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

[Sustained]

I am with you here. I find it hard to believe they would throw him out on the front lawn too. I mean, what would they think would happen if he's found on their front lawn then? If Karen had not come back that morning, he'd be right there on the Alberts' lawn. And then what ... ? I wonder if that helps explain all the butt calls the two made to each other in the wee hours, (Higgins/B_Albert). I wonder if that helps explain that they had already planned not to go outside when he was found. It's so peculiar Brian Albert never went outside to investigate when all those first responders were outside. There's no way they would sleep through the commotion. Did they conclude, "Let's just throw him on the front yard and say he never came inside".
MOO.

The Alberts would have been asleep for ~3.5 hours when KR/JM arrived @6am. I'd buy the explanation of not a lot of sleep, quite a few drinks & a howling wind outside would explain not hearing the commotion outside.

After watching the documentary just now, I'd like to know why KR was reversing her Lexus at 24mph according to the telemetry. 24mph is really fast in reverse and if IMO she had hit JO at that speed, could've done a lot of damage and
possibly killed him.

 

[fcavanaugh]

I have to say I haven’t followed this case as closely since the first trial/mistrial and in that trial thought the prosecution didn’t prove their case BARD mostly based upon the independent ARCCA third party experts’ opinion that JO’s injuries weren’t consistent with a pedestrian/vehicle hit. Now with learning the murkiness for lack of a better word regarding ARCCA and payment made to them by the defense, I’ve started paying attention to the case again.

Having said all that, IMO KR needs to stop doing interviews with the press/appear in documentaries.

To explain, I watched the recent documentary on ID channel and imo KR contradicted herself a couple of times. The main contradiction that stuck out to me in the documentary was when Karen said after JO exited her vehicle at 34 Fairview, she watched him walk away and go into the house via the front door, the front door off to right between the main house and garage. But then in one of the next clips of the documentary, she talked about how she spoke with others including one of her Attorneys, DY iirc, and said I think I could I have hit him? I think I might’ve hit him etc. So, in one breath KR says she saw JO going inside 34 Fairview after leaving her vehicle, and basically in the next breath saying I might/could have hit him etc. well which is it??? because it can’t be both. This doesn’t add up and makes KR appear that she’s contradicting herself (why the contraction? the truth never changes) and/or due to being inebriated, she really doesn’t remember what happened after JO got out of her vehicle at 34 Fairview but saying she saw him go inside, makes her naturally look better.
IMO, I think she most likely doesn’t remember what exactly happened when JO exited her vehicle and think if she did hit him and he died due to being hit by her vehicle , it was an unfortunate accident due to alcohol intoxication. I can even see her hitting him and maybe JO not dying from the hit , Karen took off with him laying there and then someone, something (animal?) coming along later and doing something to him that caused his death, just not convinced it was someone/person at 34 Fairview that contributed to his death. It’s really just too bad there were no cameras in the area that could’ve caught the whole of the incident(s) that occured outside 34 Fairview.

Just as an aside, I personally don’t find KR to be a sympathetic defendant as imo she doesn’t show a whole lot of compassion/empathy/sorrow that JO is dead. That doesn’t mean a whole lot I guess in the big picture as not everyone wears their feelings on their sleeves, so to speak,

At any rate, I have no idea whether KR is guilty of hitting JO and killing him or not (although if she did, I think it was totally unintentional/an accident), and I’m not usually someone who buys into elaborate conspiracy theories either, but between KR own statement inconsistencies and the MA State Police obvious incompetence (Proctor et al) especially in the immediate aftermath of investigating, I have little hope JO will ever receive justice. And that is just so very sad to me for both JO, his family and all who loved him.

IMHOO

ETA-clarity

 

[Sustained]

I have to say I haven’t followed this case as closely since the first mistrial, but imo KR needs to stop doing interviews/appear in documentaries.

I watched the recent documentary on ID channel and imo KR contradicted herself a couple of times. The main contradiction that stuck out to me was she said she after JO exited her vehicle at 34 Fairview, she watched him walk to and go into the front door, the front door off to right between the main house and garage. But then in one of the next clips of the documentary, she’s talking about how she asked several others including one of her Attorneys DY iirc, could’ve I have hit him? I might’ve hit him etc. So in one breath she says she saw him go inside 34 Fairview and basically next breath saying she said to people I could’ve hit him. This doesn’t add up and makes KR appear that she’s contradicting herself (why the contraction? the truth never changes) and/or she really doesn’t remember what happened after JO got out of her vehicle at 34 Fairview. Which I think is most likely and think of she did hit him and he died it was an unfortunate accident due to alcohol being involved etc. I can even see her hitting him and JO not dying from that, and someone, something coming along later and doing something to him, just not convinced it was someone at 34 Fairview. It’s really just too bad there were no cameras in the area that could’ve caught the whole incident(s).

Personally I don’t find KR to be a sympathetic defendant as imo she doesn’t show a whole lot of compassion/empathy/sorrow that JO is dead. I have no dea whether KR is guilty of hitting JO and killing him or not (although if she did, I think it was totally unintentional), and on the other hand, I’m not someone who buys into elaborate conspiracy theories either, but between KR own statement inconsistencies and the MA State Police obvious incompetence (Proctor et al) especially in the immediate aftermath of investigating, I have little hope JO will ever receive justice.

IMHOO

BBM -

The likely scenario for me is that KR & JO were both drunk and arguing on the way over and at 34 Fairview. Possibly JO got out of the car at the Alberts and KR went to execute a 3-point turn at higher than normal speed to leave and hit JO. Maybe she either didn't notice she hit him or thought she had hit a bush, tree or maybe even the flagpole. Bad things happen all the time to drunk drivers.

An unfortunate accident that should result in either an involuntary manslaughter conviction or homicide by motor vehicle while under the influence. I wouldn't be surprised to see her take a plea before the 2nd trial.

The whole conspiracy theory is starting to remind me of the Steven Avery case.

 

[ch_13]

The Alberts would have been asleep for ~3.5 hours when KR/JM arrived @6am. I'd buy the explanation of not a lot of sleep, quite a few drinks & a howling wind outside would explain not hearing the commotion outside.

After watching the documentary just now, I'd like to know why KR was reversing her Lexus at 24mph according to the telemetry. 24mph is really fast in reverse and if IMO she had hit JO at that speed, could've done a lot of damage and
possibly killed him.

I don't believe that KR ever did reverse at that speed. Trooper Paul's testimony about the keycycle data was inaccurate. I urge you to watch his testimony and the cross-examination, and not rely upon some documentary.

Just so we're clear on definitions, a keycycle includes the entire time from when a key is inserted into the ignition and the car is turned on, until the car is turned off again.

According to the Commonwealth, KR hit JO during keycycle 1162. And Trooper Paul claims that his testing began with keycycle 1164.

That means the car was only turned on-and-off once between the time KR supposedly hit JO and when Trooper Paul got the car.

But we know that's not true. KR drove the car the next morning. Then her father drove it. Then the car was impounded by the police and loaded onto a trailer. Then it was driven off the trailer and brought into the police garage. That's a minimum of four times that the car was turned on and off, perhaps more. There's no dispute about any of that. So if Trooper Paul's testing was at keycycle 1164, how could Karen have hit John at 1162?

I think in the upcoming retrial the Commonwealth will have a completely different theory about the keycycle data.


Edit - I forgot to address your first item...

The Alberts would have been asleep for ~3.5 hours when KR/JM arrived @6am. I'd buy the explanation of not a lot of sleep, quite a few drinks & a howling wind outside would explain not hearing the commotion outside.

There's no question that the Alberts were aware of what was going on outside that morning. Jenn McCabe testified that she went into the Albert's house to tell them about. If I recall correctly, she went into the house right when the police showed up and even before the ambulance arrived.

Brian and Nicole Albert both testified that they just chose to not come outside.

 

[ch_13]

Doubtful. He'd surely be facing criminal prosecution himself. Not that he shouldn't be as it is....

Personally, I think he was acutely aware there was no physical evidence against Read and that a small crack in a taillight could have had several other explanations (not knowing at the time the actual explanation was on John's own ring cam!) so he further damaged her vehicle and scattered taillight pieces on the lawn to make it "seem" a violent collision had occurred. To make himself an investigative hero and to help out his pals (whom he denied even knowing) so they didn't have to get too bothered by an in-depth investigation. I question whether the idiot had any idea what really did happen to JO though.

There are a couple of pieces of extremely suss evidence from the last trial that don't get talked about a lot. One of them, IMO, directly implicates Michael Proctor in wrongdoing.

We know that John was carrying a cocktail glass when he got out of Karen's car. That glass was found by his body.

However, in addition to John's cocktail glass, there was additional glass found by the police. Pieces of glass were found on Karen's back bumper while other pieces were found outside 34 Fairview. The state crime lab matched some of the pieces on the bumper and the glass found at the home and confirmed they were from the same drinking glass.

Now how could pieces of the same glass ended up at these two locations? Karen's car was only at 34 Fairview for a brief time. John didn't put them there, he was carrying a different glass. It doesn't make any sense for Karen to have put them there. And as far as we know, no one else approached the car while it was outside the house.

It's fairly improbable that the glass would have remained on the bumper while it was being towed across town during a storm, but that's what the police claim happened. Their story is that the glass on the bumper was discovered while the SUV was in the police garage. And the pieces at 34 Fairview were found days later by none other than Michael Proctor who somehow located them in the snow.

Now maybe that's not proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he was tampering with evidence, but he certainly had means and opportunity and it really hard to come up with any other reasonable scenario that explains how that glass got there.

 

[ch_13]

I think most of us have seen the wounds on John's arms that look they are from an animal attack, not a car accident. (Although some people believe that shards of taillight could have caused them.)

But what doesn't get discussed much is the condition of the shirt John was wearing at the time of his death.

Look at those tiny holes in the below picture. They match up with the wounds on John's arms and they're only a few millimeters in diameter. Do they look like the sort of damage that could be caused by those large shards of taillight that the Commonwealth claims were found at the scene? I've damaged a lot of clothes over the years, and a large piece of polycarbonate might rip or cut, but it couldn't make these kinds of holes. It would take something long and thin to puncture the fabric. Maybe a claw or fang. Or perhaps something else, like a metal skewer. But not a piece of taillight.







Edit -

Judge for yourself. Here's the reconstructed taillight that supposedly caused those tiny holes in his shirt.

 

[Seattle1]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1902397152929927476

 

[acutename]

There are a couple of pieces of extremely suss evidence from the last trial that don't get talked about a lot. One of them, IMO, directly implicates Michael Proctor in wrongdoing.

We know that John was carrying a cocktail glass when he got out of Karen's car. That glass was found by his body.

However, in addition to John's cocktail glass, there was additional glass found by the police. Pieces of glass were found on Karen's back bumper while other pieces were found outside 34 Fairview. The state crime lab matched some of the pieces on the bumper and the glass found at the home and confirmed they were from the same drinking glass.

Now how could pieces of the same glass ended up at these two locations? Karen's car was only at 34 Fairview for a brief time. John didn't put them there, he was carrying a different glass. It doesn't make any sense for Karen to have put them there. And as far as we know, no one else approached the car while it was outside the house.

It's fairly improbable that the glass would have remained on the bumper while it was being towed across town during a storm, but that's what the police claim happened. Their story is that the glass on the bumper was discovered while the SUV was in the police garage. And the pieces at 34 Fairview were found days later by none other than Michael Proctor who somehow located them in the snow.

Now maybe that's not proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he was tampering with evidence, but he certainly had means and opportunity and it really hard to come up with any other reasonable scenario that explains how that glass got there.

was the glass that JO supposedly had when he left K's car intact the next day? I do not recall that detail. Seems unusual that he gets hit(?) and maybe thrown(?) and the glass is OK.
Maybe if glass shards land on a bumper in a snow storm, they get "iced" onto the surface and stick on until the car gets warm some where... I dunno.

 

[Derph]

BBM -

The likely scenario for me is that KR & JO were both drunk and arguing on the way over and at 34 Fairview. Possibly JO got out of the car at the Alberts and KR went to execute a 3-point turn at higher than normal speed to leave and hit JO. Maybe she either didn't notice she hit him or thought she had hit a bush, tree or maybe even the flagpole. Bad things happen all the time to drunk drivers.

An unfortunate accident that should result in either an involuntary manslaughter conviction or homicide by motor vehicle while under the influence. I wouldn't be surprised to see her take a plea before the 2nd trial.

The whole conspiracy theory is starting to remind me of the Steven Avery case.

You need to look at ALL the shady behavior of everyone in that house that night. I and others compiled a list of things that just didn't make sense. We stopped at around 70 things that were just weird about the case. Things that cause reasonable doubt and we could have easily added more to that list. At the time I stated you could go ahead and just strike ANY 50 things from that list and STILL have another 50 things that just don't make any sense at all and show that something nefarious is going on in Canton.

I wish I had saved the list because I'm not going to go back thru over a 1000 or more posts during the trial to try and find them again. The Feds handed over 3000 pages of notes they took on the investigation of the Read case to Read's attorney's before the 1st trial. We don't specifically know what or who they were investigating but we do know the Read case was just a part of a larger investigation into something. We don't know what, but the Feds were so concerned with what they found, they felt obligated to hand over 3000 plus pages of their findings to the Defense.

The Birchmore case is another massive cover-up by some of the very same people involved in the Read investigation. If you're not familiar with that case here's a brief summery. A cop killed Sandra Birchmore who was carrying his child. Her death was ruled a suicide by some of the same cops who investigated the death of JOK. Then this Fall a cop was arrested and charged with the murder of her and her unborn baby!! She was groomed, used, abused and murdered by a cop and other cops looked the other way and tried to cover for him! Look into that case and you will see a system-wide pattern of abuse by police and a cover-up of her murder. It's not a stretch AT ALL to think the same thing happened to Read.

You really need to go back and watch the 1st trial. I had no idea about this case until I saw it blasted all over social media last summer. Initailly, just going on how it looked and how Read looked, I felt that she was probably guilty. That notion quickly went away as I began watching the trial. It was multiple weeks of watching the Prosecution trot out witness after witness who just couldn't seem to remember a damn thing about that night. Then all the butt dials. How do these people make 47 buttdials in the course of a few hours??? I've maybe made 2 in my entire life, yet these people made 47 right around the time that JOK died!! Then jen mcabe took the stand and it became very obvious that these people had it out for her. Nothing made sense. A human arm can't cause the damage to the tail light that the CW was insisting happened. No way, no how. Watch the 1st trail and don't pay attention to these sensationalistic, made for rating TV shows and docu-series. See for yourself how tht 1st trial was conducted and how the 2nd trial is being handled by this "judge"! It's a farce. Karen Read can't get a fair trial with this "judge" in this "court".

 

[ch_13]

was the glass that JO supposedly had when he left K's car intact the next day? I do not recall that detail. Seems unusual that he gets hit(?) and maybe thrown(?) and the glass is OK.
Maybe if glass shards land on a bumper in a snow storm, they get "iced" onto the surface and stick on until the car gets warm some where... I dunno.

Below is John's glass that was found by his body.

But to be clear, this glass was tested by the crime lab and it is not the same as the glass that was found on Karen's bumper. That was a totally different drinking glass. It really makes no sense.



Where John's body was found in relation to the street is another big problem I have with the Commonwealth's evidence. But that's another story.

 

[ch_13]

Then this Fall a cop was arrested and charged with the murder of her and her unborn baby!!

snipped.

Just to clarify, it was the Feds who charged the cop with murder. The state of Massachusetts never did, even though they have known for at least a year that he was the last person seen with her and she died around the time he left her apartment.

They never even charged him with statutory rape even though they've known about that for years. (And still haven't charged the other two cops who had sex with her when she was underage.)

Here's the SB thread:

Thread 'MA - Sandra Birchmore, Stoughton, 4 Feb 2021 *former police officer arrested*'

Sep 25, 2022

MY BLOOD BOILS OVER THIS ONE. ARRRGH> NONE OF THESE MEN HAVE FACED ANY CONSEQUENCES.
Mass Guy- Can you believe this???? I am a native of Westwood, MA. My mom lives right by the line with Canton. Compared to where I live currently (Kansas City) MA seeems like a separate safer planet. Not anymore.

3 Ex-Stoughton Officers Had ‘Deeply Troubling' Relationships With Woman Who Later Died

Three former police officers in Stoughton, Massachusetts, had inappropriate sexual relationships with a young woman who died by suicide last year after becoming pregnant, the department’s chief said Friday after a lengthy internal investigation revealed the “serious misconduct.” Stoughton Police...

www.nbcboston.com

• waterslyd
• Replies: 400
• Forum: Awaiting Trial

• 
• 
• 

 

[acutename]

Below is John's glass that was found by his body.

But to be clear, this glass was tested by the crime lab and it is not the same as the glass that was found on Karen's bumper. That was a totally different drinking glass. It really makes no sense.

View attachment 572345

Where John's body was found in relation to the street is another big problem I have with the Commonwealth's evidence. But that's another story.

thanks.
always hoped that accident reconstruction would "solve" this case, but more Qs than As.

 

[mrjitty]

What do you find the most troubling aspect of the inverted video?

You know they showed that camera was inverting video prior to that day?

It troubles me deeply that the witness would testify to inverted footage.

It also bothers me a lot that the defence sent their expert to the facility to recover the original footage only to find it was long deleted. Something the state always knew. So where have the state been materialising exported footage from? There is no chain of custody on any of that video so no way to prove how the original video looked.

As LYK argued this has to lead to an adverse direction from the Judge to the jury about the missing source video.

But IMO it does directly raise the possibility someone at the state intentionally flipped this footage and or selectively released parts of it.

It’s really not great.

 

[mrjitty]

How would they blame it on the plow guy if (1) they didn't know exactly when he was coming and (2) JO would have had to be walking in the path of the plow at the exact time he was plowing ?

In the blizzard, how did KR know the exact location of JO's body when she pulled up the next morning wth JM ?

i agree this theory is highly speculative. IMO it’s simply more likely investigating officers believed she was guilty and did a shoddy or even corrupt investigation. Given Proctors conduct there has to be at least a reasonable possibility his work is not legit. IMO.

 

[mrjitty]

The defense exposed that it was inverted during trial, so there was no prejudice to KR from that, it was detrimental to the Commonwealth. It's highly unlikely that they would have set out to mislead the jury and be exposed in this way - it's more likely to be lack of trial preparation between the prosecutor and witnesses, and confusion, IMO.

There is video of the car being put on the tow truck with missing taillight, before it ever got to the sallyport, and admissions by KR about removing broken taillight pieces in John's driveway, demonstrating that missing sallyport video couldn't be exculpatory evidence in any event.

there is prejudice IMO. Due to the loss of the source footage and no COC on the exports the defence lost access to critical evidence. We simply don’t know what other evidence there was or how things were inverted.

 

[Tortoise]

Below is John's glass that was found by his body.

But to be clear, this glass was tested by the crime lab and it is not the same as the glass that was found on Karen's bumper. That was a totally different drinking glass. It really makes no sense.

View attachment 572345

Where John's body was found in relation to the street is another big problem I have with the Commonwealth's evidence. But that's another story.

At the last hearing (Mar 18th) there was mention of the glass, and a new published statement by KR, now under investigation, that John took her glass out of the car too.

Starting at 48.57

 

[Tortoise]

there is prejudice IMO. Due to the loss of the source footage and no COC on the exports the defence lost access to critical evidence. We simply don’t know what other evidence there was or how things were inverted.

As I said, earlier footage, nothing to do with this case, recorded weeks before this incident, was recently found on a computer, showing that the camera was in the same condition, recording inverted. They showed it at the Mar 5th hearing.

3.04.22

 

[mrjitty]

As I said, earlier footage, nothing to do with this case, recorded weeks before this incident, was recently found on a computer, showing that the camera was in the same condition, recording inverted. They showed it at the Mar 5th hearing.

3.04.22

Yes i remember this was discussed. But IMO it does not address the fundamental point. Due to the loss of the original footage and the lack of COC we cannot be sure of what the original footage was. And it raises the question of whether the investigator intentionally tried to put in misleading evidence. whether he inverted it or not he did know it was inverted. And given we cannot unravel this IMO it raises a doubt as to integrity of states evidence.

At least i would not convict on it.

 

[Seattle1]

As I said, earlier footage, nothing to do with this case, recorded weeks before this incident, was recently found on a computer, showing that the camera was in the same condition, recording inverted. They showed it at the Mar 5th hearing.

3.04.22

Seriously? For three years the CW has argued that sallyport video is deleted within weeks and not retained and we are to suddenly believe that video somehow produced two weeks ago for January 2022 is credible? Thanks, but no thanks!

 

[Tortoise]

Yes i remember this was discussed. But IMO it does not address the fundamental point. Due to the loss of the original footage and the lack of COC we cannot be sure of what the original footage was. And it raises the question of whether the investigator intentionally tried to put in misleading evidence. whether he inverted it or not he did know it was inverted. And given we cannot unravel this IMO it raises a doubt as to integrity of states evidence.

At least i would not convict on it.

All of these issues can be aired in her trial can they not?

I am satisfied from the door bell footage shown, that a substantial part of her taillight was missing before it was put on the tow truck and transported.