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

[cocomod]

I have actually been trying to figure out the significance of the video being mirrored, and what it concealed.

One answer I got is that it shows that people were gathered around the damage taillight. Which... that can't be it because why would they be looking at the undamaged taillight? Hope to get some more clarity at some point. lol

Because he was testifying that noone went near the damaged taillight - and that was untrue! They also came with that video on the day of the trial - they didn't bring it out in discovery and give it to the defense prior to that day in trial!! That is shady as crap! It is missing minutes that the CW can't explain. That shows when a person magically appears near the damaged tl. It also has the time NOT inverted (which means that they had to fix the time as to appear that the video wasn't inverted), so it seems like the CW were trying to fool the jury into believing that the near taillight - the one closest to the camera - was not touched by Proctor during that early time - as the trooper on the stand was testifying.

 

[CourtandSims4]

Because the DUI charge was connected to the manslaughter charge

She still would have had to hit him for them to agree she was guilty of that.

 

[keek]

Because they could have been back there damaging the taillight. Nobody said there was zero damage at all points

Just the small hole/damage that the out of town cop saw when her car was towed from her parents home, AFTER it had been at FAIRVIEW. THENNNN Proctor and co. got a hold of it. Again, NONE Of them had the thought that someone who knew what when on in the basement told, and KR was able to lawyer up and fight the 'story'.. Boy has it unfolded MUCH to the Alberts and McCabe's ..'distress'. Stay tuned

 

[CourtandSims4]

RSBM - This is the very first case I have personally watched closely that I found the CW (prosecutor) to be untrustworthy! I am extremely disappointed in the amount of times that the CW twisted, turned, and flat out tried to confuse the truth!! It started before the trial as well - with the comment that there was video proof that she hit him with her vehicle! I think they should be sanctioned over several things that they did in trial! You are right, I expect this kind of behavior from some shady defense attorneys that try anything and everything to get their client off. I have never expected it from the "legal" prosecutors!

The thing about it is that police can lie to suspects in America. They can say they found DNA, they can say it's on video, they can say they have a witness who told them everything... It's allowed and LE does that ALL the time.

I still don't know why Karen didn't confirm what was on the video before conceding, but it hardly matters at this point.

With that said, I have no defense for how horribly this investigation was conducted. It's the investigation and the CW's general, overall poor showing at trial which has me stating that if I was on the jury, I would have found her not guilty of all charges. I still feel that way today. I was just wondering about the perspective of the 8 jurors who would have found her guilty of the one manslaughter charge.

 

[CourtandSims4]

Nothing of his DNA under the car or tailpipe, nothing of him. Factual entered evidence. Oh and the car did not hit John, nor just his head and propelled him up to the lawn with a deep gash only, and multiple skull fractures from that per evidence and also dog bites, his defensive arm, also face beaten, back of knuckles bruised. Old news, wait for the upcoming new news. Rehash.

A lot of this depends on if skin was broken upon impact of the MV or impact with anything else that could have caused his injuries. The thing about this is that there is always a "possibility" that something else happened that we can't account for either because of this bad investigation or because of "lack of imagination."

I don't imagine that John saw an SUV barreling backwards at him, at 24 MPH, and just stood there staring at it. If he tried to get his body out of the way, in what way could that have played a part in his injuries and where his body was found?

As much as many people feel like the "FBI- hired Experts" cleared her completely, it isn't that cut and dry because the jury DID hear other evidence that implicated Karen as the culprit. This came in form of direct evidence from eye witnesses and physical evidence from her taillight, among other things.

If we whittle this down to the bare bones, what the jury heard these experts say is that they did an experiment that doesn't match what the CW said happened and that having more information about the details of this particular case wouldn't matter, no matter what, their opinion won't change. So, how useful did these jurors find their testimony if they are saying that they don't care about all the facts and that their experiment was about something else?

I hope one day we actually get to hear from some of these jurors because I do want to know how they regarded that testimony and why it didn't move them as much as it moved the majority of the people watching this trial.

 

[MyJoey]

No they were presented as pieces of the lexus tail light, not legit.

Ok I need a link to where I’m supposed to find this, I listen to most of the defense testimony and it was just mostly on chain of custody stuff….its kind of boring to lol .

 

[RANCH]

Agree it was kinda shady but it didn’t show proctor doing anything to the tail light.

I agree 100%. The inverted video doesn't show any tampering or planting of evidence. In my opinion it's value as exculpatory evidence for the defense is nil.

JMO.

 

[TTF14]

I agree 100%. The inverted video doesn't show any tampering or planting of evidence. In my opinion it's value as exculpatory evidence for the defense is nil.

JMO.

I wonder why they didn't just show it truthfully then. I don't disagree since we can't see what's going on over there, but they did this on purpose, which makes them look guilty <modsnip>.

IMO MOO

 

[Lilbirdie]

One thing I think I missed from the beginning of this case is how close JOK was with the Alberts/McCabes. Were they actually friends he hung out before or just acquaintances he ran into at the bar?

 

[MyJoey]

No, but he said noone went near the taillight and that was a flat out lie. You are right that we cannot see Proctor do anything to the taillight, but we also can't see that he didn't. Proctor also lied about the time that he picked up the car - on an affidavit! He lied! Not by a minute, but by an hour. Not one digit wrong, but the whole time wrong!! That is in NO way a typo! He even couldn't explain it.

Still don’t change the evidence of her tail light being around and on John. The lie made no difference he didn’t arrive back to the Sally Port until 5:30ish and the SERT search was going on.
I don’t see it as a malicious lie, I’m sure he was writing his report as he was driving.

 

[cocomod]

I still want to know how/why he has blood on his pants. The CW can't explain any portion of this case to my satisfaction. If he was hit and just "ended up" where he was with this major cut on his head, he wouldn't have had blood down on his pants. How did that occur? They can't and didn't try to explain that phenomenon.

 

[RANCH]

I wonder why they didn't just show it truthfully then. I don't disagree since we can't see what's going on over there, but they did this on purpose, which makes them look guilty <modsnip>.

IMO MOO

If there was something nefarious about the video being inverted then I would have more of a problem with it.

I'm not sure who is guilty or for what. JMO.

 

[cocomod]

Still don’t change the evidence of her tail light being around and on John. The lie made no difference he didn’t arrive back to the Sally Port until 5:30ish and the SERT search was going on.
I don’t see it as a malicious lie, I’m sure he was writing his report as he was driving.

Still doesn't explain how the taillight flew to where he "landed". Science and math can't explain that either - as noone is claiming she drove up on the lawn. Also, he had an outer shirt on. How in the world did the "microscopic" taillight pieces end up on his inner shirt? Doesn't make any logical sense. The shirts were out in the open and compromised for days and days on end. I hold that evidence with zero regard.

 

[cocomod]

I agree 100%. The inverted video doesn't show any tampering or planting of evidence. In my opinion it's value as exculpatory evidence for the defense is nil.

JMO.

It showed perjury again by them claiming noone "went near the damaged taillight", but they did! You can't see what he is doing near the taillight, so how do you know he isn't tampering with it? He is bent down near it - even though they said noone went near it. I also want to know where he went after the car arrived at the SallyPort. If he went straight to the scene of the crime, would that alter your opinion?

 

[Derph]

So Kevin Albert has been placed on paid administrative leave pending an outside, independent investigation for his actions in a case he investigated with Michael Protor from 2 yrs ago. The statement was just issued by the Canton Select Board Meeting tonight.

 

[RANCH]

It showed perjury again by them claiming noone "went near the damaged taillight", but they did! You can't see what he is doing near the taillight, so how do you know he isn't tampering with it? He is bent down near it - even though they said noone went near it.

Okay. It still doesn't mean much to me because it doesn't show any tampering. Looking at the tail light is not tampering it. JMO.

 

[MyJoey]

RSBM - This is the very first case I have personally watched closely that I found the CW (prosecutor) to be untrustworthy! I am extremely disappointed in the amount of times that the CW twisted, turned, and flat out tried to confuse the truth!! It started before the trial as well - with the comment that there was video proof that she hit him with her vehicle! I think they should be sanctioned over several things that they did in trial! You are right, I expect this kind of behavior from some shady defense attorneys that try anything and everything to get their client off. I have never expected it from the "legal" prosecutors!

I see the defense doing the same thing, by trying to throw so many people under the bus. This is a question…..was the statement about having video evidence of Karen hitting John before the charges were upped? Asking because if I remember correctly didn’t her attorney come out and say this was an accident there was no intent involved?

 

[RANCH]

So Kevin Albert has been placed on paid administrative leave pending an outside, independent investigation for his actions in a case he investigated with Michael Protor from 2 yrs ago. The statement was just issued by the Canton Select Board Meeting tonight.

Can you link that please?

 

[ShadyLady]

I still want to know how/why he has blood on his pants. The CW can't explain any portion of this case to my satisfaction. If he was hit and just "ended up" where he was with this major cut on his head, he wouldn't have had blood down on his pants. How did that occur? They can't and didn't try to explain that phenomenon.

And blood in the snow. I wonder how much blood he had lost. And how long under those weather temps would it take a body to get down to 80 degrees.

 

[KSwizzle]

Correct me if I’m wrong as I might be but wasn’t there literally no official SERT report done, and the jurors asked for it and judge Cannone said you have all the evidence, kind of hiding the fact there wasn’t one when she could have just said there wasn’t one?

Why didn’t they make that official report?