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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #601
  • #602
  • #603
why did lally get to bring in the "i hit him" card
 
  • #604
Lally asking a question about what the agency that hired him gave him...if I was a juror hearing the word agency would give me a clue..
 
  • #605
Dr Wolf is not phased by Lally in the slightest and its awesome!
Not a shred of doubt in Dr Wolf's voice. The confidence!!
 
  • #606
@SueNBCBoston

Are you aware the defendant said on the scene “I hit him. I hit him”?
- I’m not aware of that


Were you made aware that OKeefe’s DNA was on the taillight?
-I was not aware
 
  • #607
@BienickWCVB

Wolfe noted in his report that they would have expected to find O'Keefe's DNA on the car. Lally says his DNA was in fact found. Wolfe says he did not know that.


11:59 AM · Jun 24, 2024
 
  • #608
@TedDanielnews

on cross:
AL: "Are you aware that the defendant said to multiple people on scene, ‘I hit him. I hit him. I hit him’
"DW: I’m not aware of that.


12:00 PM · Jun 24, 2024
 
  • #609
@KristinaRex

Dr. Wolfe did not know that witnesses reported Karen Read saying "I hit him" three times. He also did not know that DNA consistent with O'Keefe's was found on the tail light.


11:59 AM · Jun 24, 2024
 
  • #610
Why is Lally unable to cross-examine anyone? He just uses dirty tricks and it backfires, massively.
 
  • #611
why did lally get to bring in the "i hit him" card
It's an ''I hope the jury have memories like gold fish' Lally moment. Wolf testified to undertaking an objective accident analysis without outside influences (knows nothing about the actual case) to interfere with assessment of the physical evidence. Jackson will sort it on redirect and remind the jury moo
 
  • #612
But folks, that what experts witness testimony does and why it is so useless. All of the stories the defense is telling are plausible stories. They get to say anything they want to and they are not required to prove it in any way. They never have to be right, they only have to confuse you. They can accuse the Alberts, they can harass witness through surrogates, they can drag every police officer through the mud, they can berate the poor paramedics. They get to do all of that without any proof what-so-ever.

The expert testimony is summarized as: "We can't figure out how this happened so it probably didn't". We know because me and my friends myth-bustered a car hitting him..."

Its was almost idiotic what they said on the stand.

Sure sounds more plausible than Trooper Paul’s mathematical assessment of “it happened because it did” JMO
 
  • #613
The hair is moot
 
  • #614
@SueNBCBoston

Were you shown the SP reconstruction?
-no
Lally asks if he was aware the defendant & OKeefe had a fight before he got out of the car?
Objection
On juror grimaced and raised her eyebrows.


12:04 PM · Jun 24, 2024
 
  • #615
Dr Wolf is not phased by Lally in the slightest and its awesome!
Not a shred of doubt in Dr Wolf's voice. The confidence!!

I have not heard the word stuff, nor the phrase " It just did" from this expert witness. See how that works, Lally?
 
  • #616
I was wondering if anyone might know why Lally keeps referring to JOK as "Mister O'Keefe" instead of "Officer O'Keefe?"
 
  • #617
@SueNBCBoston

Lally listing the evidence the Commonwealth has and doesn’t have, to see if the witness is aware?
He is not aware
Asking about the DNA of the hair?
- not aware


12:06 PM · Jun 24, 2024
 
  • #618
The apparent hair is back!
 
Last edited:
  • #619
  • #620
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
137
Guests online
2,932
Total visitors
3,069

Forum statistics

Threads
632,569
Messages
18,628,521
Members
243,198
Latest member
ghghhh13
Back
Top