MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #5

[k-mac]

I don’t think anyone cares. Well, except the McAlberts and a few people here.
He’s irrelevant; even the prosecutor doesn’t want him mentioned in a trial.
And as far as I know, this thread is about the ongoing trial and facts gathered.

KR thought he was pretty important for awhile.....

 

[Universecalling]

TBH its mostly the outrageous opposition to really acceptable facts presented that has made me look harder at what is going on here.

This very statement posted that there is no dog dna on JO's shirt he was wearing.
Here we go with all the jumping through hoops as to why this is still all a conspiracy.

The defence has access to all the presented evidence. I think they would be all over a switched shirt or pig dna.


My point is...there is no dog DNA on JO shirt according to the experts presented at trial.
Stated in a court of law under oath.

why would it not be correct????????

I think it’s worth listening to Kun‘s testimony in its entirety, including cross and re-cross (don’t remember if there was re-cross).
There were three outcomes/explanations given the reasons why no dog DNA found.
Also, dogs love pigs ears and many dog food treats contain pork.

What it all comes down to is that there is so much reasonable doubt raised by just mere issues of collecting this evidence. There is no telling what was swabbed. And the person who swabbed it did not pass their certification.
ANY reasonable minded juror would NOT consider this witness’ testimony. Not bc of her credibility, but bc of the unknown process the swabs were taken, mold and wetness impact the viability of the DNA (his shirt was wet), shirt dye also nullifies the DNA, and his shirt was colored.

The defense does not have all the access. They’ve asked where Chloe is so that they can test.
They were told they don’t know where she is, yet Coco sat on that stand and told us all she knows exactly where the dog is.

 

[k-mac]

I think it’s worth listening to Kun‘s testimony in its entirety, including cross and re-cross (don’t remember if there was re-cross).
There were three outcomes/explanations given the reasons why no dog DNA found.
Also, dogs love pigs ears and many dog food treats contain pork.

What it all comes down to is that there is so much reasonable doubt raised by just mere issues of collecting this evidence. There is no telling what was swabbed. And the person who swabbed it did not pass their certification.
ANY reasonable minded juror would NOT consider this witness’ testimony. Not bc of her credibility, but bc of the unknown process the swabs were taken, mold and wetness impact the viability of the DNA (his shirt was wet), shirt dye also nullifies the DNA, and his shirt was colored.

The defense does not have all the access. They’ve asked where Chloe is so that they can test.
They were told they don’t know where she is, yet Coco sat on that stand and told us all she knows exactly where the dog is.

I really appreciate your respectful detailed push back to my post. Thats what we are here to do.


My bug bare is...

can every single...witness....expert.....investigator...council ....be lyin.

Just because its got faulty areas DOES NOT been KR is innocent.

Does not mean plenty of facts are not there in plain sight stacking up against her.

Her words and actions are still at the forefront.
Above everyone else's actions and words.

Karens are the most important and they just get dismissed instead of scrutinised.

moo

 

[Universecalling]

I really appreciate your respectful detailed push back to my post. Thats what we are here to do.


My bug bare is...

can every single...witness....expert.....investigator...council ....be lyin.

Just because its got faulty areas DOES NOT been KR is innocent.

Does not mean plenty of facts are not there in plain sight stacking up against her.

Her words and actions are still at the forefront.
Above everyone else's actions and words.

Karens are the most important and they just get dismissed instead of scrutinised.

moo

I understand. It is inconceivable to think so many are lying and scheming. In a world of crazy conspiracies, we don’t want to give it life.
I get it.
I came into this almost blank slate. I’m an immigrant and truly appreciate our state of checks and balances, the privilege of assuming innocence until proven guilty, and the opportunity to have a trial with finders of facts present to weigh in on our fate.

I don’t know if she hit him or if there’s collusion. In my mind they’re not mutually exclusive.
I put myself in jurors’ shoes every day watching and listening to this trial.
I cannot get passed the inconsistencies in testimonials, blatant omissions in every aspect (investigation and by witnesses), body language, actions taken pre and post JO’s death, differences in testimonies during State and Federal GJ, and all the time the investigators had to make this right, but chose not to.
To top it all off, there is a reason FBI gave the defense all this info.

If this was involving all unrelated people, no family angle, I would think no way is it possible to have this many people involved and colluding. Someone would talk.

But when you look at the totality of it all, families with strong ties to the community and each other do stick together.
I lean more towards the fight angle, I think it was an accident and it snowballed quickly to try to cover and self preserve. And at one point it was too late to walk any of it back. Too many people involved that would go down.
That’s why I believe no one is admitting to anything. Mutual destruction deal kinda thing.

I appreciate your respectful approach, as well. It is always nice to have a meaningful discussion with both sides considering the differences

 

[keek]

How funny would it be if she actually has a flat butt?
That would be so on brand with her.
“Call Officer Lank back. And Proctor Trooper. I’d like to amend my testimony. It wasn’t my butt dialing, it was my paired sit bones. Yes, yes. My sit bones.”

Shouted three times.

 

[Weki]

what happened to king turtle boy?
He fall off his throne?
or fall on his sword?

He’s facing some 20 charges for witness intimidation/harassment. He’s getting ready for his own trial. He can use all the money he made from trolling this case to pay for his defense. It seems KR is distancing herself from him. Apparently he turned the harassment and intimidation on KR supporters and that was just unacceptable. They’re OK with witnesses being harassed but they draw the line at themselves. Fear not, it sounds like a new PR guru has been anointed. I don’t think TB will do jail time but he should imo. He needs to be made an example.

JMO

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

Don't know anything about that. Interesting case S1. .
I was simply pointing out it was mentioned in the post above without any reason or proof.

It is just an example of non truths floating around this case like facts. :-(

This is a misrepresentation of what was said. Nobody said it was a fact that shirts were switched. What actually was said was that no shirt was sent off for testing. Swabs were sent off. We don't know what the chain of custody was due to the sloppy LE work. If you have some information about what was and wasn't sent off, I'd be happy to read a link. We are all entitled to our opinions.

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

I really appreciate your respectful detailed push back to my post. Thats what we are here to do.


My bug bare is...

can every single...witness....expert.....investigator...council ....be lyin.

Just because its got faulty areas DOES NOT been KR is innocent.

Does not mean plenty of facts are not there in plain sight stacking up against her.

Her words and actions are still at the forefront.
Above everyone else's actions and words.

Karens are the most important and they just get dismissed instead of scrutinised.

moo

Nothing was dismissed. I have seen ZERO presented by the CW that leads me to believe KR MURDERED someone. I came into this with an open mind and am basing my opinion on what has been presented at TRIAL. What actions and words are you referring to? I have seen none that show she murdered anybody. Also, the OP made points about collection of evidence and why that type of thing is being scrutinized and they were not acknowledged. JMO

 

[Universecalling]

What bothers me here with “I hit him/did I hit him” is that it starts with, involves, and ends with Jen Mc.
Every time this was said was when Jen was present.
The niece said she heard KR ask if she hit him it over the phone to Jen.
My belief is they all threw him out and we’re going to blame it on the plow.
Jen is the one that’s always present during the utterance of that sentence. And was the one to tell Karen it wasn’t waterfall where KR left JO.
In that very moment is when Jen, IMO, capitalizes on Karen’s despair and puts it in her head via a question “ no, Karen, you were parked in front of my sister’s house. Omg do you think he was hit by a plow? Or did you hit him?”. And bam. It starts there.

I say all this because this next part was admitted by both JM and KerR- they ask Karen in a car if he could be at TWO different ex’s houses.
This is an ULTIMATE mean girl move while someone is in a frantic and hysterical state of mind.
They don’t diffuse, they exacerbate.

Just think to yourself- would your best friend in that situation mention your SO’s ex implying your SO spent the night w one of their ex’s as you are searching for them?

If they put that in KR’s head, everything else is game.

 

[Wishbone]

Don't know anything about that. Interesting case S1. .
I was simply pointing out it was mentioned in the post above without any reason or proof.

It is just an example of non truths floating around this case like facts. :-(

"There was absolutely no canine DNA,” Teri Kun, forensic scientist UC Davis Veterinary Lab said.

The forensic scientist said testing did uncover pig DNA. The prosecution said the samples were taken from John O'Keefe's shirt by the state police lab.

"It could be from food," Kun said.

Karen Read's defense arguing degraded or contaminated samples could have led to the results.

"I don't know anything about how they took those swabs," Kun said.

Expert disputes dog DNA defense in Karen Read murder trial

The Karen Read murder trial continues with more perspectives from witnesses on Wednesday.

turnto10.com

 

[HarmonyE.]

IMO if you were mauled by a dog to the point of death, the DNA would be there.

Not exactly what the DNA expert explained though, is it?

And he wasn't mauled to death. He died from a head injury and hypothermia.

The jury will hear all about the clothes and Michael Proctor. Unless he takes the 5th, which seems very possible.

 

[Name_Withheld]

I just had a thought...is there any proof that JO actually got in KR's car at The Waterfall? We know they walked out together and she reportedly had some hesitance about attending the Albert's home. Is it possible the JO got in someone else's car and she followed at some point later? Might explain her statement of last seeing him at The Waterfall and the testimony of KR being seen in her car alone with the dome light on...possibly waiting for JO to text her that all was well and she was welcome to join. It was JM who told KR that she drove JO to the Albert's home that night. Might also explain why nobody in the house saw him...whatever happened could've happened between the bar and the house and he really didn't make it into the house.

After five threads and 900+ posts I can't remember if there's actual proof that he was in KR's car. My mind was wandering through alternate scenarios.

 

[HarmonyE.]

I just had a thought...is there any proof that JO actually got in KR's car at The Waterfall? We know they walked out together and she reportedly had some hesitance about attending the Albert's home. Is it possible the JO got in someone else's car and she followed at some point later? Might explain her statement of last seeing him at The Waterfall and the testimony of KR being seen in her car alone with the dome light on...possibly waiting for JO to text her that all was well and she was welcome to join. It was JM who told KR that she drove JO to the Albert's home that night. Might also explain why nobody in the house saw him...whatever happened could've happened between the bar and the house and he really didn't make it into the house.

After five threads and 900+ posts I can't remember if there's actual proof that he was in KR's car. My mind was wandering through alternate scenarios.

I don't think there is much question he was in Read's car. The GPS/Health app data in their phones haas been examined. Karen didn't take a direct route; there was at least one wrong turn on the way as neither John nor Karen were sure where the house was.

 

[Wishbone]

dbm

 

[keek]

I don't think there is much question he was in Read's car. The GPS/Health app data in their phones haas been examined. Karen didn't take a direct route; there was at least one wrong turn on the way as neither John nor Karen were sure where the house was.

Did JO say/text anything at all do 'we' know once he was to have said, 'where to'?

 

[keek]

Did JO say/text anything at all do 'we' know once he was to have said, 'where to'?

Sure all of his texts are known, but don't know if it's out to public yet.

 

[TIGER0822]

Don't know anything about that. Interesting case S1. .
I was simply pointing out it was mentioned in the post above without any reason or proof.

It is just an example of non truths floating around this case like facts. :-(

Wow! I love that point. Wish I could pass it along to the defense.

 

[ch_13]

My point is...there is no dog DNA on JO shirt according to the experts presented at trial.
Stated in a court of law under oath.

why would it not be correct????????

rsbm.

I disagree that we've heard from "experts" in the plural. So far we've only heard from one person, the lab scientist at UC Davis who examined the swabs she received in the mail and determined that there was no dog DNA on them. But she only examined swabs she was sent. What we have yet to hear is how the shirt was collected, who did the swabbing, if it was done properly and how the package was sent to the lab.

Maybe that was all on the up-and-up, I don't know. However, I have heard rumblings that there are issues with the chain of custody on the shirt. So I would simply ask that before you decide that there's no way an animal could have caused John's injuries that you wait for all the evidence to be presented, including the testimony of the defense's expert witness.

Personally, I'm not fully on board with the whole full-fledged conspiracy theory. But I first saw those wounds on John's arm over a year ago. And I have a lot of trouble accepting that they were caused by a collision with a car. If not a dog, then how did John get them? I've heard a bunch of theories: taillight shards, pieces of the cocktail glass, exhaust pipe, Karen scratched him during an argument and so on. But so far none work for me.

I know for some people the physical evidence doesn't matter. To them this case starts and ends with Karen allegedly saying "I hit him", even though only something like 4 of the 15 or so witnesses at the scene heard her say that. But I don't feel that way. I just want to see the proof that Karen's SUV backed into John at a high-rate of speed and caused both his injuries and the damage to her car. Maybe it's coming. However, after five weeks of trial, we still have zero evidence presented that explains what happened to John after he stepped out of Karen's SUV.

 

[TIGER0822]

I would love to get a pulse of this group.
Are there any posters who were thinking Karen is guilty at the start of the trial and have Yechanged their mind, even slightly?

Yes, I assumed that her Attorneys theory was ridiculous. I am now swaying to believe that KR car did not hit JO. JMO

 

[TIGER0822]

TBH its mostly the outrageous opposition to really acceptable facts presented that has made me look harder at what is going on here.

This very statement posted that there is no dog dna on JO's shirt he was wearing.
Here we go with all the jumping through hoops as to why this is still all a conspiracy.

The defence has access to all the presented evidence. I think they would be all over a switched shirt or pig dna.


My point is...there is no dog DNA on JO shirt according to the experts presented at trial.
Stated in a court of law under oath.

why would it not be correct????????

The evidence collection did not follow any standard procedures, or any procedure really. The shirt was tossed around for a month before being tested.