MISTRIAL MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #17

[Linda7NJ]

Literally, the only people in this whole mess that have gotten physical with others involved in the case ARE the Albert/McCabe family and friends, Linda.

There’s more ways to seriously and unjustly damage people other than just physically.
I believe those maliciously slandered have exercised tremendous restraint.

 

[kittythehare]

There’s more ways to seriously and unjustly damage people other than just physically.
I believe those maliciously slandered have exercised tremendous restraint.

KR has shown magnificent restraint. Respect to her for that.
She is THE most maligned victim here.

 

[Linda7NJ]

KR has shown magnificent restraint. Respect to her for that.
She is THE most maligned victim here.

That’s your opinion
She’s the accused and out on bail.

 

[Soulmagent]

Why would the jurors names EVER be released in the first place? Aren’t jurors identities always protected even after the trials, except when they want to speak? MOO

Public record .
Google , the exact question you asked here . and an answer pops rights up ,to help us all out.

 

[TIGER0822]

Public record .
Google , the exact question you asked here . and an answer pops rights up ,to help us all out.

Not in Massachusetts!

 

[TIGER0822]

Why would the jurors names EVER be released in the first place? Aren’t jurors identities always protected even after the trials, except when they want to speak? MOO

Not in Massachusetts

 

[Curiousobserver]

They were invited guests of the VICTIM’S family

Yes, under this logic the family of the victim would also be considered intimidating? but Karen's family and the hundreds of chanting people outside are not? It defies any version of logic or equity.

 

[Curiousobserver]

I would assume because it’s been claimed soooo often here, the source of that claim would be provided in the form of a link.

I encourage anyone to take the time to Google images of JO's funeral to see the thousands of people and hundreds if nth thousands of police officers who should up. It would be impossible to verify if any particular person was there, or if they expressed there condolences privately to his family.

This is more fake news.

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

I would assume because it’s been claimed soooo often here, the source of that claim would be provided in the form of a link.

With all due respect, I do not believe that I had made a claim. Although I did provide examples from my own personal experience of the difficulty that can arise in attempting to prove a negative fact or hypothesis. MOO

 

[Forest_Wood]

Yes, under this logic the family of the victim would also be considered intimidating? but Karen's family and the hundreds of chanting people outside are not? It defies any version of logic or equity.

How is that logical or equitable?
The 3 thugs that showed up to sit behind the OK's were each witnesses in the trial, and quite possibly involved to some degree in the death of JOK according to evidence the defense dug up and brought to light. They came to intimidate IMO.
The hundreds of people outside were not involved in JOKs death, and they were not witnesses in the trial. They obviously came to support KR because of their neutrality and objectivity because they were not involved.
IMO you're trying to compare apples and oranges rather than contrasting them.
MOO.

 

[rescuemom]

I keep hearing that, yet I have seen zero proof that it’s true.

Hard to believe if true and then I ask why would they not attend

 

[Forest_Wood]

Another apparent connection is that John's brother Paul was teammates with Lieutenant Brian Tully on a college football team. Lieutenant Brian Tully was Michael Proctor's supervisor at MSP.
Source: Wikipedia

 

[Linda7NJ]

How is that logical or equitable?
The 3 thugs that showed up to sit behind the OK's were each witnesses in the trial, and quite possibly involved to some degree in the death of JOK according to evidence the defense dug up and brought to light. They came to intimidate IMO.
The hundreds of people outside were not involved in JOKs death, and they were not witnesses in the trial. They obviously came to support KR because of their neutrality and objectivity because they were not involved.
IMO you're trying to compare apples and oranges rather than contrasting them.
MOO.

There’s zero evidence the three people that sat behind the O’Keefe’s, at their request, are thugs. They have not be charged with a crime nor are they persons of interest.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Friends, none of which attended his funeral.

What is the source of this information?
Please provide a link.

 

[Forest_Wood]

There’s zero evidence the three people that sat behind the O’Keefe’s, at their request, are thugs. They have not be charged with a crime nor are they persons of interest.

Did you read that it's my opinion only?
How do you know they haven't been under investigation or persons of interest for a crime???

 

[Forest_Wood]

TB is no innocent victim in this IMO

How is TB not an innocent victim of being assaulted?
Please provide evidence that he was charged too.

 

[Forest_Wood]

There’s more ways to seriously and unjustly damage people other than just physically.

Exactly what the <derogatory nicknames are not allowed - member meant the Alberts> have done to Karen Read, at the same time colluding about their involvement.
MOO.

 

[fluffypaste]

Exactly what the <derogatory nicknames are not allowed - member meant the Alberts> have done to Karen Read, at the same time colluding about their involvement.
MOO.

There is no proof that any of the <derogatory nicknames are not allowed - member meant the Alberts> had any motive to hurt John.

 

[Seattle1]

Juror E came forward.

Very important clarification here by Juror E: they were only deadlocked in relation to the lower charges of Count 2 (i.e., the lesser included).

 

[Forest_Wood]

There is no proof that any of the <derogatory nicknames are not allowed - member meant the Alberts> had any motive to hurt John.

What does that have to do with my post?
I was commenting on the post @Linda7NJ who stated,
"There’s more ways to seriously and unjustly damage people other than just physically."
The <derogatory nicknames are not allowed - member meant the Alberts> have blamed Karen Read from the beginning, thereby seriously and unjustly damaging her other than just physically. Only they know their motive since a proper investigation was never conducted IMO.