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

[Charlot123]

RSBM. This was posted in another thread, but I hope you'll forgive me if I respond to it here, as this has to do with the KR trial.

As I'm sure you're aware, the state's theory of the case was not that KR "accidentally" ran over JK, but rather than she backed into him on purpose at a high-rate of speed. They could have just charged her with manslaughter, but they chose to make it a murder case, even though they had very little evidence of intent.

As for links between the KR and SB, here are some obvious ones:

• Many of the same agencies were involved including Canton PD, MSP, Norfolk District Attorney's Office, Office of the Chief Medical Examiner
• Many of the same cops were involved, and both cases involved misdeeds by a LEO
• When the LEO misdeeds were uncovered, the commonwealth just quietly sat on the evidence and did nothing until it became public knowledge and they were forced to act.
• An incomplete investigation was done which missed obvious physical evidence indicating the scene wasn't what it initially appeared
• Both cases involved missed tech evidence that would have inculpated a police officer had it been discovered
• Even as new evidence came to light indicating that the cases were more complicated than originally thought, the commonwealth refused to reexamine them.
• The FBI /US Attorney is investigating both cases because they believe that public integrity has been compromised

I'm sure there is much more, which will be revealed in the weeks and months to come.

But one thing in particular I'd like to point out. In SB's case, the ME ignored the broken hyoid bone and physical description of the crime scene which were indicative of a murder. In the KR case, the ME claims that there were no signs of a physical fight (ignoring the various wounds to JK's hands and face) and have refused to admit that the scratches on his arm were caused by an animal. Although at trial, they simply refused to give any explanation.

I think we can look at the autopsy photos and the holes in JO's jersey and our eyes tell us what should have been obvious to the ME, just as the circumstances and manner of SB's death should have been obvious and yet the ME got it wrong.

(It's cool how you moved my post here, I want to know how to do it.)

The first thing I posted in KR's thread was something along the lines of "the events reconstructed through collective alcoholic haze", and this is how I still view it. Now, i don't live in MA and may not be privy to the intricacies of behind-the-scenes politics of Norfolk county, so maybe KR's case will yet surprise me.

The same community and many cops are involved in both cases, you are right. SB's case testifies to low morals of many policemen as well. (Twenty years since the Boston diocese scandal, and such an odd deja vu.) So, i bought popcorn, but not ready to discuss the scratches on JOK's arm because I honestly don't know what to make of them. Either way.

 

[arielilane]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1830684370165748043

 

[Seattle1]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1831338032970322415

 

[Curiousobserver]

<modsnip - quoted post was removed>
I think it takes exceptional arrogance to compare yourself, even by analogy, to those brave soldiers who died in the tens of thousands as if being accused of the crime of drunk driving is morally equivalent to dying in battle. Its totally preposterous, tone-deaf, and stunningly narcissistic.

 

[HarmonyE.]

I think it takes exceptional arrogance to compare yourself, even by analogy, to those brave soldiers who died in the tens of thousands as if being accused of the crime of drunk driving is morally equivalent to dying in battle Its totally preposterous, tone-deaf, and stunningly narcissistic.

Once again,
She disparaged no one, especially not the soldiers who died in that insane war.
So what if she's arrogant, assuming you are even correct? What possible relevance does it have to her innocence or guilt?

 

[waldojabba]

Considering the source I'm not surprised. Certainly not an unbiased news site over there. JMO

I think she is 100 per cent innocent. I also think her remarks are tone deaf but they have nothing to do with her guilt or innocence.
This is not about whether we like Karen or not, or whether we think she is “narcissistic” or not as another commenter opined.
Does the evidence show that she killed John with her car. And that’s a big FAT NO. Just my opinion

 

[HarmonyE.]

I think she is 100 per cent innocent. I also think her remarks are tone deaf but they have nothing to do with her guilt or innocence.
This is not about whether we like Karen or not, or whether we think she is “narcissistic” or not as another commenter opined.
Does the evidence show that she killed John with her car. And that’s a big FAT NO. Just my opinion

Agree. I don't know Karen Read. I may or may not like her if I did. We might disagree on everything. Maybe I like her clothes, maybe I don't. I'd probably handle questions differently than she does, because I'm not her.

But I do know there is no way JOK's injuries were caused by her vehicle. And that's all that matters to me.

 

[Soulmagent]

I think she is 100 per cent innocent. I also think her remarks are tone deaf but they have nothing to do with her guilt or innocence.
This is not about whether we like Karen or not, or whether we think she is “narcissistic” or not as another commenter opined.
Does the evidence show that she killed John with her car. And that’s a big FAT NO. Just my opinion

I think it was awkward talking. She probably was searching her brain trying to compare the situation to something. People have posters and they were there to support her . I probably would have said something dumb as well.

 

[housewife]

So, i bought popcorn, but not ready to discuss the scratches on JOK's arm because I honestly don't know what to make of them. Either way.

RSBM

I scratched JOK's arm with my conical
Bugle tm fingernails.

 

[Seattle1]

I think she is 100 per cent innocent. I also think her remarks are tone deaf but they have nothing to do with her guilt or innocence.
This is not about whether we like Karen or not, or whether we think she is “narcissistic” or not as another commenter opined.
Does the evidence show that she killed John with her car. And that’s a big FAT NO. Just my opinion

Well said @waldojabba.

I remember opining in a YT chat that I did not think KR polled as "likeable," and the following day, we learned a juror was dismissed-- allegedly after a juror sent a note to the Judge about reoccurring comments being made by another juror.

We will never know what the dismissed juror said about the defendant but I personally think it had become apparent to others that this juror was holding a personal dislike of KR. No doubt, it's difficult to remain impartial but disliking a defendant can never be allowed to overrule the evidence.

It's allowed to dislike KR and still believe she's not guilty as indicted! JMO

 

[Charlot123]

Once again,
She disparaged no one, especially not the soldiers who died in that insane war.
So what if she's arrogant, assuming you are even correct? What possible relevance does it have to her innocence or guilt?

Well, it’s not about her. It is what our journalism has degenerated into.

 

[arielilane]

Karen Read, accused of killing her boyfriend, a Boston Police officer – the 20/20 interview and exclusive personal video. The ALL-NEW event special premieres Friday night at 9/8c. And stream on Hulu. #ABC2020

https://twitter.com/x/status/1830984241649459315