MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #6

[HarmonyE.]

Whatever one thinks of Kearney I think it's worth remembering he wasn't in Canton the night John was killed and he has no relevance with regard to this trial.

 

[TIGER0822]

I hope KR sues the prosecutor's office, the PD, and the individuals who conspired to bring about this sham trial!! This is beyond absurd.

The trial get whackier and whackier!

 

[TIGER0822]

Wow! You are right! 3 and 4 certainly look like puncture marks.

Can’t see how a car could do that!

 

[TIGER0822]

Maybe an example of how the witness can solve a puzzle from the pieces of a plastic drinking glass? Thus she could reassemble a tail light from broken pieces.....some kind of puzzle experience, JMO

The jigsaw lady, that was ridiculous!
If the headlight fits you must not quit.

 

[OldCop]

So many people sitting on it, it broke.

 

[TIGER0822]

So many people sitting on it, it broke.

I'm assuming you've watched the trial to date? And you think the jury is gong to convict her on that "EVIDENCE"?

So many people sitting on it, it broke.

Dbm

 

[cocomod]

No chain of custody!! This investigation was beyond a sham!! The car didn’t have any evidence of her hitting him. The broken taillight is not evidence and shouldn’t even be admissible since it was obviously tampered with. It doesn’t matter if pieces were found under the snow, it was still snowing when the “investigators” were there. The same ones that were around her SUV when the surveillance video mysteriously lost footage. They admit they broke the light taking it out of her car. A single hair on her car after driving in a blizzard - but even so, her car was in his garage. What does one hair prove?! As Luis Litt would say - Not a GD thing.

Karen Read trial live updates: Hair was found on rear bumper of Read’s SUV

A Massachusetts State Police forensic scientist testified Monday that she found what appeared to be a human hair on the rear bumper of Karen Read's SUV.

www.masslive.com

She also confirmed that both the t-shirt and the sweatshirt were bagged together in one evidence bag.

Finally, Jackson asked when the evidence not collected by Hartnett was submitted to her, and provided an evidence log showing that it was submitted on March 14 or after by Trooper Michael Proctor or other officers from the Norfolk County State Police detective unit.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

Our first look at John's right sleeve!

View attachment 507708


Edit - To me they look like puncture marks, not slices or damage from abrasions.

Edit 2 - A couple of closeups.

View attachment 507720View attachment 507721

So, where did they swab for DNA?

 

[GoBuckeyes]

No chain of custody!! This investigation was beyond a sham!! The car didn’t have any evidence of her hitting him. The broken taillight is not evidence and shouldn’t even be admissible since it was obviously tampered with. It doesn’t matter if pieces were found under the snow, it was still snowing when the “investigators” were there. The same ones that were around her SUV when the surveillance video mysteriously lost footage. They admit they broke the light taking it out of her car. A single hair on her car after driving in a blizzard - but even so, her car was in his garage. What does one hair prove?! As Luis Litt would say - Not a GD thing.

Karen Read trial live updates: Hair was found on rear bumper of Read’s SUV

A Massachusetts State Police forensic scientist testified Monday that she found what appeared to be a human hair on the rear bumper of Karen Read's SUV.

www.masslive.com

She also confirmed that both the t-shirt and the sweatshirt were bagged together in one evidence bag.

Finally, Jackson asked when the evidence not collected by Hartnett was submitted to her, and provided an evidence log showing that it was submitted on March 14 or after by Trooper Michael Proctor or other officers from the Norfolk County State Police detective unit.

Further, that one hair that was found wasn't even human.

 

[sunspun]

Now I understand why the "human hair witness" had to admit she made a big mistake. Lally covered it at the beginning of her testimony.
According to the defense the hair is not of John Okeefe DNA, in fact the hair is not even human. Will be interesting if Lally brings an expert to say differently.

This snip is from defense motion where the hair is dealt with
affidavit of counsel in support of defendant's motion to modify conditions of releaseView attachment 507786

So the defense DID tell the court this, right??? I didn't hear that. But if it's true, it's the only thing about this stupid hair that matters. So they'd of course bring it up! Why did the defense waste time asking other questions about the hair (such as why didn't it blow off while on the road) if they knew it wasn't even a human hair?

I thought the witness testified that it was a hair from JO?? Did they just leave that unstated and let us assume it was?

Did they even bring this up in court?

 

[seekingjustice**]

So the defense DID tell the court this, right??? I didn't hear that. But if it's true, it's the only thing about this stupid hair that matters. So they'd of course bring it up! Why did the defense waste time asking other questions about the hair (such as why didn't it blow off while on the road) if they knew it wasn't even a human hair?

I thought the witness testified that it was a hair from JO?? Did they just leave that unstated and let us assume it was?

Did they even bring this up in court?

I believe it will be a DNA expert witness who will identify who the hair belongs too.

 

[BrownRice]

I'm assuming you've watched the trial to date? And you think the jury is gong to convict her on that "EVIDENCE"?

Really?

I think this is the key takeaway. I believe she could have done it. However, no way could I convict her with how the evidence was not secured, the witnesses clearly lying etc.

 

[BrownRice]

CW still has 33 more witnesses to go!........and 0 credible evidence yet to be seen!

What? We will be here until November at this rate.

 

[TIGER0822]

So the defense DID tell the court this, right??? I didn't hear that. But if it's true, it's the only thing about this stupid hair that matters. So they'd of course bring it up! Why did the defense waste time asking other questions about the hair (such as why didn't it blow off while on the road) if they knew it wasn't even a human hair?

I thought the witness testified that it was a hair from JO?? Did they just leave that unstated and let us assume it was?

Did they even bring this up in court?

They brought it up to discredit the witnesses honesty, and they are building a pattern of prosecutors misconduct.

 

[TIGER0822]

What? We will be here until November at this rate.

If I was a juror I would be extremely annoyed. The CW are deliberately racking up the defense legal fees.

 

[nodamselindistress]

Julie Grant @ CourtTV yammering on and on this morning about how yesterday was a GREAT DAY for the CW and such GREAT EVIDENCE was revealed like the hair on KR's SUV!!! Seriously implying it was JO's hair.

 

[Wishbone]

Julie Grant @ CourtTV yammering on and on this morning about how yesterday was a GREAT DAY for the CW and such GREAT EVIDENCE was revealed like the hair on KR's SUV!!! Seriously implying it was JO's hair.

Shows how little some of these talking heads know. JMO

 

[KMouse]

I hope KR sues the prosecutor's office, the PD, and the individuals who conspired to bring about this sham trial!! This is beyond absurd.

Is that a thing? People who are found NG turn around and sue the state?

 

[KMouse]

I am still considering that the FBI determined that the injuries were not consistent with being hit by a car.
medical examiner wrote ‘the death was not the result of a fight’ on the death certificate. That is the opposite of what a death cert should do! It does not say what did not cause the death.
The evidence gathering team ‘were not given the green light’ .

Can you link to the documents from the FBI that state that? I haven't seen them.

 

[HarmonyE.]

Julie Grant @ CourtTV yammering on and on this morning about how yesterday was a GREAT DAY for the CW and such GREAT EVIDENCE was revealed like the hair on KR's SUV!!! Seriously implying it was JO's hair.

If it had a root, as was implied yesterday, I'm assuming the prosecution was able to get a DNA profile? I missed the last hour or so of testimony because Lally finally put me to sleep.

I know it took forever for the prosecution to get the hair to the lab and to get it back from the lab, but I don't think even this prosecutor would introduce the hair unless they have an expert who is going to testify that it's John's.

Looking at the clothing though, it's hard to imagine a solo piece of hair being the only genetic material on the SUV that allegedly killed a human being. There was a ton of blood that must have come from the head wound. And I'm sure the defense will point out that the SUV was regularly housed in John's garage.