MISTRIAL MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #17

[kittythehare]

No need for a further defense here, the meaning of your post is clear enough.

The crowd outside could best be described as a peaceful mob.

If anyone thought that JO's family sitting together with some of the witnesses during closing arguments was Jury intimidation, I am not sure how you reconcile hundreds of people marching around in pink and shouting all day is not intimidation.

The jurors thought so.
Actually.

 

[kittythehare]

The affidavit read to me as though the juror had concerns from both sides not just KR supporters. It was just as ugly as the Alberts parading in and staring at the jury during closing arguments.

specifically stated it was from 'both sides', not one in particular.
eta link

https://twitter.com/x/status/1813975177111421076

 

[kittythehare]

Why would the jurors names EVER be released in the first place? Aren’t jurors identities always protected even after the trials, except when they want to speak? MOO

different in CW, it seems.

 

[TIGER0822]

I feel like it may have really handicapped the biomedical engineers that they weren't allowed to say who hired them. If I were on a jury, I might see it as weird or suspicious that a witness seems unwilling to say who hired them.

And it would not be intuitive to think "oh, it was probably the FBI who hired them."

Judge Cannone showing her biased again. MOO. Jackson tried, he really tried to give a clue 'Department of Defense'

 

[TIGER0822]

@BienickWCVB

#KarenRead The judge has agreed to keep sealed the list of jurors after one juror petitioned the court saying they feared for their safety.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1813988539937210406

“I am frightened for my personal safety as a result of learning that someone associated with this case has been criminally charged with intimidation,” wrote Juror Doe in an affidavit.


“I also recall testimony from at last one witness who described being harassed by individuals and her family being harassed because of their involvement in this case,” the juror wrote.


The juror says that during their deliberations they “could hear protesters outside screaming and yelling.” And they say after the mistrial was declared, they were followed to a secret location by what appeared to be news photographers.


“I have seen social media posts that were very demeaning of attacking the integrity of the trial judge. If someone is going to attack a sitting judge, I see no reason why they would not demean and attack, verbally and physically, a juror who sat on this jury,” wrote the juror.


“My concerns are not limited to a particular blogger or to a particular “side” of this case,” the juror wrote.


“My affidavit and motion should not be interpreted as indicating how I or any other juror voted on this case, or how I or any other juror feel about this case,” wrote the juror.

McCabes sister was charged with assault on TB!

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Judge Cannone showing her biased again. MOO. Jackson tried, he really tried to give a clue 'Department of Defense'

Is there any information available whether or not an investigation might be conducted into the judge and rulings or procedural activity in the KR case?

For example, the following come to mind:
- some of the pre trial and in-trial rulings made;
- the push to trial when IIRC both the prosecution and defense teams requested a delay in the trial start for preparation and other reasons;
- any aspects relating to the pre trial statement of DA Morrisey and possible impact on the investigation, investigators, and / or the judge’s rulings;
- exclusion of certain elements (e.g. nature of the third party report identity and why that report exists);
- inclusion of certain aspects (e.g. Aruba testimony) perhaps deemed irrelevant or prejudicial;
- any rulings on items deemed prejudicial to one side or the other;
- absence of clear judge rulings on objections either sustained or overruled;
- absence of clarity on the SERT report and whether or not that report existed (and if not why not) - and as relates to the jury’s deliberation request on that report;
- whether or not sufficient reasonable doubt existed (as many contend) and whether a directed verdict should have been declared;
- whether the jury was provided sufficient instruction or guidance on an apparent confusing verdict form;
- whether the jury was too readily excused and why;
- whether information was available as to the jury split on the verdicts - including to the judge - before the mistrial declared;
- and whether the case should have been dismissed with prejudice.

And if so who would be able to file such investigation and with which state or other authority? And who would be responsible for conducting it? IMO one would hope that would be another aspect of this case that needs investigation. There are it seems too many questions that exist IMO. MOO