MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #12

[geevee]

I hope it's Jackson that gives the closing and also hope he pulls out the big easel and physically writes all the conflicts in the CW's case - esp. the key log data, start with 1164 (where Trooper Paul accessed it) and work backward everywhere there is evidence that vehicle had been up to 34 Fairview (and who had custody of it). I'm sure the jury took notes but seeing it big and bold in front of their faces will make an equally big impact.

That alone just kills the CW's case, but writing out the phone timeline wouldn't hurt either, show what a fibber JMcC was in her testimony about seeing KR at 12:45 outside, when we know (through one of the CW's own witnesses) that she was at JOK's house by then.

Can't wait for closings!

 

[Warwick7]

Lol!! Thought I would repost this:

Dog got erased
Butt dials
Mysterious steps
Deleted searches
Deleted calls
Deleted phones

Nothing to see here...

 

[ChasingKaty]

Lol!! Thought I would repost this:

Dog got erased
Butt dials
Mysterious steps
Deleted searches
Deleted calls
Deleted phones

Nothing to see here...

Also he was hit and then people apparently left the property but nobody saw him lying there dead. (If what I've read is accurate, I'm struggling to keep up!!)

 

[jepop]

The prosecutor Jackson asked “and then you saw the SUV had driven away after 12:45?”
Jen answers: “correct”

Jen lied. At 12:36am KR was already home.

She did not hit him.

Yeah it was obvious that lally needed/wanted her to say she still saw KR's lexus there at 12.45am to consolidate the theory presented at opening. And then on cross she really dug her heels in.

She lied her butt off (pardon the idiom) to comply and do her bit to help nail KR.moo Whatya gonna do lally, now that another of your witnesses (and an expert no less) has proved her a liar and deflated your timeline like a pricked balloon?

 

[ch_13]

So, it looks like the defense is going to rest after calling three more of their expert witnesses. However, they had also put Michael Morrissey on their witness list and I really wanted to see him on the stand, even though I know the judge would have never permitted it.

I have a lot of questions about the video statement he released last fall and where he got the knowledge to say what he did. Among other things he specifically denied that Michael Proctor was conflicted and said outright that no evidence was planted. I also want to know why he felt he needed to defend the honesty and integrity of several Alberts/McCabes. Did someone lean on him to give them some cover?

This was all done after he knew the Feds were investigating, so he should have realized something was off and been wary of making any blanket statements. I bet the Feds would be interested in Morrissey's motivations as well. Could they have brought him in to testify in front of the grand jury?

Morrissey's statement:

DA condemns 'harassment,' 'innuendo' surrounding Karen Read case

"It should be an outrage to any decent person — and it needs to stop," the district attorney said in a rare statement about the high-profile case.

www.wcvb.com

 

[Slick762]

Transcript of the voicemails (below).
For reference, the recorded messages were played in court on Day 28 - started around timestamp 45:31 in this video.

I've gotten more than my fair share of angry voicemails from a GF or EX. I've been called a lot of horrible things; most I deserved before I grew up. I've never been called a pervert. WTH is up with that?

 

[ChasingKaty]

I've gotten more than my fair share of angry voicemails from a GF or EX. I've been called a lot of horrible things; most I deserved before I grew up. I've never been called a pervert. WTH is up with that?

I wondered about that too, didn't know if I'd just missed some information.

 

[kittythehare]

got to thinking about ethico legal issues for prosecutors. I found some stuff.
The following are the principal changes to the rule and comments: Rule 3.8(a): This section previously required prosecutors only to refrain fromprosecuting a charge not supported by probable cause. As amended, it requiresprosecutors to refrain from prosecuting where the prosecutor “lacks a good faithbelief” that probable cause to support the charge exists. It further requires aprosecutor to refrain from threatening to prosecute a charge where the prosecutorlacks a good faith belief that probable cause exists or can be developed throughinvestigation.Comment 1 has been expanded to note that prosecutors have a responsibility totake special precautions to prevent and rectify the conviction of innocent personsand also that competent representation of the government may obligate theprosecutor to take some procedural and remedial measures in such cases.Comment 1A to this rule is new and clarifies that paragraph (a) does not prohibit aprosecutor from “declaring the intention” to prosecute for as yet unchargedcriminal conduct if the prosecutor in good faith believes that probable cause tosupport the charge can be developed through investigation.
Rule 3.8(f): Former Rules 3.8(e) and (g) have now been combined into newRule 3.8(f). This rule requires that a prosecutor refrain from making extrajudicialcomments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnationof the accused. It also prohibits prosecutors from making extrajudicial statementsprohibited under either Rule 3.6 (“Trial Publicity”) or Rule 3.8 and, in addition,requires prosecutors to take reasonable steps to prevent investigators, lawenforcement personnel, employees or other persons assisting a prosecutor frommaking such statements. !!!!

https://bbopublic.massbbo.org/web/f/prosecutionresolution.pdf

There will be trouble ahead.
There simply must be.

I checked because it came up in another case in another state.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

One of the most bizarre things is Jen texting and calling John when Karen and her car were already back at 1 Meadows Ave. Using the Nagle testimony about texting his sister in the house and John's phone, Karen and John arrived at 34 Fairview about 12:23. The people in the Nagle vehicle see Karen alone in the car and don't see John on the lawn. Read auto-connected to John's home Wi-Fi at 12:36. The route from 34 Fairview to John's is seven minutes in normal conditions. Using seven minutes, this means Karen had to have left 34 Fairview by 12:29, if not a couple of minutes earlier if her phone didn't connect until she was inside the home or she drove slower due to conditions or not being familiar with the roads.

Instead of videos they could or should have had access to along Karen's route home, the CW's entire timeline here is built around the Jen McCabe sightings of Karen's vehicle outside. McCabe testified she had a clear view of Karen's vehicle up until 12:45.

Here are her texts to JO:

• 12:31 a.m. Jennifer McCabe texts O”Keefe: “Pull behind me”
• 12:40 a.m. Jennifer McCabe texts O’Keefe: “Hello”
• 12:42 a.m. Jennifer McCabe texts O’Keefe: “Where are u”
• 12:45 a.m. Jennifer McCabe texts O’Keefe: “Hello”

Jen also called John's phone seven times between 12:30 and 12:50. So from 12:30 to 12:50 am, a combined total of 11 calls and texts to John from Jen. But Karen must have been gone from the premises before any of these 11 contact attempts were made.

Jen would have us believe that at least until 12:45 she's looking out the window at Karen's vehicle, apparently very anxiously waiting for John to alight and join the beer and Claw party inside. She doesn't see a body on the lawn but she does see a Lexus that can't be there.

And the CW makes a big deal out of the number of times KR called JO that night? That seems like a ridiculous number of calls in such a short period of time from JMcC. moo

 

[ch_13]

Rule 3.8(f): Former Rules 3.8(e) and (g) have now been combined into newRule 3.8(f). This rule requires that a prosecutor refrain from making extrajudicialcomments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnationof the accused.

I don't think there's any question that Morrissey violated this rule. Even the judge agreed in one of the pre-trial hearings.

I don't know if there will be any kind of censure from the bar, although there certainly should be. (Among other things.)

 

[kittythehare]

I don't think there's any question that Morrissey violated this rule. Even the judge agreed in one of the pre-trial hearings.

I don't know if there will be any kind of censure from the bar, although there certainly should be. (Among other things.)

Suzanne Morphew DA in serious trouble because of far milder extrajudicial remarks..

There simply must be action...

 

[HarmonyE.]

I don't think there's any question that Morrissey violated this rule. Even the judge agreed in one of the pre-trial hearings.

I don't know if there will be any kind of censure from the bar, although there certainly should be. (Among other things.)

He's been reported to the Board of Bar Overseers by at least one Plymouth County attorney. For what it might be worth. He's up for re-election in two years and I suspect this case will finally bring some primary opposition. He should retire before then, IMHO.

 

[keek]

I've gotten more than my fair share of angry voicemails from a GF or EX. I've been called a lot of horrible things; most I deserved before I grew up. I've never been called a pervert. WTH is up with that?

I figured that was in response to something JO said to KR before he got out of the car or on the way and just about there, could of been in regard to Higgins and her, something flip and not nice, to her. He had an idea KR and Higgins had some sort of interaction but not really about the texts between them. No way was she going in that house with Higgins there too. She had a received a text from him THAT NIGHT, but not sure where or when saying something about tonight? Hmmmm.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

Ok, so she's lied about seeing the Lexus out there.
But why was she sending all these texts and calling?

12:30am to 12:50am - Seven voice calls

• 12:31 a.m. Jennifer McCabe texts O”Keefe: “Pull behind me”
• 12:40 a.m. Jennifer McCabe texts O’Keefe: “Hello”
• 12:42 a.m. Jennifer McCabe texts O’Keefe: “Where are u”
• 12:45 a.m. Jennifer McCabe texts O’Keefe: “Hello”

Then what happened, nothing until the "Hos long" search?

 

[HarmonyE.]

I figured that was in response to something JO said to KR before he got out of the car or on the way and just about there, could of been in regard to Higgins and her, something flip and not nice, to her. He had an idea KR and Higgins had some sort of interaction but not really about the texts between them. No way was she going in that house with Higgins there too. She had a received a text from him THAT NIGHT, but not sure where or when saying something about tonight? Hmmmm.

Yes, Higgins sent her a cryptic text - I think from the Waterfall. I don't think it's a stretch to imagine she told John about it on the way to Fairview. As in "well, if you're going to cheat on me, you should know there is someone interested in me."

 

[Aquarian]

I figured that was in response to something JO said to KR before he got out of the car or on the way and just about there, could of been in regard to Higgins and her, something flip and not nice, to her. He had an idea KR and Higgins had some sort of interaction but not really about the texts between them. No way was she going in that house with Higgins there too. She had a received a text from him THAT NIGHT, but not sure where or when saying something about tonight? Hmmmm.

Idk, I thought it was bc she was thinking he was with another woman?

 

[keek]

Yes, Higgins sent her a cryptic text - I think from the Waterfall. I don't think it's a stretch to imagine she told John about it on the way to Fairview. As in "well, if you're going to cheat on me, you should know there is someone interested in me."

..and it's that hunka hunka buddy of yours.

 

[SteveS]

You're saying the McCabes beat the stuffing out of JOK and set their cranky dog on him, and subsequently hatched a plan to claim he was never there all within seven minutes?

I mean I guess it's possible the dog attacked him and he fell and banged his head. No beating needed.

When trying to put the pieces together, I've pretty much landed here ^. The second part, not the first.

I don't think there was a plan to attack/kill JOK. But I think it was a situation where one thing led to another, the dog jumped in to "defend" someone, and he got dead, and then they covered it all up.

If I had to guess what started it, it was drunk guys late at night and I bet some flash-moment happened as JOK came in. I'd guess it was about someone messing with someone's woman, either right then (for example, did drunk JOK walk in, hoping to get laid, and say something aggressively sexual to the wrong woman?) or something said earlier and now it boils up. Punches are thrown (including JOK getting punched in the face, ending up with cuts to the nose and black eyes), and then the dog jumps in biting and attacking (to defend his master), and JOK falls or is knocked backwards and his head hits something that causes major slice and damage, there's unconsciousness, huge bleeding. Instead of calling 911, figuring he's already a goner, not wanting to have to face consequences, they wait until they have a discreet chance to put him outside, like taking out the trash. Not meaning to be disrespectful to JOK, but commenting on what I think happened.

JMc's story about him never coming in, and wait and watching for him and it lasting to 12:45, was obvious fiction. Could not have happened. So I think she was trying to tell a tale that keeps him outside (where he was found).

 

[HarmonyE.]

..and it's that hunka hunka buddy of yours.

A hunka burnin' love, for sure. I don't believe Karen was actually interested in him.

 

[HarmonyE.]

When trying to put the pieces together, I've pretty much landed here ^. The second part, not the first.

I don't think there was a plan to attack/kill JOK. But I think it was a situation where one thing led to another, the dog jumped in to "defend" someone, and he got dead, and then they covered it all up.

If I had to guess what started it, it was drunk guys late at night and I bet some flash-moment happened as JOK came in. I'd guess it was about someone messing with someone's woman, either right then (for example, did drunk JOK walk in, hoping to get laid, and say something aggressively sexual to the wrong woman?) or something said earlier and now it boils up. Punches are thrown (including JOK getting punched in the face, ending up with cuts to the nose and black eyes), and then the dog jumps in biting and attacking (to defend his master), and JOK falls or is knocked backwards and his head hits something that causes major slice and damage, there's unconsciousness, huge bleeding. Instead of calling 911, figuring he's already a goner, not wanting to have to face consequences, they wait until they have a discreet chance to put him outside, like taking out the trash. Not meaning to be disrespectful to JOK, but commenting on what I think happened.

JMc's story about him never coming in, and wait and watching for him and it lasting to 12:45, was obvious fiction. Could not have happened. So I think she was trying to tell a tale that keeps him outside (where he was found).

I don't believe for a moment this was accidental. I think he was purposely hit in the head by someone, possibly during an altercation. There has to be a reason Colin was hustled out and why no one mentioned him until Erin Beatty came forward said he called her around 12:30 looking for a ride from Fairview.