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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
My 80+ year old father butt dials me at least 4 times a week with his IPhone. Mostly in the middle of my night.

There is a time difference between us and apparently he takes his phone to bed with him. So mystery solved from earlier posts today.

But I'm not buying that group of people's butt dialing. No way...no how.
 
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
This.
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.


this article.

 
I imagine frozen ground could cause such an injury, if hit with the right force, at the right angle. But, I don't know.
My understanding of the conditions is that at the time of the supposed accident, the ground is unlikely to have been frozen. IE it wasn't cold enough in the lead up and it had only just started snowing. It takes a long time for the ground to freeze.

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
A key cycle, in this context, is defined as the start button being pushed. Auto start/stop doesn't trigger a key cycle. Trooper Paul miscalculated the amount of keystrokes between when the accident occurred and the vehicle was finally tested. Key cycle #1162 is the one which had the data of the car reversing at 24MPH. This key cycle happened after the car was seized by the police.

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.
If JOK was hit with enough force to propel him anywhere, he would have at minimum bruising on his body. Trooper Paul is suggesting he was hit so hard that he travelled 30 feet. This would cause bruising, broken bones, organ damage etc.

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.

I'm curious how you think this accident played out exactly. How do you figure that a 7000 pound Lexus hit a 220 pound man hard enough to propel him through the air and deposit him on someone's front lawn, without damaging his body aside from a bump on the head and a dog bitten arm?
It's preposterous.

--
 
Correct. Here is what she said:
“she didn’t feel prosecutors had convinced her beyond a reasonable doubt that Read was guilty of the charges, WBZ reported.”



It's just not fair that this juror spent the whole trial taking hyper-diligent notes and then got excluded from the final result.
 
They were still in a relationship. Who cares if "he was leaving her?" (IF) Have you ever been a relationship where you broke up, got back together, broke up, got back together, etc.? It's a typical relationship pattern--even if it isn't healthy. To say she's not a victim because of what you perceive his intentions to be is a huge, huge, huge reach.

IMO MOO

She was not the victim of JO's murder. Funny, my friends in MA are unaware of the case and laughed at the statement that something out of Norfolk courthouse has split the CW. I surely miss names like Canton that I saw on driving by I-95 but now, it seems, the topic is exhausted and what is left is free advertising for a couple of lawyers.

Happy Independence Day, when the Declaration of Independence was printed by John Dunlap, the printer of the Continental Congress!
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
89
Guests online
1,379
Total visitors
1,468

Forum statistics

Threads
598,526
Messages
18,082,758
Members
230,653
Latest member
distrustHUMANS24
Back
Top