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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

HarmonyE. said:
Good. These are not good cops. I'm no Turtleboy fan, but I wonder if some of this relates to how they've behaved with regard to the witness intimidation allegations.

This is also possibly very good news for Read's defense. Be funny if the only state trooper standing by the time she's retried is poor Trooper Joe Paul.
Click to expand...

I want answers on the flipped/ mirrored video. Hope the IA will Investigate that. Not crossing my fingers either...
 
shotgun09 said:
I want answers on the flipped/ mirrored video. Hope the IA will Investigate that. Not crossing my fingers either...
Click to expand...

Of course, I don't know but I'm thinking that might be of their lesser concerns. I blame Lally in full for presenting that video without having a witness explain at the outset it was flipped. He wanted to confuse the jury.

It's MOO, but I don't see a retrial here. Even the judge acknowledges there are going to be appeals from one side no matter how she rules on the motion to dismiss two of the charges so that will push a trial back much further into next year, if not into 2026. In the meantime, shoes are likely to continue to drop. And there's still the FBI who we've yet to hear from.

For those following the horrific Sandra Birchmore case, Fanning was very much involved with that. (as was Canton cop Michael Lank who testified in this case and of course, Albert brother Kevin who is already suspended for bad behavior).
 
OldCop said:
Not MA law per se but here’s a couple I found:
talks.ox.ac.uk

‘Breaking the Chain of Causation’

An important principle in common and criminal law is that a defendant is not liable for a harm if there is a ‘break in the chain of causation’ between the defendant’s wrongful conduct and the harm. For example, if the negligence of a tanker company causes oil to leak onto the street, which is...
talks.ox.ac.uk
www.thewilsonpc.com

Causation in Legal Contexts

The importance of establishing causation in legal cases especially in personal injury.
www.thewilsonpc.com www.thewilsonpc.com

It is often used in negligence cases and/or
Click to expand...
From your post @OldCop - below seems to be pretty on target. Betting lots of money that many of the jurors did not understand the concept.
JMO

“ Understanding the difference between causation and correlation is also essential. While correlation indicates a relationship between two events, it does not imply that one event caused the other. Causation, on the other hand, establishes a cause-and-effect relationship, asserting that one event directly leads to another.”
 
ShadyLady said:
That she did not get the outcome she wanted?
With fresh eyes, I now clearly see her bias.
Click to expand...

The judge is very experienced, or in the words of my favorite Attorney 'Not all experience is good experience. Sadly they often have lots of experience in doing it the wrong way!
shotgun09 said:
I want answers on the flipped/ mirrored video. Hope the IA will Investigate that. Not crossing my fingers either...
Click to expand...
 
It seems most of the posters on this thread think Karen Read should have been found not guilty of all charges. I watched the trial like a juror. That is to say I only watched testimony in front of jurors, and I really have no idea of the substance of anything else outside of that including any other investigation ongoing. At the end of the trial, I think she most likely hit him with no intent to kill him. Also, I would have probably voted not guilty due to reasonable doubt related to the sloppy investigation. However, in no way, do I buy into the conspiracy surrounding the Albert family, and it is illogical to me that every single piece of damning evidence could be planted by Proctor.

I am honestly wondering if a lot of you really believe the Albert family did something to JOK, and if so, what is the evidence to support this?
 
misantha said:
It seems most of the posters on this thread think Karen Read should have been found not guilty of all charges. I watched the trial like a juror. That is to say I only watched testimony in front of jurors, and I really have no idea of the substance of anything else outside of that including any other investigation ongoing. At the end of the trial, I think she most likely hit him with no intent to kill him. Also, I would have probably voted not guilty due to reasonable doubt related to the sloppy investigation. However, in no way, do I buy into the conspiracy surrounding the Albert family, and it is illogical to me that every single piece of damning evidence could be planted by Proctor.

I am honestly wondering if a lot of you really believe the Albert family did something to JOK, and if so, what is the evidence to support this?
Click to expand...
As you stated, the sloppy investigation created reasonable doubt. Watching another trial in another state this week and the way the evidence was handled leaves no doubt whatsoever. So the question is does the way Canton and MSP LE handled the KR case indicate their SOP or was it an anomaly? I believe this question is at the root of all the further and ongoing investigations. Results to follow.

As to the Alberts, who knows? Why so many different stories and times, butt dials, disposed of phones, circling the wagon texts,etc? Once again, a proper investigation could have provided the answers.

As a juror, you are supposed to follow the law. There was reasonable doubt and she should have been acquitted.
 
misantha said:
It seems most of the posters on this thread think Karen Read should have been found not guilty of all charges. I watched the trial like a juror. That is to say I only watched testimony in front of jurors, and I really have no idea of the substance of anything else outside of that including any other investigation ongoing. At the end of the trial, I think she most likely hit him with no intent to kill him. Also, I would have probably voted not guilty due to reasonable doubt related to the sloppy investigation. However, in no way, do I buy into the conspiracy surrounding the Albert family, and it is illogical to me that every single piece of damning evidence could be planted by Proctor.

I am honestly wondering if a lot of you really believe the Albert family did something to JOK, and if so, what is the evidence to support this?
Click to expand...
Because the burden of proof is on the CW and not Karen's defense it's not really within the scope of the trial for evidence to prove this conspiracy. Although you could easily be fooled to think that it was, seeing as the CW spent more time trying to disprove the "conspiracy" than they did trying to prove the actual case they were presenting. I remain utterly shocked by how pathetic the excuses the CW had to come up with were to try and explain away exculpatory evidence in this case.

There is no way that the injuries on John O'Keefe's body could have been caused by Karen Read's SUV reversing into him at 24 mph, according to an actual expert.

There is no way that the damage caused to Karen Read's SUV was caused by it reversing into John O'Keefe at 24 mph, according to another actual expert.

There is no way that dinner plate sized pieces of bright red taillight lay undiscovered under a few inches of snow for days. Unless MSP policy states that they are only allowed to hire police officers who are terrified of snow.

There is no way that Karen Read repeatedly screamed out the words "I hit him!" and no record was made of this for MONTHS. No bodycam, not even a handwritten note by an attending officer.

There is no way John O'Keefe lay dying/dead on the lawn of 34 Fairview Avenue for 5 hours while people were coming and going in and out of the property. Apart from the "black blob" observation that, again, didn't reveal itself for an unacceptably long time.

I could go on and on. But I'll stop now.

JMO
 
You know, I started off on this case fresh, trying to approach it from the point of view of a juror. Albeit it one that also saw all of the legal discussions outside of the actual juror's presence.
And at first, when I watched the attending Fire department EMT's say that they heard the defendant say "I hit him, I hit him" I thought... Well why would they lie about that?
But then Katie McLaughlin was asked if she knew Caitlin Albert and her response was "I went to high school with someone called Caitlin Albert."

And it was all downhill from there for the CW!

JMO
 
misantha said:
It seems most of the posters on this thread think Karen Read should have been found not guilty of all charges. I watched the trial like a juror. That is to say I only watched testimony in front of jurors, and I really have no idea of the substance of anything else outside of that including any other investigation ongoing. At the end of the trial, I think she most likely hit him with no intent to kill him. Also, I would have probably voted not guilty due to reasonable doubt related to the sloppy investigation. However, in no way, do I buy into the conspiracy surrounding the Albert family, and it is illogical to me that every single piece of damning evidence could be planted by Proctor.

I am honestly wondering if a lot of you really believe the Albert family did something to JOK, and if so, what is the evidence to support this?
Click to expand...
KR is on trial, the CW case is hellbent on exonerating the Alberts.
Why?
If you believe she hit him why is it his body, the most significant evidence they have , shows no signs of it?

The somersault theory doesn't pan out for a grass landing, you see..
 
kittythehare said:
KR is on trial, the CW case is hellbent on exonerating the Alberts.
Why?
If you believe she hit him why is it his body, the most significant evidence they have , shows no signs of it?

The somersault theory doesn't pan out for a grass landing, you see..
Click to expand...
Yes kitty!^^^^….. so true….. and I almost have to ask, maybe the CW case, the investigators, proctor, evidence collection, CW theory of the case, chain of custody (lack thereof), and courtroom protocol should be on trial. Oh wait, for those that watched much of this it was. SMH. MOO
 
Last edited:
bobbymkii said:
Because the burden of proof is on the CW and not Karen's defense it's not really within the scope of the trial for evidence to prove this conspiracy. Although you could easily be fooled to think that it was, seeing as the CW spent more time trying to disprove the "conspiracy" than they did trying to prove the actual case they were presenting.
Click to expand...
Snipped by me.

This specifically is my problem with watching the trial. I was introduced to this case when the jury was already deliberating. I was of the opinion that KR could have possibly done this, so I have been watching the trial on YouTube. Lally fails to draw a picture of what happened according to the CW theory. He can't connect the dots because he is too busy countering the defenses theory. The defense draws a very detailed theory of what they think happened and connects the dots. The defense doesn't really need to have a theory. They just need to punch holes in the CW theory and evidence. I know longer believe she hit him, and I sure don't believe anyone who says she said she hit him. Nobody documented this at the time and that would be important info. Police procedure alone was abysmal. KR is innocent, and I believe the <modsnip - derogatory name changes are not allowed> know what happened even if they didn't do it. JMO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brian Higgins
Ryan Nagel
Heather Maxson
Ricky D'Antuono
Jennifer McCabe
Matt McCabe
Sarah Levinson
Tristan Morris
Caitlin Albert
Brian Laughlin

This is a list of known people who testified that at various times they walked near and traveled in a vehicle past where John O'Keefe was supposed to have been lying on a pretty short front lawn. And saw nothing. Not even a fake black blob.

And of course this doesn't include any other vehicles driving past the area in the early part of the morning before snow would have covered a body.

He could not have been there when Read left.
 
I believe that the blow to the back of the head was inadvertent, that nobody actually struck JO with a heavy blunt object. The wound just does not correspond with being struck by a tail light lens OMO. I do not think a car had anything to do with causing injury to JO.
That impact wound may have been consequential to a pretty brief fight, or even potentially a confrontation with an animal; or some combination of those. I believe the real mystery here, is how did he get to that location on the lawn? That required conscience effort on someone's part, and I don't believe it could have been KR.
 
It actually wouldn't matter if Karen Read's defense claimed that JO'K was killed by aliens or by a time-travelling Genghis Khan, if the CW can't convince 12 jurors beyond a reasonable doubt that she hit him with her car then she can't be found guilty!

JMO
 
misantha said:
It seems most of the posters on this thread think Karen Read should have been found not guilty of all charges. I watched the trial like a juror. That is to say I only watched testimony in front of jurors, and I really have no idea of the substance of anything else outside of that including any other investigation ongoing. At the end of the trial, I think she most likely hit him with no intent to kill him. Also, I would have probably voted not guilty due to reasonable doubt related to the sloppy investigation. However, in no way, do I buy into the conspiracy surrounding the Albert family, and it is illogical to me that every single piece of damning evidence could be planted by Proctor.

I am honestly wondering if a lot of you really believe the Albert family did something to JOK, and if so, what is the evidence to support this?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't agree that most of the posters on this thread think she is guilty, in fact I think we are in the significant minority and have been the focus of some pretty angry and disrespectful posts.

The problem here is that a sloppy investigation and unprofessional conduct makes it easy for people to believe that the evidence that was collected isn't real, that evidence that they didn't look for actually existed, that any story the defense tells is true, and that some of the evidence is in fact planted. None of that is of course true.

Absent an elaborate evidence planting conspiracy by multiple police officers you can't explain how tail light pieces from her car are at the scene, or how those pieces are on his clothes, and how his DNA is on those pieces. You can't explain how the glass from the bar is still there with him just as it would be if he died right after he got out of that car.

Absent an elaborate conspiracy to coordinate testimony of first responders, you can't explain how she confessed at the scene that she hit him in front of multiple people.

Absent a conspiracy to coordinate testimony between civilians, you can't explain why she said she hit him and why she knew her tail light was broken while in the car searching with her friends.

Many people have focused on the testimony of one expert who testified that in his opinion those injures could not have been caused by an accident. This witness has a BS in mechanical engineering, and a PhD in photonics; neither of which have any coursework or direct relevance to accident reconstruction. He actually had no formal training in accident reconstruction, He isn't a plastic engineer, a polymer scientist, an automotive engineer, he isn't a medical Dr., he has never been an EMT or medic, he hasn't even been a lifeguard. His team did not examine the car, go to the scene, look at the body, get a real bar glass, or provide the full signed report of the studies they did. And... he and his company will benefit enormously from the publicity.

Most ER Dr. will tell you that accident injuries are often not overt for several days. And studies posted on this forum from the NHTSA show low speed pedestrian crashes result in severe injuries around 30% of the time. Around 1/3 of the time people are severely injured by low speed collisions..., and she was going up to 24mph, black-out drunk, backward.

But there is a lot more. JO's shirt and all his other clothes are still in evidence and could be tested for canine DNA by the defense, but they didn't. Why do you think they didn't? The prosecution did and found no canine DNA.

There is dashcam video showing her completely obliterated tail light from 8am that morning, before MP had her car.

Chloe the dog is alive and well. If I were trying to cover up a dog bite I would put the animal down and have them cremated.

That picture of the bloody knuckles of the teenager the defense claims hit JO; taken a month later.

The FBI investigated for 2+ years and held a Federal Grand Jury- no indictments, no charges, 3000 pages turned over to the defense and no smoking gun of framing Karen Read they could use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 161 more.
Total: 1,989 (members: 162, guests: 1,827)

Online statistics

Members online
162
Guests online
1,827
Total visitors
1,989
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,655
Messages
18,111,684
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top