MISTRIAL MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #16

[jepop]

so maybe they weren't looking to frame Karen per say but that's how it spelled out once they could hit on her tail light as
evidence something occurred when actually she busted it in a parking lot.

RBBM Missing Canton Library footage that would have shown KR passing after 12.30am on her way to JO's (connecting with Wifi at 12.36am). Could KR have pulled over in the vicinity of that camera's scope for a minute, a quick unanswered call to JO (one of the 53) then reversing to drive on hit a lamp pole or something. IIRC the testimony from Canton Libary guy was that he handed the footage over to LE (read Proctor) without himself ever reviewing the footage. I posted about this speculation on earlier thread. It's just a thought and just a speculation. I can't recall when it was that Proctor was first given that footage and if it was before or after tail light pieces began being uncovered at 34 Fairview beginning in February 2022. Moo

 

[jepop]

A violent initial strike then violently propelled in the air without receiving any bruises or broken bones or any injuries below the neck.......

Plus there was something illogical about the Key data and Trooper Paul's analysis of it IIRC. The reverse may well have occurred when the Lexus was in LE custody. The 24mph was not confirmed via any data from the vehicle either IIRC. jmo

 

[BUF]

Not only was POK’s interview posted yesterday, but also one of a longtime friend of JOK. I expect there will be many more of these interviews to come.

Wouldn’t it be something if we woke up Monday morning to GMA (or another national morning show) to them interviewing a group of jurors and finally find out the split numbers?

Might be a futile expectation….but one can only hope….

 

[jepop]

A violent initial strike then violently propelled in the air without receiving any bruises or broken bones or any injuries below the neck.......

Oh and add to that, medical testimony from Dr Sheridan, Dr Rentschler, Dr Wolfe and the ME herself (who made some sort of reservation but did say something more solid would be expected) that the nature of the head wound ruled out hitting lawn and lawn with cold hard ground beneath it and thin ice on a lawn. Head wound was blunt force trauma and the back of JO's head had come into contact with a solid object (concrete, steel etc if falling backwards or a hard object yielded with force for eg baseball bat, weight, tyre lever or some similar object). Moo

 

[MerlinFalcon]

I wish I knew more about the custody battle between John and his mother over his late sister's children.

What? This is the first I've heard of this.

 

[TTF14]

RBBM Missing Canton Library footage that would have shown KR passing after 12.30am on her way to JO's (connecting with Wifi at 12.36am). Could KR have pulled over in the vicinity of that camera's scope for a minute, a quick unanswered call to JO (one of the 53) then reversing to drive on hit a lamp pole or something. IIRC the testimony from Canton Libary guy was that he handed the footage over to LE (read Proctor) without himself ever reviewing the footage. I posted about this speculation on earlier thread. It's just a thought and just a speculation. I can't recall when it was that Proctor was first given that footage and if it was before or after tail light pieces began being uncovered at 34 Fairview beginning in February 2022. Moo

It would have been helpful to see a complete timeline of all witness statements, and missing data/evidence mixed into it, in the closing arguments. A visual aid representing it all - whether from the CW to prove their case or from the defense to disprove it.

Possibly not their style, but I sure would like to see it. Is @vislaw still around? I think they work/worked for a company that did stuff like this.

IMO

 

[ch_13]

Snipped a couple of things.

Why does he need to hit his head on the verge? My assumption would be that he was propelled in the air, and then hit his head on the cold hard ground (or something on top of it).

The testimony in the trial was that the ground just wasn't hard enough to cause that kind of damage. I don't know if you've seen the actual autopsy photos but there was a gash in the back of John's head. Even frozen ground wouldn't do that. (And it's not clear that the ground was even frozen, temps during the day were above freezing.)

We know that Karen slammed on her accelerator and that her vehicle accelerated to 24mph in reverse.

I don't think we know that at all. The key cycle data that Trooper Paul was using to calculate the speed was highly suspect. According to him, there were only two cycles between Karen reversing the car and the tests that he ran. But we know that the car was turned on several times in the interval from when she drove away from 34 Fairview to when the testing was done.

But for all we know, at least for all I know, it seems possible to me that she initially hit him at a very low speed - and then slammed the accelerator (maybe because she was startled and her foot had already been on the accelerator).

Then how did the taillight break? How did John get propelled? Simple physics tells you that if the velocity of the car is near zero at the moment of the strike than the pedestrian will not get thrown backwards as there isn't sufficient momentum (momentum = mass x velocity). Instead the taillight would remain intact and the pedestrian will be either slightly pushed or dragged under the vehicle (depending on a lot of other factors).

Don't believe me? Try it yourself with a large box. Place it behind your car and back into it at 24 mph. The box will get launched backwards. Now try it again by hitting the box at low speed and then stomping the accelerator. This time the box will stay in the vicinity of the car.

I am not an accident reconstructionist, but I feel like that kind of scenario could help explain a lack of evidence indicating a particularly violent initial strike, while still explaining how he could have been violently propelled in the air; he would have already been more or less attached to her vehicle when it sped up.

The problem in my mind is that everyone is starting with the conclusion and trying to work backwards. First you say "Karen obviously hit him" and try and figure out what set of circumstances led to this. That's how you get these complicated scenarios like Paul's pirouette and arm strike. But that's not science, it's basically just hocus-pocus.

 

[jepop]

It would have been helpful to see a complete timeline of all witness statements, and missing data/evidence mixed into it, in the closing arguments. A visual aid representing it all - whether from the CW to prove their case or from the defense to disprove it.

Possibly not their style, but I sure would like to see it. Is @vislaw still around? I think they work/worked for a company that did stuff like this.

IMO

The defense may have to hire someone to do that and try to do the cw's job and solve the case because it seems the cw won't. I shouldn't be here but this case interrupts my sleep with its unanswered questions!!

 

[Curiousobserver]

I have explained this ad nauseum. JOK had not come home. JOK had young children at home he was caring for. Since taking care of those young children, JOK ALWAYS came home. So lets not act like him not coming home was some normal occurance and she should assume he's sleeping at a house he doesn't even know how to get to. JMO

Except they were teenagers and the plan must have been all along to leave them alone. They had planned to start the after party at 12:30, together. The kids were always going to alone.

 

[TTF14]

Except they were teenagers and the plan must have been all along to leave them alone. They had planned to start the after party at 12:30, together. The kids were always going to alone.

The plan, like always, wasn't to have them wake up in the morning alone.

IMO MOO

 

[Curiousobserver]

John O'Keefe's brother speaks about Karen Read mistrial in first interview, says "We know what happened"

In an exclusive interview with WBZ-TV, John O'Keefe's brother revealed what he said to Karen Read in court after a mistrial was declared in her murder trial.

www.cbsnews.com

You've all been Jerry Springer'd into believing she is innocent.

 

[TTF14]

John O'Keefe's brother speaks about Karen Read mistrial in first interview, says "We know what happened"

In an exclusive interview with WBZ-TV, John O'Keefe's brother revealed what he said to Karen Read in court after a mistrial was declared in her murder trial.

www.cbsnews.com

You've all been Jerry Springer'd into believing she is innocent.

Prosecutor Lally convinced me she's not guilty. No Jerry Springer necessary.

IMO

 

[thref23]

I don't know if you've seen the actual autopsy photos but there was a gash in the back of John's head. Even frozen ground wouldn't do that. (And it's not clear that the ground was even frozen, temps during the day were above freezing.)

I imagine frozen ground could cause such an injury, if hit with the right force, at the right angle. But, I don't know.

I don't think we know that at all. The key cycle data that Trooper Paul was using to calculate the speed was highly suspect. According to him, there were only two cycles between Karen reversing the car and the tests that he ran. But we know that the car was turned on several times in the interval when she drove away from 34 Fairview to when the testing was done.

I know that a lot of newer vehicles turn on and off automatically when they to a stop, and I am really not sure how a key cycle is defined. I am inclined to assume that Trooper Paul's data somehow makes sense, but if it doesn't, then it just emphasizes perhaps that we really don't know enough about what happened, to reconstruct exactly what happened.

Then how did the taillight break? How did John get propelled? Simple physics tells you that if the velocity of the car is near zero at the moment of the strike than the pedestrian will not get thrown backwards as there isn't sufficient momentum (momentum = mass x velocity). Instead the taillight would remain intact and the pedestrian will be either slightly pushed or dragged under the vehicle (depending on a lot of other factors).

In theory, the initial impact at a low speed would not have propelled him backwards, but it would have been just enough to propel him forward onto the back of the SUV, to change his angle and maybe lift his feet off of the ground. He would have then been propelled backwards upon further acceleration.

The problem in my mind is that everyone is starting with the conclusion and trying to work backwards. First you say "Karen obviously hit him" and try and figure out what set of circumstances led to this.

You are right that I am saying this. I don't think I am working backwards. "Karen obviously hit him" is what the evidence, in its entirety, states to me. At least, the evidence clearly suggests to me that Karen's SUV was involved in some sort of accident which occurred at the same approximate time as and at the same approximate location where John suffered injuries that directly or indirectly caused his death. And I can't think of another reasonable explanation for what happened to John which would be plausible enough to establish reasonable doubt.

 

[kittythehare]

I imagine frozen ground could cause such an injury, if hit with the right force, at the right angle. But, I don't know.



I know that a lot of newer vehicles turn on and off automatically when they to a stop, and I am really not sure how a key cycle is defined. I am inclined to assume that Trooper Paul's data somehow makes sense, but if it doesn't, then it just emphasizes perhaps that we really don't know enough about what happened, to reconstruct exactly what happened.



In theory, the initial impact at a low speed would not have propelled him backwards, but it would have been just enough to propel him forward onto the back of the SUV, to change his angle and maybe lift his feet off of the ground. He would have then been propelled backwards upon further acceleration.



You are right that I am saying this. I don't think I am working backwards. "Karen obviously hit him" is what the evidence, in its entirety, states to me. At least, the evidence clearly suggests to me that Karen's SUV was involved in some sort of accident which occurred at the same approximate time as and at the same approximate location where John suffered injuries that directly or indirectly caused his death. And I can't think of another reasonable explanation for what happened to John which would be plausible enough to establish reasonable doubt.

You might have missed this and the testimonies of the two FBI experts?

They are worth your time...

 

[thref23]

You might have missed this and the testimonies of the two FBI experts?

They are worth your time...

"We don't know what happened in this case," said Andrew Rentschler from ARCCA, which was hired by the U.S. Department of Justice as part of a federal investigation into state law enforcement's handling of the Read case.

"Certainly it's not consistent with getting hit by the car and ending up where he did, even if the ground is somehow hard enough to cause that type of an injury," he said of O'Keefe head injuries. "We don't really have enough evidence in this case to determine what one specific event actually caused that injury."

Karen Read doesn't take stand in trial accusing her of killing police officer boyfriend with SUV

Prosecutors contend Read struck John O'Keefe with her SUV and then left the scene in January 2022, leaving him unconscious in the snow after a night of bar hopping.

6abc.com

 

[thebedbug]

RBBM Missing Canton Library footage that would have shown KR passing after 12.30am on her way to JO's (connecting with Wifi at 12.36am). Could KR have pulled over in the vicinity of that camera's scope for a minute, a quick unanswered call to JO (one of the 53) then reversing to drive on hit a lamp pole or something. IIRC the testimony from Canton Libary guy was that he handed the footage over to LE (read Proctor) without himself ever reviewing the footage. I posted about this speculation on earlier thread. It's just a thought and just a speculation. I can't recall when it was that Proctor was first given that footage and if it was before or after tail light pieces began being uncovered at 34 Fairview beginning in February 2022. Moo

In general, I'm amazed there wasn't lots and lots more camera footage to confirm/deny all sorts of events related to the case.

I wonder if the storm wasn't an impediment to getting the word out to citizens and collecting footage before it was naturally deleted. Also, re: JO's ring camera footage, isn't there an issue with chunks of it missing?

 

[mrjitty]

Oh and add to that, medical testimony from Dr Sheridan, Dr Rentschler, Dr Wolfe and the ME herself (who made some sort of reservation but did say something more solid would be expected) that the nature of the head wound ruled out hitting lawn and lawn with cold hard ground beneath it and thin ice on a lawn. Head wound was blunt force trauma and the back of JO's head had come into contact with a solid object (concrete, steel etc if falling backwards or a hard object yielded with force for eg baseball bat, weight, tyre lever or some similar object). Moo

Thanks - that is how I remember it.

I don't get how his final resting place fits with the state theory - unless he crawled off. Not saying it can't, but surely they need to explain some credible version

IMO

 

[kittythehare]

Thanks - that is how I remember it.

I don't get how his final resting place fits with the state theory - unless he crawled off. Not saying it can't, but surely they need to explain some credible version

IMO

Doc Sheridan said he would have gone down immediately following a blow of that impact.

 

[Odeto BJ]

Plus there was something illogical about the Key data and Trooper Paul's analysis of it IIRC. The reverse may well have occurred when the Lexus was in LE custody. The 24mph was not confirmed via any data from the vehicle either IIRC. jmo

Lexus infotainment system includes notices to the owner of record, to the driver, and optionally to an owner designated dealership of any vehicle inclemency they designate: this includes such things as proceeding on too steep a hill, ABS activation, engine overspeed and select others. As consequence the servicing dealer knows of certain things to check before your car arrives for service and the owner can keep track of how other people in the household drive his car...And it accumulates data that could effect a warranty claim. Big Brother is not just watching, he remembers everything.

I have not to this point found a source that defines what Key Cycles and Ignition Cycles actually mean, but the chart Trooper Paul used at trial to support a very fast acceleration event in reverse, that indicated the 24 MPH peak speed, has been contested by the defense in the case as an occurring after the vehicle had been towed. I was surprised that during trial, neither contestant had a Lexus data person to confirm the actual content and extent and time stamps of these important elements. The way I interpret it, the chart described an event that happened while the car was already in LE custody. And Paul was not able to confirm or deny that.

I found another thing particularly interesting about how they handled the car, in the salleyport video. The condition of the tailight and select other pieces of glass being so important to the whole evidentiary trail: that video showed garage personnel sweeping and shoveling snow and meltwater into both a trough drain and into a garbage pail. With all the concerns for plastic and glass particles and witness marks on the car, I would have thought the snow and melt would have been carefully picked up, preserved, maybe screened, maybe kept frozen and subsequently analyzed. Considering the circumstances, I would have anticipated that the car would be driven onto a brand new tarpaulin or drop sheet and anything it shed would have been isolated.
After all, they did find touch DNA from JOK on the tailgate IIRC.

 

[Cedars]

It's hard to get past the expert testimony that it was not even possible he was hit by a vehicle (any vehicle including a snow plow).

Expert witnesses constantly disagree with each other in trials, when they get into an area which is essentially speculation and theory. Expert witnesses for the defense are paid a great deal of money. If you believe the whole justice system is corrupt, why would you believe a retired medical pathogist was both incapable of error and uncorruptible?

JMO