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]

There's no way that KR was the only person he had disgusting comments about, right? The DA isn't going to be able to bury this if there's possible exculpatory information on his phone. This is going to be a field day for defense attorneys.

You know, I think Canton and Stoughton PD atmosphere was that of one big teenagers’ locker room.

That actually has an effect on everyone. If RD was head of the Explorers program in school, most of the participants were likely boys. So your head of the program, the male role model, is grooming girls, and chance is, you hear him talk about girls in a demeaning, misogynistic style behind their backs.

And the sad part it, some of these younger policemen come from families and generations of policemen, with respected names in the CW; good families. But, it was a different time, and maybe the prevailing attitude to women was different among their dads and granddads. Things ideally should be changed in the community of peers. And also, look at the wives of these young cops. Many are self-reliant, independent, work and bear kids to these guys, manage everything. To be respected. And of course young women in general know how to protect themselves from harassment better. So all that’s left for these men in uniforms is to put women down behind their backs…or like in a neighboring SB’s thread, go after young, immature, vulnerable girls who have no protection.

Thinking of KR. I am not her supporter and the case is ??? for me, but if we take her outside of JOK’s death, she is an independent self-sufficient woman. What Proctor was laughing at to me, shows resilience and strength that should be respected. In any gender.

 

[Seattle1]

Attorney Bederow's summary on the 20/20 episode:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1832390987223539816

 

[arielilane]

MG Interview -Is this a confession?
Any remorse?
Any care or concern about Officer O’Keefe's family?
Only concern is for KR?

It’s pretty simple for me. Can’t support a drunk driver.
Alcohol impaired
Decided to drive after drinking heavily
Raging
Will not accept consequences
Blamed innocent people including a 17 year old high school student
Ruined lives

matter of opinion

 

[CrimeTheorist]

I admit I haven't followed this case very closely but watching the 20/20 episode it seems pretty clear to me that she's guilty. I do think she has a good defense team and has a good chance of being acquitted though.

 

[HarmonyE.]

I admit I haven't followed this case very closely but watching the 20/20 episode it seems pretty clear to me that she's guilty. I do think she has a good defense team and has a good chance of being acquitted though.

My emphasis.

The 20/20 story was meaningless. No one should attempt to form an opinion based upon it, whether on behalf of her innocence or guilt. There is so much more to the story.

 

[CrimeTheorist]

My emphasis.

The 20/20 story was meaningless. No one should attempt to form an opinion based upon it, whether on behalf of her innocence or guilt. There is so much more to the story.

I wanted to say that I haven't followed the case closely because I know that could very well be the case. My opinion is based on a few things I have seen, the 20/20 episode just being the final one. I might have to watch the entire trial and see if my opinion changes.

 

[sunshineray]

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.

Snipped by me for focus...I'm aware of this case through mefia articles but haven't followed it to trial.

• 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

What were the instances of the above things in the Karen Read case? The "obvious physical evidence" and specific "tech evidence" implicating another? Was it just the scratches on JS's arm or something more? TIA for an help in understanding.

 

[MerlinFalcon]

I was talking to my friend last night who is also into true crime and listened to the 2020 podcast. She believed KR was guilty. Then I started telling her all of the things we knew here that weren't part of the show and she wishes she had followed it as it was happening.

 

[ch_13]

Snipped by me for focus...I'm aware of this case through mefia articles but haven't followed it to trial.

• 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

What were the instances of the above things in the Karen Read case? The "obvious physical evidence" and specific "tech evidence" implicating another? Was it just the scratches on JS's arm or something more? TIA for an help in understanding.

Physical evidence: Not just the scratches, but also the condition of his shirt; the lack of wounds to JO's body, where the car had supposedly hit him; the wounds to the back of his head; that his body wasn't found on the roadway, but up on the grass; the drinking glass he was carrying was also found on the lawn, not in the road; the lack of damage to KR's car...basically a whole bunch of things which should have immediately caused LE to question the idea of a hit-and-run and investigate more thoroughly.

Tech evidence: I was specifically thinking of the Jen McCabe's supposed 2:30 AM google search which Trooper Guarino missed. (Whether or not the search happened then or later, I don't know, but Guarino missed the whole thing entirely. He's also the same person who "missed" thousands of deleted texts between Farwell and Birchmore.) Then there's the Apple Health data on John's phone. And of course, you could also add in the various buttdials and texts exchanged by the Alberts and Brian Higgins, which we only know about because of the Fed intervention.

 

[sunshineray]

Physical evidence: Not just the scratches, but also the condition of his shirt; the lack of wounds to JO's body, where the car had supposedly hit him; the wounds to the back of his head; that his body wasn't found on the roadway, but up on the grass; the drinking glass he was carrying was also found on the lawn, not in the road; the lack of damage to KR's car...basically a whole bunch of things which should have immediately caused LE to question the idea of a hit-and-run and investigate more thoroughly.

Tech evidence: I was specifically thinking of the Jen McCabe's supposed 2:30 AM google search which Trooper Guarino missed. (Whether or not the search happened then or later, I don't know, but Guarino missed the whole thing entirely. He's also the same person who "missed" thousands of deleted texts between Farwell and Birchmore.) Then there's the Apple Health data on John's phone. And of course, you could also add in the various buttdials and texts exchanged by the Alberts and Brian Higgins, which we only know about because of the Fed intervention.

Wow that's a lot to look into!

And how did the Defense explain away the broken tail light fragments at the scene?

 

[Wishbone]

Wow that's a lot to look into!

And how did the Defense explain away the broken tail light fragments at the scene?

Another question could be how to explain away the extra tail light pieces submitted to lab by LE.
The crime lab reconstructed the taillight from the evidence that was collected. After completely reassembling it, there were leftover pieces. Extra tail light pieces that did not belong to the original tail light.

 

[ch_13]

Wow that's a lot to look into!

And how did the Defense explain away the broken tail light fragments at the scene?

The taillight fragments don't really make any sense. The commonwealth claims KR backed into him at 24 mph. At that speed, how was there no damage to the car? (As an aside, they screwed up their analysis of the SUV's key cycle data and looked at the wrong event. See the testimony of Trooper Paul.)

And if she just tapped him lightly which caused him to fall, then the taillights would never have been broken. There's really no scenario where one can be hit hard enough to break a taillight but not otherwise damage a car. Not from hitting a human body at least.

And as @Wishbone points out, they found extra taillight pieces at the scene. What does that tell you?

Also, if you're looking into this case, check out the mysterious glass on her bumper. I explain the circumstances here: VERDICT WATCH - MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #14

 

[arielilane]

I admit I haven't followed this case very closely but watching the 20/20 episode it seems pretty clear to me that she's guilty. I do think she has a good defense team and has a good chance of being acquitted though.

I didn't watch 20/20 episode and most likely will not watch it. I only watched the several minute clips posted by 20/20 at their X site.

 

[sunshineray]

The taillight fragments don't really make any sense. The commonwealth claims KR backed into him at 24 mph. At that speed, how was there no damage to the car? (As an aside, they screwed up their analysis of the SUV's key cycle data and looked at the wrong event. See the testimony of Trooper Paul.)

And if she just tapped him lightly which caused him to fall, then the taillights would never have been broken. There's really no scenario where one can be hit hard enough to break a taillight but not otherwise damage a car. Not from hitting a human body at least.

And as @Wishbone points out, they found extra taillight pieces at the scene. What does that tell you?

Also, if you're looking into this case, check out the mysterious glass on her bumper. I explain the circumstances here: VERDICT WATCH - MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #14

Thanks, just one more question, where was his phone found?

 

[arielilane]

The jurors (imo) were influenced by the pink party outside (caused confusion) tailgating; otherwise, it would have been a final vote of guilty by all 12 of the jurors. I commend each of the jurors for their civic duty and recognize they had a difficult task - can't imagine the daily pressure put upon them. What a stressful time for the jurors.




On manslaughter and the lesser included charges, the juror said the jury's final vote was a "soft" 9-3, with nine voting guilty.

Read was charged with manslaughter while operating under the influence, but jurors were given the option to convict her on the lesser charges of involuntary manslaughter or motor vehicle homicide.

Karen Read trial juror says jury didn't know how to communicate unanimous verdict on 2 charges to judge

A juror in the Karen Read trial says they weren't sure how to communicate a unanimous decision on two charges.

www.cbsnews.com

Updated on: July 22, 2024

 

[ch_13]

Thanks, just one more question, where was his phone found?

On the lawn under his body, which just brings more questions.

 

[sunshineray]

On the lawn under his body, which just brings more questions.

Maybe he was holding that and it in his hand hit the tail light, just a thought

 

[jepop]

Snipped by me for focus...I'm aware of this case through mefia articles but haven't followed it to trial.

• 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

What were the instances of the above things in the Karen Read case? The "obvious physical evidence" and specific "tech evidence" implicating another? Was it just the scratches on JS's arm or something more? TIA for an help in understanding.

This link covers the testimony of Dr Sheridan (re lack of bodily injuries and bruising, head wound and arm wounds); Dr Wolf (commissioned by FBI independently for truth finding re accident reconstruction and lack of damage to Lexus ); Dr Rentschler ditto commissioned by FBI re head wound and bodily injuries and lack thereof). The CW knew of Wolf's and Rentschler's work well before trial and elected to ignore their findings and push ahead. Moo

The last 3 witnesses in the Karen Read trial took the stand Monday. Here's what they said.

Closing arguments are set for Tuesday morning, with jury deliberations to follow.

www.boston.com

This link includes summary of Dr Russell (dog bite/clawing/ injury animal expert re JOK's horrific arm wounds).

Karen Read's defense team called their first 3 witnesses Friday. Here's what they said.

A snowplow driver and experts on dog bites and digital forensics took the stand Friday for the defense after the commonwealth rested its case.

www.boston.com

It's hard to get a clear sense of their findings without viewing the actual testimony. It's important to put this testimony in the context of the previous poor and questionable offerings of the CW's crash 'expert' and the pussyfooting of the ME witness around the arm wounds. All Imoo.

Edited spelling.

 

[ch_13]

Maybe he was holding that and it in his hand hit the tail light, just a thought

Remember, he was carrying the drinking glass in his hand as well. As one of the ME's testified in the trial about the glass, if his arm was hit, he would have dropped it at the point of impact, not up on the lawn. That's just a simple reflex action.

Look, you can try to explain away the physical evidence all day if you want. Lord knows, we have 17 threads filled with people trying to do just that: Maybe Karen scratched him; Maybe he crawled onto the lawn; Maybe he was scratched by a rose bush; Maybe Karen drove up onto the lawn; Maybe he was dragged under the car; Maybe a passerby moved the phone; and so on.

Everyone's got their theory, but none really comport with all the physical evidence. You're still welcome to take your own stab at it, but really, every single "what if" has been endlessly debated and debunked. If you're truly interested in the physical evidence, I would suggest going back and watching the testimony of the ME's, the reconstruction experts, and perhaps the lab techs.

 

[arielilane]

Maybe he was holding that and it in his hand hit the tail light, just a thought

Possible and Probable, moo.