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

[LaineyJ]

It depends. If the judge rules without prejudice, she can be retried. If the judge rules with prejudice she cannot be retried. There is no way IMO judge Bev will rule dismissed with prejudice.

Totally agree. I think there’s way too much pressure on her

 

[themonk]

He was believable to me.

RSBM

When BH and BA did not simply say they had a quick convo like 'you get home in one piece you were loaded bud' that alone was enough for me. My BS meter exploded.

ZERO reason to lie about this. ZERO. Instead coitus buttus dialus. And people actually believe this LOLOLOL

All these things add up to something nefarious. This is a coverup. Doesn't have to be a massive conspiracy, just a small number of people 'keeping their mouths shut' til it blows over. And then the FBI stepped in...

“tell them the guy was never in the house”…. “exactly”​

ETA: if BA and BH were UNAWARE that something awful had happened at 34F they would have both admitted they called each other. They KNEW something had happened and that is why they felt compelled to lie, albeit in the most massively, transparently stupid way about a suspect as hell call a few hours after JO was likely beaten severely.

 

[kittythehare]

Thanks but it doesn't give a time when BH texted JOK, just 'that night' and that BH said he left the Albert's between 12:30 - 1:00. I really don't want to have to go through the testimony and see if I can spot the text time, mostly was just curious when he actually texted JOK. Appreciate the link and refresher on his testimony.

sorry, had just finished reading it when you asked, it does not actually state time.. but good to read it again too..

He was so dishonest, texting her while her bf was in the room that night when JOK had already asked her if there was a scene between them and she had informed Higgins of this..

Likely JOK knew,I would say..

 

[calo44]

Any info on what the Alberts and McCabe's were celebrating at the VFW hall the other night?

 

[kittythehare]

RSBM

When BH and BA did not simply say they had a quick convo like 'you get home in one piece you were loaded bud' that alone was enough for me. My BS meter exploded.

ZERO reason to lie about this. ZERO. Instead coitus buttus dialus. And people actually believe this LOLOLOL

All these things add up to something nefarious. This is a coverup. Doesn't have to be a massive conspiracy, just a small number of people 'keeping their mouths shut' til it blows over. And then the FBI stepped in...

“tell them the guy was never in the house”…. “exactly”​

Yeah..
The dog walker though.. she maintained she had never been in the house until confronted..
Keep it simple...

I'd be losing the 'conspiracy' adjective, it's a term used to undermine the facts..

We're not talking about 100 people here, 1000 or a million..

 

[jepop]

RSBM

When BH and BA did not simply say they had a quick convo like 'you get home in one piece you were loaded bud' that alone was enough for me. My BS meter exploded.

ZERO reason to lie about this. ZERO. Instead coitus buttus dialus. And people actually believe this LOLOLOL

All these things add up to something nefarious. This is a coverup. Doesn't have to be a massive conspiracy, just a small number of people 'keeping their mouths shut' til it blows over. And then the FBI stepped in...

“tell them the guy was never in the house”…. “exactly”​

ETA: if BA and BH were UNAWARE that something awful had happened at 34F they would have both admitted they called each other. They KNEW something had happened and that is why they felt compelled to lie, albeit in the most massively, transparently stupid way about a suspect as hell call a few hours after JO was likely beaten severely.

Thanks, was working through my first impressions of BH to try and understand them. But yeah, just realised I forgot all about 22 second convo at 2.30 between BA and BH. In context and the fact they both lied about that under oath is the sussest thing of all. And also the text about the guy not being in the house (Matt McCabe wasn't it) and that whole group text situation within days of JO's death is controlling at best and something indicating something else at worse! moo

eta if BH and BA were involved I agree and think they were deinitely aware of it!

 

[shotgun09]

Brian Higgins was the first to obtain legal services, if I am not mistaken. Dude was sobering up and scared, IMO.

 

[kittythehare]

Brian Higgins was the first to obtain legal services, if I am not mistaken. Dude was sobering up and scared, IMO.

got to consult his lawyer while testifying... so many anomalies

 

[shotgun09]

Brian Higgins also works for the Feds. And the Feds are all over this case.........

Carry On

 

[PamCake]

If these people do live in Canton - a jury by peers, then, I can see holdouts. This town has been divided, and I can definitely see some people holding their opinion come Heck or high water. Even IF they didn't know anything at all about the case coming in to the trial, they may definitely know some of the dynamics of the town. This town has been undergoing a cultural war - a civil war of sorts. I have lived in small towns. It is very clear that there are those that are believed to be "above" the law so to say. There are those that are tired of the same "status quo". There ABSOLUTELY feels like there is corruption in the political arena. There may be some on the jury that are part of the "establishment", or have family that are. They may be highly offended at the mere mention of corruption! They may be holding their high "moral" ground to show that they flat out don't believe the defense because it is a smear on "their" community. Just a point of view I have given the now real possibility of a hung jury.

I live in Massachusetts, and I've learned from many years of jury duty that the state prefers prospective jurors to NOT be residents of the town or from neighboring towns in which a trial is held and/or where a crime has been committed. This is supposed to ensure that people on a jury are less likely to be familiar with those who are being tried or their family members. Jurors are confined to a specific county however, this one being Norfolk County, which encompasses 28 towns/cities. So, even if there is a courthouse in my town, I'm sent 25-30 miles away to be on jury duty on the other side of the county.

 

[CourtandSims4]

The tail light was largely intact, and then it was completely obliterated after having been in Canton PD custody.

This is so obvious I can't see how it is not apparent to the entire world.

Some just don't want to believe cops plant evidence.

They do, all the time. To think otherwise is naive.

In real life, outside of this case and the internet and conspiracy theories, we all know we have been behind cars that have a busted light, but when there is some red left, it will look red until there is no light shining through it. (I don't expect anyone to admit they've seen this. Maybe you haven't. But I know I have.)

We can also see the jagged piece shadowed in the video leaving the house, and there are no red pieces by John's vehicle. The problem is that since it is not clear, it can't be fully trusted to see how much is missing. This is yet another place LE dropped the ball. And part of why I would vote her NG.

 

[shotgun09]

The absolute MESS of this investigation should be proof hands down Not Guilty. They NEVER considered the home at 34 Fairview, or it's occupants at a party the night of could be of any importance. They interviewed groups of people ! Not individually. The reason? Proctors own words. " Nope. He's a Boston Cop too" The Big Blue Wall indeed. 'No lookie see in the house, mmkay? '

It needs to be said again. If someone found a dead or dying body on MY lawn, after a night of partying? You can bet they would be marching in with a warrant. There is no protection for me though. Yep, the CSI would be inside my home, yellow tags showing any perceived evidence, properly photographed, logged and verified. There would be a video of them entering inside, and following through the entire space of my home. Documenting everything.

NONE OF THAT HAPPENED at 34 Fairview. Why?

 

[JudyBolton]

Most people misunderstand this- The defense does not have a burden of proof. That is not the same as not having to substantiate the things they say. If that were true every crime could be dismissed because you could always defend it by saying the police framed my client without any evidence that is the case.

The prosecution can’t simply accuse and then sit back and make the defense prove them wrong. That is what burden of proof means.

Thank you for the clarification - HOW have I survived all of these years watching trials, sitting in courtrooms, being married to a lawyer without knowing what "burden of proof" means???

If you refer to my original comment - I was responding to this: "Did they prove that Proctor being angry with Karen led him to definitely planting those pieces?" I stated the fact that the defense did NOT have to prove what Proctor's motive may or may not have been. In this case, Proctor did an excellent job of "proving" he hates Karen and the defense did not need to do anything but let him read his own words.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

Perhaps the wording "created" not used properly.

However, I've not determined definitively whether KR did or didn't hit JOK, because the case is so complex. It's been that way for me since first reading everything I can about this case. It's important to skip over bloggers, YTer's and anyone who has an agenda, they care only about clicks, as you already know.

I am interested in hearing why you first thought guilty, but changed to not guilty, if you choose to share. TIA

I've stated all along there's a lot of reasonable doubt and she will walk. Ive not waver from that initial stance. Which agree with, she should walk, because of the lack of evidence presented ... no proof she committed this crime beyond a reasonable doubt (BARD).

Will the jurors use their common sense. I suspect they're confused by some of the info. They will follow MA laws.

She is innocent until proven guilty BARD.

Speculation and moo

PhDs in biomechanics already determined whether KR hit JO,, as did an MD and an ME. For most, that took the complexity out of what the verdict should be. Since you've not determined whether or not KR hit JO, would you be willing to share what you're still working out on that matter? Your thoughts may be similar to some of the jurors. TIA

 

[GoBuckeyes]

If I'm not wrong, when the note said they were hung and the judge wanted to send them back Jackson protested.

The more research I have done the more it proves to me hung would benefit Read.

Now that LE and Lally have shown their hand they can't go back. CW would do well to reevaluate not to charge again.

And I believe very strongly, in the second go around, FBI would be brought in heavy-duty. And that would be extremely detrimental to prosecution.

MOO is she is better off with a hung jury.

I still haven't given up on a Monday NG verdict.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

Thanks for your well thought out post, @Curiousobserver. I appreciate your thoughts.
A lot of your decision is made around the broken taillight. There were other taillight pieces found at the scene that did not belong to KR’s SUV. Were the vehicles of the many drunk drivers who were at 34 Fairview Rd that night examined for any damage?
My main response to your conclusion is based on your statement: Charge #1 does not require that she hit him with her car, only that she took reckless actions with her car.
Under that theory, the CW would not have to prove she killed him?

JOK is dead.
KR drove recklessly.
Therefore KR killed JOK?

Thanks again for giving us your thought processes on this.

Excellent response to OP!

If I might add one thought. If all it takes to be convicted is reckless actions, then why wouldn't all of the drunk drivers that night be charged, given that they didn't have to hit him, as OP pointed out?