canton firefighter and paramedic Anthony Flematti was sharply questioned by the defense​

Flematti testified Thursday that he also heard a distressed Read make a confession at the scene and that Read was two feet away from him when she said, “I hit him. I hit him. Oh my God, I hit him.”

Takeaways from day three of Karen Read trial - The Boston Globe

Two paramedics testified Thursday they heard the Mansfield woman repeatedly shout “I hit him” as her boyfriend lay motionless in the front yard of a Canton home and the Supreme Judicial Court separately upheld the buffer zone outside the courthouse. Here's what to know.

www.bostonglobe.com

 

[pavlovsdaughter]

I posted this earlier

Understanding Hung Jury: Implications, Options, and Strategies

Delve into the intricacies of hung juries in our comprehensive guide. Learn about its implications, the circumstances leading to a hung jury, and the potential options after such a verdict. Explore strategies for navigating this complex situation with insights from experienced defense attorneys.

thedefenders.net

Circumstances That Lead to a Hung Jury​

A hung jury typically results from several circumstances:

• Disagreement on Interpretation of Evidence: Jurors may have different interpretations of the evidence presented during the trial. Some jurors might find certain pieces of evidence more compelling and convincing than others, leading to disagreement.
• Conflicting Views on Witness Credibility: If jurors differ in their assessment of the credibility of witnesses, this could lead to a deadlock. One juror might find a witness to be credible, while another may not.
• Differing Personal Beliefs and Values: Sometimes, personal beliefs or values can affect a juror’s decision-making process. For example, a juror’s stance on issues like law enforcement or crime can potentially influence their verdict.
• Insufficient Evidence: A hung jury can occur when there is insufficient evidence for a unanimous decision. If some jurors believe that the prosecution has not met the burden of proof, they may vote not guilty, resulting in a deadlock.
• Complexity of the Case: In complex cases involving multiple charges or intricate legal issues, jurors may struggle to reach a consensus. The complexity can lead to confusion or differing interpretations of the law.
• Pressure to Agree: Sometimes, a juror may feel pressured to change their vote to reach a unanimous decision. If they resist this pressure, it can result in a hung jury.

Which, if any of the above are most likely to have brought about the current status?

I think people feel intimidated and defensive when confronted with people whose intellects or abilities far surpass their own. I think there is someone in the juror room who honestly thinks, “screw those PHD elites, I know better.” We live in very anti-science, anti-expert, and anti-education times. Lack of knowledge is valorized as long as you can back it up with enough bluster. So I guess that falls in the “witness credibility” camp. MOO.

 

[jepop]

Awe, thanks @jepop.

yw

 

[kittythehare]

I think people feel intimidated and defensive when confronted with people whose intellects or abilities far surpass their own. I think there is someone in the juror room who honestly thinks, “screw those PHD elites, I know better.” We live in very anti-science, anti-expert, and anti-education times. Lack of knowledge is valorized as long as you can back it up with enough bluster. So I guess that falls in the “witness credibility” camp. MOO.

Good point, well made.

There is a kind of a brashness to it, okay.. I feel.

 

[RANCH]

Thanks for replying @MyJoey. I think a lot of folks are voting against the conspiracy theory. It does sound preposterous, doesn’t it? Other than that, the tail light evidence is a toss up between the G and NG folks I think. Yes, there were some pieces found in the street and near the body, but not all of them belonged to KR’s SUV. There have been two versions of what KR said the morning John was found. Some heard “I did it” while others think it was “Did I do it?”
KR was really drunk. Is it possible that maybe even she doesn’t know what she said or did?
Next we come to the crux of the charges. What proof do we have that John died as the result of being hit by a motor vehicle? If the prosecution can not prove that, KR can’t be guilty of doing that, can she?
John’s body doesn’t tell us how exactly he died, but it does tell us how he didn’t die. He didn’t die from being hit by a motor vehicle. Witnesses for both the prosecution and the defense admit they can’t conclude that JOK definitely died as a result of being hit by a motor vehicle. His injuries, the lethal head wound and the deep scratches and puncture wounds on his arm, were not caused by impact with a vehicle, any vehicle. Furthermore, his body lacked the injuries that he should have sustained had he been hit by a vehicle; broken bones or fractures, heavy bruising, and those types of injuries should have been present, especially below the neck. His body is the most important piece of evidence in this case, not tail light fragments, not deleted texts, not butt dials, not a completely incompetent investigation. Extensive testing was done by highly qualified experts. Their conclusions were not theories or guesses. They were based on the laws of physics, medical evidence, kinetics, and pathology.
We, as law abiding citizens, want justice for victims. However, we can’t get justice for a victim or protect the rights of an accused by finding them guilty based on feelings. We need good solid evidence with no reasonable doubt in order to convict. I do not believe that we have that in this case. A wrongful conviction is justice for nobody.

What's your opinion on how O'Keefe died and who killed him?

 

[kittythehare]

Not the only paramedic to testify to the same statement.

Canton firefighter and paramedic Anthony Flematti was sharply questioned by the defense​

Flematti testified Thursday that he also heard a distressed Read make a confession at the scene and that Read was two feet away from him when she said, “I hit him. I hit him. Oh my God, I hit him.”

Takeaways from day three of Karen Read trial - The Boston Globe

Two paramedics testified Thursday they heard the Mansfield woman repeatedly shout “I hit him” as her boyfriend lay motionless in the front yard of a Canton home and the Supreme Judicial Court separately upheld the buffer zone outside the courthouse. Here's what to know.

www.bostonglobe.com

But she didn't hit him, did she?
She couldn't possibly have hit him without leaving as much as a bruise.
Flash back to Dr Sheridan's testimony.

He showed us John's arm, he showed us the antemortem injuries, the scratches..
He told us he could tell they were ante as opposed to post mortem because of their colour.
Recall their colour.
Bright read..

Dr Sheridan has performed no less than 13000 post mortems, several involving dog injuries.

He pointed out that it simply is impossible to hit any part of someone's body with a vehicle of that size without at least bruising them.

There were zero bruises on the arm.. just the scratches.

There were zero bruises on his torso.

Yet, the prosecution would have you believe she hit him with such force as to drive him into a pirouette.

Without leaving a bruise on him?

It is simply not possible, no more than it's possible her tail light broke his skull in several places. Not anatomically, not physiologically.

It doesn't matter that if she was screaming the cow jumped over the moon.

 

[k-mac]

KR and the defence spending the weekend not quite so brash and cocky.

Good.

moo

 

[k-mac]

<<modsnip - quoted post was removed>

Clearly and most importantly members of the jury aren't either.

I called a guilty or hung jury by end day 1 deliberations just because to me not guilty would have been back quick...if they were all aboard the conspiracy trainwreck.

I would like guilty obviously but if betting, the odds look hung to me.

moo

 

[seekingjustice**]

KR and the defence spending the weekend not quite so brash and cocky.

Good.

moo

Agree - Not quite unfolding as they anticipated. It's ironic how the Defense eagerly jumped at the opportunity for a mistrial, suggesting to me that they may have come to realize that not everyone is buying into their 'unbelievable' conspiracy theory! MOO

 

[seekingjustice**]

<modsnip>
I'm not negotiable about it too.

Clearly and most importantly members of the jury aren't either.

I called a guilty or hung jury by end day 1 deliberations just because to me not guilty would have been back quick...if they were all aboard the conspiracy trainwreck.

I would like guilty obviously but if betting, the odds look hung to me.

moo

<modsnip> I also like to respect other people's opinions regardless of whether I agree or not.

Same here, the only options I have been able to see are Guilty or Hung and it seems that's where we are potentially heading!

 

[CuriousCarly]

I'm surprised that someone in a high level of law enforcement (BA) has no security cameras around his family home. Were there no cameras anywhere ~ their home or neighbors?? It seems odd to me but maybe the cameras are more of a California thing as I have them as do a good number of my neighbors.

 

[Aquarian]

I'm surprised that someone in a high level of law enforcement (BA) has no security cameras around his family home. Were there no cameras anywhere ~ their home or neighbors?? It seems odd to me but maybe the cameras are more of a California thing as I have them as do a good number of my neighbors.

Yes, cameras are needed. My husband bought some when Kyron Hormon was stolen from this earth. He was horrified. We’ve had various and numerous since, and these oldies are still working. The media has described the Albert home as an affluent community, maybe they didn’t think they needed it.

 

[k-mac]

I'm surprised that someone in a high level of law enforcement (BA) has no security cameras around his family home. Were there no cameras anywhere ~ their home or neighbors?? It seems odd to me but maybe the cameras are more of a California thing as I have them as do a good number of my neighbors.

I bet the Alberts wish in hindsight they did do.

moo

 

[k-mac]

But then again....
you can have camera's like JO had...
AND....
wouldn't ya read about it.

The very moments that would support or INCRIMINATE KR's behaviour when she arrived back at JO abode (after hitting him IMO) poof!!! vanished!!! magic!!

Pesky camera's just don't work when you need em too.

But they work perfectly while you then reverse out with your reverse beepers (sensors)blasting in your ears....and capture you gently tapping that pesky back tail light.
Miracle!

moo

 

[Moonsie]

If I burn my hand on a stove, I have a burn on my hand. Not a broken wrist.

If my arm gets hit by a car, I have a bruised and possibly broken arm. Not a dog bite.

moo.