MISTRIAL MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #18

Status
Not open for further replies.
Motion denied. Welp. I really didn't think there was a chance for dismissal but really the way the "judge" handled the the trial there was no way this was going to go well for Read. Such a joke.
Agreed, disappointing but really did not expect much. Judge Cannone was her most obvious biased self during this whole affair. Almost every time I have seen a case dismissed by mistrial the presiding Judge asks for specifics to see if all charges need to be retried or only some charges.
 

2/11/25

In the 35-page ruling, the SJC stated, “The trial judge correctly denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss and request for a posttrial juror inquiry. The case is remanded to the county court for entry of a judgment denying the defendant’s petition for relief.”

During deliberations in Read’s first trial, the jury submitted three separate notes to Norfolk Superior Court Judge Beverly Cannon indicating a deadlock, however, the SJC faulted the defense for not requesting further inquiry into the content of the notes.

“Nothing suggested that the deadlock was limited to a specific charge. On the contrary, the notes contained no inkling of agreement, and the third note implied the jury were deadlocked on all charges,” the SJC stated in its ruling. “Under these circumstances, given the content of the notes and the fact that defense counsel did not request further inquiry, engaging in one sua sponte (of one’s own accord) risked coercing a verdict. Thus, the judge appropriately exercised her discretion in declaring a mistrial based on manifest necessity.”

ETA: SJC Ruling

 

Yes! Especially after it appears that the SJC did not believe that there was a unanimous vote on any charge!

Nonetheless, I don't think this decision came as any surprise. While I think Statute puts the burden on the Court to make the inquiry of the jurors-- just as it did with the final juror instructions, the higher Court in essence split the responsibility when it blamed the defense for not making inquiry before the jurors were dismissed.

Also, I don't recall, and probably not, but were the jurors present when defense attorney Jackson tried to reason with Judge Cannone about the instructions for completing the verdict slips, and she dismissed him with 'this is how it's done in MA'?
 
Additionally, the defense is looking to block a prosecution expert, Dr. James Crosby, from testifying about the injuries to John O’Keefe’s arm.

The defense argues Crosby “is not qualified to render the opinions he proffers,” stating in the motion that “it is undisputed that he is not a medical doctor.”

Read’s attorneys are now considering their legal options, including federal habeas corpus relief.
 
Additionally, the defense is looking to block a prosecution expert, Dr. James Crosby, from testifying about the injuries to John O’Keefe’s arm.

The defense argues Crosby “is not qualified to render the opinions he proffers,” stating in the motion that “it is undisputed that he is not a medical doctor.”

Read’s attorneys are now considering their legal options, including federal habeas corpus relief.

I find these requests interesting.

" Read’s defense team also filed a “motion to compel discovery,” requesting the chain of custody logs for the Canton Police Department, details from embattled Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor’s internal affairs investigation, and notes related to “material law enforcement” in the Sandra Birchmore murder case, in addition to other materials."

The proctor stuff will be damning AGAIN! If they can get the Birchmore stuff in that's going to be huge. It shows some of the same police investigators and their lack of competence in that investigation. I'll be surprised if Cannone allows it but I don't know on what legal grounds will or won't pertain this is.
 
I find these requests interesting.

" Read’s defense team also filed a “motion to compel discovery,” requesting the chain of custody logs for the Canton Police Department, details from embattled Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor’s internal affairs investigation, and notes related to “material law enforcement” in the Sandra Birchmore murder case, in addition to other materials."

The proctor stuff will be damning AGAIN! If they can get the Birchmore stuff in that's going to be huge. It shows some of the same police investigators and their lack of competence in that investigation. I'll be surprised if Cannone allows it but I don't know on what legal grounds will or won't pertain this is.

I'm following Sandra Birchmore's case and what might help here is that her case is in the hands of the US District Court of Mass -- so the Feds are prosecuting her abuser/murderer M Farwell. I don't believe the defendant has made a single court hearing/appearance since his arrest last August. Makes me wonder if he's defense strategy will be to snitch on all of Canton!

Sandra Birchmore case returns to court; trial date still not set
 
More Proctor shenanigans!



" According to a new motion from the defense, Proctor sent another text message to Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally at 5:48 p.m., just a few hours after the mistrial was declared. Read's legal team suggests that the message is an example of "impeachment evidence," which can be used to discredit a witness.

According to the defense, Proctor's message to Lally said, "Yeah, didn't watch (expletive) Jackson's closing for good reason. Like all of us the anticipation and anxiety of the verdict has us all on edge."

In Monday's motion, Read's attorneys are asking the court to reconsider a motion compelling them to share evidence with the prosecution. They are asking for permission to delay sharing that impeachment evidence until after witnesses complete direct examination.

In the example of Proctor's July 1 text message, they argue it indicates that the former investigator may not have abided by the court's sequestration order, which is meant to keep witnesses from watching other parts of the trial.

"The message implies that Mr. Proctor had been following the trial online and simply skipped the defense closing argument because he does not like Attorney (Alan) Jackson," the defense motion states."
 
More Proctor shenanigans!



" According to a new motion from the defense, Proctor sent another text message to Assistant District Attorney Adam Lally at 5:48 p.m., just a few hours after the mistrial was declared. Read's legal team suggests that the message is an example of "impeachment evidence," which can be used to discredit a witness.

According to the defense, Proctor's message to Lally said, "Yeah, didn't watch (expletive) Jackson's closing for good reason. Like all of us the anticipation and anxiety of the verdict has us all on edge."

In Monday's motion, Read's attorneys are asking the court to reconsider a motion compelling them to share evidence with the prosecution. They are asking for permission to delay sharing that impeachment evidence until after witnesses complete direct examination.

In the example of Proctor's July 1 text message, they argue it indicates that the former investigator may not have abided by the court's sequestration order, which is meant to keep witnesses from watching other parts of the trial.

"The message implies that Mr. Proctor had been following the trial online and simply skipped the defense closing argument because he does not like Attorney (Alan) Jackson," the defense motion states."

Proctor, breaking the rules? Why, I never!
 
Karen Read

“The message implies that Mr. Proctor had been following the trial online and simply skipped the defense closing argument because he does not like Attorney (Alan) Jackson,” Reads lawyers claim

They also said Crosby used a flaw methodology in determining the marks on O'Keefe's arm were from a sharp object, not a dog.

"Dr. Crosby does not even allege, let alone establish, that his purported methodology is generally accepted in the relevant medical community," the motion reads.

The defense is seeking a Daubert hearing, or a hearing to determine if an expert's testimony is admissible. In such a hearing, Cannone would weigh whether expert testimony from Crosby is relevant and reliable.
 
It says something when jurors are willing to come out of the background to make personal statements their instructions weren't clear enough. It's obvious to one and all a unanimous verdict was reached on count 1; not guilty of murder. The defense know this, the cw know this, judge Cannone knows this, even the Supreme Court knows this. Jmo. Yet technicalities in the legal process and moo Judge Cannone's woeful failure to do her job, mean that despite all this knowing, KR gets to be retried again for murder. Real justice would be fixing this problem when it's the jury who are saying Ng verdict was reached, just let us formerly confirm that. Ridiculous.
 
Here's the whole Boston 25 interview with Read and Jackson :


Some big things here. The one that stood out to me is that EVERY person who was inside 34 Fairview who was interviewed by police that night had an attorney present!! Now, why would they all feel the need to have a lawyer present if they had nothing to hide? I've seen it said over and over again by the anti-KR crowd that if she was innocent, why did she need an attorney? Well she was a suspect in JOK death from the start. She knew it from the start.

The issue I have is that ALL the other people in that house were NEVER suspected of committing a crime. They were interviewed as witnesses NOT suspects!!! That is very suspect to me!! Jackson said he's never seen that before. I haven't either.

Guess it's just another one of them there coincidences huh!!
 
It's obvious to one and all a unanimous verdict was reached on count 1; not guilty of murder. The defense know this, the cw know this, judge Cannone knows this, even the Supreme Court knows this.
“Nothing suggested that the deadlock was limited to a specific charge. On the contrary, the notes contained no inkling of agreement, and the third note implied the jury were deadlocked on all charges,” the SJC stated in its ruling.
Per the ruling, the Supreme Court denied that there was a unanimous verdict on any charge -- including the murder count!
 
Monday's hearing concluded after several hours, and a state police representative announced that at least one more will be needed. Proctor is due back at police headquarters in Framingham on Thursday, March 13, and if another day is needed, that Friday as well.
The hearings are not open to the public.
When the trial board hearing concludes, any recommendations would be sent to the leader of the state police, Col. Geoffrey Noble, and to the state’s POST Commission. There's no timeline for how long that would take.
Seems like they are deliberately extending proceedings, so as not to make a ruling before the upcoming trial. JMO
 
Per the ruling, the Supreme Court denied that there was a unanimous verdict on any charge -- including the murder count!

I think that is a matter of interpretation since there wasn’t a written unanimous verdict on any charge. They are going by the letter of the law. These poor jurors have specifically said they didn’t understand the instructions and that they went by the foreperson’s interpretation. This is still a travesty in my opinion set out by a horrible judge that did not perform her duty correctly and should be ashamed of the situation. Again - all in my opinion
 
DEDHAM, Mass. (Court TV) — Karen Read is back in court Tuesday for another hearing ahead of her April retrial.


Attorneys are expected to argue numerous motions, including the admissibility of the Commonwealth’s dog bite expert witness, a defense request to test vehicles belonging to Read and her father, and other evidentiary requests.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
136
Guests online
2,771
Total visitors
2,907

Forum statistics

Threads
620,921
Messages
18,423,704
Members
239,302
Latest member
DetectiveAficionado
Back
Top