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

[bobbymkii]

Will we get to hear? If so, when it's the CW's turn, those few seconds should be quite entertaining.

No idea! I really hope they do though, they've shown voir dires for other witnesses during court days where the jury is in. It'll also be the first chance to see Lally cross examine defense witnesses, so hopefully no more of that "what if anything" stuff.

If they don't show it and Judge Bev chooses to strike a defense witness behind closed doors expect some serious anger from the FKR movement!

 

[Wishbone]

Wondering now if Lally and Co while discussing Trooper Paul's upcoming testimony " a few weeks ago", did they mention factoring in the CW's own witnesses who testified to the fact that Higgins Jeep was parked directly in front of 34 Fairview, and therefore directly in the path of the Lexus backing up. ???? That front yard width was not that long was it? Did Paul ever have to go back to the drawing board, and re-calculate distances to include the jeep, or nah? Just go with the story they originally had.

The Questions !!!

The phantom jeep that was seen and talked about by a select few and was said to plow the driveway of barely there snow.MOO

 

[darring21]

Also, remember we only ever learned about those text messages because of the feds. He even admitted on the stand that he would not have disclosed them if for the federal investigation.

So, at minimum, the lead investigator has admitted that he fully intended to conceal exculpatory evidence (the text messages) and was only prevented from doing so because of the feds.

At that point, it would be asinine to suggest that he couldn't have also tried to conceal other things.

Almost as interesting as the trial is observing people's reaction to it. One LE agency (MSP/Canton PD) is conflicted and has demonstrated bias and very poor investigation (or worse) and another (FBI) is not conflicted and has a much higher reputation. Some people still believe MSP against the FBI. I think its the difference between emotional and rational thinkers and that's also why nobody moves off their position. Rational people aren't swayed by an emotional argument and vice versa.

 

[darring21]

That's a good sign. I want to be optimistic, but I've learned to be pessimistic about such things. I'm still afraid that the jury will probably convict her of the manslaughter charge.

The only thing I feel fairly certain about is the 2nd degree murder charge. I cannot conceive that the jury might vote to convict on that.

Pretty sure it has to be unanimous for a guilty verdict. I don't think they come close to that. I'm betting not guilty but could be hung. No way they will get to guilty.

 

[fluffypaste]

Pretty sure it has to be unanimous for a guilty verdict. I don't think they come close to that. I'm betting not guilty but could be hung. No way they will get to guilty.

It has to be unanimous for a guilty verdict. But what everyone forgets is that is also needs to be unanimous for acquittal. That's why I'm so worried about a compromise verdict.

The murder charge will be Not Guilty, I am confident of that. The manslaughter charge is what I'm worried about.

 

[typical_vacation]

Ugh. It’s not totally the same - but when I was in college I saw a ped v car accident in a ~20 mph zone. Someone blew a red light and hit a skateboarder with a corolla-sized vehicle.
The sound his body made against the car as well as the tires squealing was SO LOUD. I get that there are different factors at play here. But how the heck did NO ONE hear John get hit?! There were no broken car parts in the collision I saw or even blood shed and it was still loud and memorable. Idk how no one reported hearing her slam the gas and back into him at 24 mph.

(The skateboarder ended up being ok and walked it off).

 

[GoBuckeyes]

No idea! I really hope they do though, they've shown voir dires for other witnesses during court days where the jury is in. It'll also be the first chance to see Lally cross examine defense witnesses, so hopefully no more of that "what if anything" stuff.

If they don't show it and Judge Bev chooses to strike a defense witness behind closed doors expect some serious anger from the FKR movement!

Very true! She'd have the ire up of that mass of people outside. I didn't consider that.

How is the defense going to attempt to disqualify 3 PhDs in what was it, biomechanics? Yeah, good luck with that! I'd tune in just to hear those questions.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

It has to be unanimous for a guilty verdict. But what everyone forgets is that is also needs to be unanimous for acquittal. That's why I'm so worried about a compromise verdict.

The murder charge will be Not Guilty, I am confident of that. The manslaughter charge is what I'm worried about.

I hope the jury instructions are good.

 

[Mony Mony]

The phantom jeep that was seen and talked about by a select few and was said to plow the driveway of barely there snow.MOO

Phantom jeep? I haven’t read all the comments so not sure if you are serious or being sarcastic. Higgins testified under oath his Jeep was there and also testified he did a sweep of the driveway. The jeep was most definitely there and he most definitely “swept” the driveway with his plow.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

I've only seen bits and pieces of this trial and forgive me if I'm behind.
I am watching Michael Proctor being grilled by KR's defence attorney. I am a short way into this SIX hour video.
I have two observations:
- That defence attorney is terrifying
- Proctor is the most guilty or ashamed looking witness I have ever seen.

Edit - It's like watching a dog tear apart a fluffy toy, and the toy is destroyed in the first 30 seconds.
But then it somehow just keeps tearing more strips off for SIX HOURS.

Love the dog toy analogy!

 

[TIGER0822]

Yes, we're to believe that it defied all known laws of physics. (It was a Nike though so.... Cue: "I Believe I Can Fly"

LOL ! Hope the defense can straighten this nonsense out.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

Phantom jeep? I haven’t read all the comments so not sure if you are serious or being sarcastic. Higgins testified under oath his Jeep was there and also testified he did a sweep of the driveway. The jeep was most definitely there and he most definitely “swept” the driveway with his plow.

I've still never heard of a plow driver "sweeping" snow or a driveway before this trial. Although, to be fair to Higgins, I've also never heard of using a leaf blower to remove layers of snow or using Solo cups to store/transport evidence.

The red solo cups are just so on the nose. That's kind of like someone dying on the beach and officers using bikini tops to collect evidence.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

LOL ! Hope the defense can straighten this nonsense out.

Yes, I hope so.

 

[bobbymkii]

Very true! She'd have the ire up of that mass of people outside. I didn't consider that.

How is the defense going to attempt to disqualify 3 PhDs in what was it, biomechanics? Yeah, good luck with that! I'd tune in just to hear those questions.

IMO it's less about whether they're qualified to give the opinions they have, more that they were introduced quite late. But not nearly as late as the CW did with their reconstructionist witness where they introduced a new opinion ON THE STAND and in front of the jury about the Ring video of Karen tapping John's Chevy, without notifying the defense at all.

If you jump to the end of Emily D Baker's full day coverage of it she explains why the situation is such a big problem way better than I can!

 

[TIGER0822]

I would say trooper Paul’s comments border on perjury.

 

[fluffypaste]

LOL ! Hope the defense can straighten this nonsense out.

I fully believe that the defense can straighten all of this out. I'm just worried about whether or not the biased judge will let them do it.

 

[shotgun09]

Phantom jeep? I haven’t read all the comments so not sure if you are serious or being sarcastic. Higgins testified under oath his Jeep was there and also testified he did a sweep of the driveway. The jeep was most definitely there and he most definitely “swept” the driveway with his plow.

During the trial multiple witnesses who were at 34 Fairview were asked " Do you recall seeing the white jeep?" Or, " Where was Brian Higgins jeep parked?". Many of them used the standard " I don't remembah". Or," I don't recall". Hence the phantom descriptor.

ETA: ...."I got no memory, of anything at all" !
Thank you, Peter Gabriel

 

[HarmonyE.]

It has to be unanimous for a guilty verdict. But what everyone forgets is that is also needs to be unanimous for acquittal. That's why I'm so worried about a compromise verdict.

The murder charge will be Not Guilty, I am confident of that. The manslaughter charge is what I'm worried about.

If there's no evidence she hit him, I don't see a jury hanging over either homicide charge

I've been on two criminal juries, both in Dedham. One was a fairly easy peasy vote; one was anything but. But with that one, I understood why juries so rarely hang. In that case, the majority immediately voted to convict. I was in the minority who felt the evidence was at best flimsy and at worst non-existent and refused to convict. Ton of reasonable doubt, and it seemed to me the CW couldn't get all of the evidence in they wanted. Even though we were decidedly in the minority (and even though one in the majority kept directing me to to tell the judge we couldn't decide - I was foreperson) eventually it was a unanimous Not Guilty.

How did it happen? I doubt it was the minority's powers of persuasion, although one guy was great. No, it was because the judge told us we'd have to keep coming back every day until we came to a verdict, and he meant it. By Day 2 several in the Guilty column said were saying they didn't feel all that strongly about the case either way and by the end of Day 3, everyone had moved over to Not Guilty, even the most annoying one who wanted a hung jury Day 1.

Ultimately, the much more passionate minority, who said they'd keep coming back every day won out. The Guilty voters just didn't have a strong enough feelings about the defendant's guilt to stand their ground.

Even though it was not an enjoyable experience for me, this is exactly how the system is supposed to work.

 

[rebelchild]

I think too though after waking up, with alcohol in her system and being groggy, that at first she only remembered being at the bar with him and the others. She didn’t really recall being at Fearview even after JM reminded her.

Yet still it probably wouldn’t make any sense to her that JO wasn’t home by then, especially not during a blizzard. He is more responsible than that, according to his friends and family who testified, and he had a niece at home to think about and care for. He sounded like too dedicated a caretaker to not make it home so he was up and ready for his niece in case she needed something or something went wrong during the storm. It doesn’t seem likely he would want to sleepover and get snowed in. And if he was going to sleep over he most likely would have still contacted her to inform her since somewhere needed to be there for his niece.

KR also called him 53 times that night and she received no call back in return. Usually if people call that many times others assume it is because there is some sort of emergency and considering she was with his niece that may seemed out of character for him to not contact KR back, even if they were in an argument, in case there was a emergency or medical problem.

Also, wasn’t she supposed to be his ride home but if he didn’t call her to pick him up how did he plan to get back in the snowstorm?

He doesn’t answer when his niece calls and JM doesn’t know where he is either. So the worry builds, where is he, how is he and is he safe?

From testimony from JM and KRob the worse case scenarios go through her head like perhaps he tried to walk home because he was still mad or out of spite (in this scenario drinking could have impaired his decision making too) and possibly got hit by snowplow or car by accident? What if he somehow succumbed to the cold? I think that is why she rushes out there to try to drive and look for him. She does to the bar and checks the streets along the way, maybe she tries to go to Fairview but got lost, since she only been there once and was drunk then too, and then to JM to help her and where she notices the tail light.

Her brain is still probably still affected by the alcohol so maybe she cannot think properly which could worsen her anxiety.

One of the things I can't understand .. when calling people at 5 or 5:30 in the morning I think my questions would be "have you seen John?" or "what time did he leave last night" or "do you happen to know where John is?" .. did she ever do that? Or was she just immediately in panic mode?

 

[HarmonyE.]

One of the things I can't understand .. when calling people at 5 or 5:30 in the morning I think my questions would be "have you seen John?" or "what time did he leave last night" or "do you happen to know where John is?" .. did she ever do that? Or was she just immediately in panic mode?

Read's almost certainly not going to testify, but this is exactly why she got Jen McCabe's number from John's niece and why she also contacted John's friend Kerry Roberts. To find out if they knew where he was. Jen was with them the night before and maybe she thought he'd more more inclined to crash at the Roberts' home if the didn't want to return home.