MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #9

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Then I don’t understand why “how long to die in cold” would show up twice (at 2:27 and 6:24) on the defense’s chart instead of just once at the 2:27 mark since they both occur when same tab is active again?

Also, I tried my own experiment and when you type the mentioned phrase above you yield info on hypothermia.

However, on another tab JM typed “how long to die in clkd” results yielded info about chronic kidney disease. Why would JM try this search again instead of just returning to the other tab that info she was looking for and she claimed her fingers already hurt from the cold?
 
When cars are towed, they generally are higher up in the front than in the rear. FInding it hard to believe all this glass didn't fall off in transport. JMO
The bumper was wet, then covered in snow, perhaps the glass pieces were frozen in the grooved surface?

I believe the SUV was towed on a flatbed, although it would still have been driven up a ramp.

However, the forensic scientist from the crime lab already established that the glass on the bumper did not come from John's drinking glass. Why is this witness still talking about it?
 
I don’t think it would matter much. LE normally uses its own people on the payroll with the correct expertise/training rather than pay extra for outsiders. The defense gets to cross him and bring in their own expert to rebut him. adversarial trials are the fairest way to reach judgement IMO.

Normally. But, the credibility of the entire organization is completely shot, IMO. Including this guy, by association.

IMO MOO
 
I believe the SUV was towed on a flatbed, although it would still have been driven up a ramp.

However, the forensic scientist from the crime lab already establish that the glass on the bumper did not come from John's drinking glass. Why is this witness still talking about it?
The CW apparently is not realizing that continuing to point out that there was glass on the bumper that doesn’t match the cocktail glass is only emphasizing the idea of planted evidence.

Because otherwise why would Karen have had any glass on the bumper?
 
The CW apparently is not realizing that continuing to point out that there was glass on the bumper that doesn’t match the cocktail glass is only emphasizing the idea of planted evidence.

Because otherwise why would Karen have had any glass on the bumper?

"Another state police forensic scientist, Christina Hanley, testified she examined a broken cocktail glass and said it matched glass pieces found on the ground outside the home.
Hanley also testified she examined small pieces of glass found on Read’s rear bumper and found some matched glass pieces found on the road outside the home.
Prosecutors say O’Keefe was holding a cocktail glass when he was struck by Read and it was the same glass he was seen on video carrying out of one of the bars before he was killed."
 
The vehicle data wasn’t extracted until Feb !!!*2023*!!! A full YEAR after the accident?? And Karen had already been CHARGED before this evidence was even checked??

AND this witness literally just said “At the time of my initial inspection, I didn’t really know much about Tech Stream at that point. So over time I kinda learned about tech stream and so once I learned about it and it was relevant to our case…”

Y’all THIS is why the CW should have hired an outside expert witness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
93
Guests online
2,488
Total visitors
2,581

Forum statistics

Threads
602,546
Messages
18,142,293
Members
231,434
Latest member
NysesPieces
Back
Top