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

[twall]

Any mention of JOK's hat yet?

 

[MyJoey]

Any mention of JOK's hat yet?

Nope

 

[Wishbone]

Let’s see how the rest plays out. So far I see her tail light when she pulled out of her driveway, it’s busted good, a large area. If those pieces are around JO’s body…. I don’t care what the FBI report says.

As I have said, she has not been given a fair trial and that in and of itself is enough. Incompetent investigation is enough for me on it's own.JMOO

 

[waldojabba]

The only real take away I have from today - I was watching it sporadically while working - is that the bigger pieces of the tail light were found days later than the small pieces and that feels totally counter intuitive to me. If you are searching the snow it is much easier to find the bigger pieces. JMO

 

[waldojabba]

As I have said, she has not been given a fair trial and that in and of itself is enough. Incompetent investigation is enough for me on it's own.JMOO

There is no other way to view this whole charade IMO. That is the bottom line - A terribly flawed investigation from the jump - tainted everything. LE totally disrespected their fellow officer by their action or lack of actions while investigating JOK's death.
I still believe she did not hit him but if she did - she is walking either way.
Frankly I don't care how many drinks she had. Lets count the drinks of everybody she was out with - they all drank too much. Poor judgement does not equal murder.
Any yes the person to point the finger at is <mod note - derogatory name changes aren't allowed> Proctor
for letting this investgation be handled so poorly.

What lingers in the back of my mind is the FORD EDGE in front of the house at what 230am ish ....I want that explained - whose car etc
JMO

 

[keek]

So was it visibly damaged or was there just a small pin type hole?

The right questions like this one are never asked !

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

The right questions like this one are never asked !

Wasn’t Kerry the one testifying to a small pin like hole in KR’s taillight? How does a juror rectify two CW witnesses giving conflicting testimonies? Or is the CW doing what I see people claim as the defense’s tactic of throwing a bunch of crap at the wall to see what sticks?
JMO

 

[keek]

Wasn’t Kerry the one testifying to a small pin like hole in KR’s taillight? How does a juror rectify two CW witnesses giving conflicting testimonies? Or is the CW doing what I see people claim as the defense’s tactic of throwing a bunch of crap at the wall to see what sticks?
JMO

Yes she did say that. She explained along the lines of ‘like a hole and wires coming out’ I believe she’s the one that added about the wires coming or sticking out. Couid of been reconstructed if the remaining light wasn’t all broken up afterwards. She did not say yes, the taillight was all smashed out. She had also replied to KR about it ‘you could of done that anywhere’ in response to KR saying could I have hit him before they went and saw him on Fairview

 

[Wishbone]

Why am I seeing a lot of red plastic on the tail light of the car?

 

[Chelly]

By Kristina Rex
Updated on: June 5, 2024 / 8:25 AM EDT / CBS Boston

When will lead investigator Trooper Michael Proctor testify in Karen Read murder trial?​

When will lead investigator Trooper Michael Proctor testify in Karen Read murder trial?

The current phase of the state's case begs the question: when - and how - will Trooper Michael Proctor testify?

www.cbsnews.com

 

[ch_13]

From a CBS News article on whether Proctor will testify.

If - and it's a big if - testifying could potentially incriminate Trooper Proctor for criminal behavior, he could invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
...
If the judge finds the concern legitimate, Proctor would be exempt from testimony. "The jury would never hear about that," Dearborn added.

In essence, Proctor would never testify, lawyers would not be allowed to explain why, and it would be a big elephant in the room for the jury. "It'd be a really tricky elephant to navigate for the defense, because obviously they would want the jury to draw on a negative and adverse inference about Proctor not testifying, but it would be unethical and illegal for them to comment on his lack of testifying," Dearborn said.

When will lead investigator Trooper Michael Proctor testify in Karen Read murder trial?

The current phase of the state's case begs the question: when - and how - will Trooper Michael Proctor testify?

www.cbsnews.com

If this is true, it seems like the defense won't even be able to mention Proctor and ask "why won't the commonwealth put him on the stand", much less question all the irregularities in the investigation he led. Can they even show the texts where he said he wasn't going to investigate the Alberts or that he was looking for Karen's nudes on her phone? How will they even get them admitted without his testimony?

As a layman this seems to me like a complete infringement of Karen Read's right to face her accusers. It is rife for abuse considering you have several agents employed by the state (the cop, DA and judge) all working in concert to hide exculpatory evidence from the jury.

 

[Derph]

Pretty interesting how much of the RED taillight is still attached to KR's vehicle as it's being loaded on to the back of the flat bed tow truck. I'll say it again, that taillight was obliterated in reconstruction photos. It looks nothing like the taillight we see in the other videos from that night and early morning hours.

Also notice how the labeling of video just so conveniently happens to cover the rest of the taillight in the upper left hand corner.

 

[bobbymkii]

From a CBS News article on whether Proctor will testify.

If - and it's a big if - testifying could potentially incriminate Trooper Proctor for criminal behavior, he could invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
...
If the judge finds the concern legitimate, Proctor would be exempt from testimony. "The jury would never hear about that," Dearborn added.

In essence, Proctor would never testify, lawyers would not be allowed to explain why, and it would be a big elephant in the room for the jury. "It'd be a really tricky elephant to navigate for the defense, because obviously they would want the jury to draw on a negative and adverse inference about Proctor not testifying, but it would be unethical and illegal for them to comment on his lack of testifying," Dearborn said.

When will lead investigator Trooper Michael Proctor testify in Karen Read murder trial?

The current phase of the state's case begs the question: when - and how - will Trooper Michael Proctor testify?

www.cbsnews.com

If this is true, it seems like the defense won't even be able to mention Proctor and ask "why won't the commonwealth put him on the stand", much less question all the irregularities in the investigation he led. Can they even show the texts where he said he wasn't going to investigate the Alberts or that he was looking for Karen's nudes on her phone? How will they even get them admitted without his testimony?

As a layman this seems to me like a complete infringement of Karen Read's right to face her accusers. It is rife for abuse considering you have several agents employed by the state (the cop, DA and judge) all working in concert to hide exculpatory evidence from the jury.

The simple solution IMO would be for them to gve Proctor the Mark Fuhrman treatment, compel him into the witness stand only so that he can repeatedly plead the 5th in front of the jury.

If they don't you can guarantee that once the jury are finally sent out their first question will be "where is Trooper Proctor?"

 

[keek]

From a CBS News article on whether Proctor will testify.

If - and it's a big if - testifying could potentially incriminate Trooper Proctor for criminal behavior, he could invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
...
If the judge finds the concern legitimate, Proctor would be exempt from testimony. "The jury would never hear about that," Dearborn added.

In essence, Proctor would never testify, lawyers would not be allowed to explain why, and it would be a big elephant in the room for the jury. "It'd be a really tricky elephant to navigate for the defense, because obviously they would want the jury to draw on a negative and adverse inference about Proctor not testifying, but it would be unethical and illegal for them to comment on his lack of testifying," Dearborn said.

When will lead investigator Trooper Michael Proctor testify in Karen Read murder trial?

The current phase of the state's case begs the question: when - and how - will Trooper Michael Proctor testify?

www.cbsnews.com

If this is true, it seems like the defense won't even be able to mention Proctor and ask "why won't the commonwealth put him on the stand", much less question all the irregularities in the investigation he led. Can they even show the texts where he said he wasn't going to investigate the Alberts or that he was looking for Karen's nudes on her phone? How will they even get them admitted without his testimony?

As a layman this seems to me like a complete infringement of Karen Read's right to face her accusers. It is rife for abuse considering you have several agents employed by the state (the cop, DA and judge) all working in concert to hide exculpatory evidence from the jury.

Once today was finished, KR was very animated and talking to her very distressed appearing father as he sat on his bench. The first remarks she said I think to one of her lawyers /in general, I SWEAR immediately, was something something PROCTOR ...something. It was all muted but I watch her closelyyy for what kind if any, responses. It JUMPED out at me. The other Trooper had finished, just and Judge had gone on about her ending of day talk. Oh, may not of been muted when I think of it, but she was in her seat, not at a microphone. She wants and deserves Proctor up there, FACE HER.

 

[New Penny]

Will they ask him if he is the lead investigator on the case?

And if he answers no, then can he be asked who is?

Is defense allowed to do that on cross? MOO

Intriguing…the witness is answering questions as though he IS the lead detective as in “I instructed Proctor to call about the missing shoe” and “I instructed Proctor where to have KR’s car towed” etc.

Hmm…

 

[ch_13]

The simple solution IMO would be for them to gve Proctor the Mark Fuhrman treatment, compel him into the witness stand only so that he can repeatedly plead the 5th in front of the jury.

If they don't you can guarantee that once the jury are finally sent out their first question will be "where is Trooper Proctor?"

According to the article, they will not be able to put Proctor in front of a jury. All his pleas to take the Fifth would happen with just the judge present and no jury.

 

[friendlysleuther]

**Snipped for context If - and it's a big if - testifying could potentially incriminate Trooper Proctor for criminal behavior, he could invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
...
If the judge finds the concern legitimate, Proctor would be exempt from testimony. "The jury would never hear about that," Dearborn added.

How is this even legal?

 

[bobbymkii]

According to the article, they will not be able to put Proctor in front of a jury. All his pleas to take the Fifth would happen with just the judge present and no jury.

damn. I think that sucks personally, because Michael Proctor is not on trial here, and he is a material witness to the case against Karen Read. So long as his decision to plead the 5th in this trial does not draw adverse inference against him in any future legal proceedings against Michael Proctor personally, surely it's only fair to Karen that the jury know in some way, shape or form that Michael Proctor has rejected the call to give evidence at this trial in line with his constitutional rights. Like was said before, "the right to face your accuser."

 

[KMouse]

Seeing a lot of head shaking today. It is not advisable for a defendant to shake their head during trial. I suspect defense attorney will advise KR about this after today, and we won’t see anymore back and forth shaking the head in disagreement. It's not due to illness. They (defendant) do not direct the narrative- if they choose to provide their narrative then take the stand when it is your turn.

Where is the respect to John O'Keefe's family?

moo

I supposed it's better than smiling like she has been observed doing.

 

[ch_13]

Someone pointed this out online, and it seems pretty sketchy.

The video of the SUV in the sallyport is reversed. The driver appears to step out of the passenger side door, I've cued the video below so you can see it after it's driven in.

Also there are a bunch of weird time-skips all over the video. You can see the time advance from 5:36:48 to 5:36:53 immediately after the driver exits the vehicle. There are a ton of these jumps.

Lally made us sit through hours of bar footage and footage of the scene outside John O'Keefe's home where nothing was happening, so why is this video so carefully edited?