MISTRIAL MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #19

[Sustained]

This is a false dichotomy.
You could also simply believe there is not evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convict

I didnt say anything about having enough evidence to convict. IMO, she is guilty but she may not get convicted.
The alternative to her hitting JOK are simply not believable and there is zero evidence of collusion.

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

Read now says JOK went into the house. No one in the house testified to that and Julie Nagel testified they were all in the kitchen and dining room area including BA and BH.

Why did Read not mention that on the morning he was found ? Or question how he got back on the lawn after going into the house ? Simply put ... she couldn't because while first responders were at the scene as Jen McCabe was also there and would have called her out as lying.

So he could have been in the basement? Are there more rooms and entrances into a house or are the only rooms the kitchen and dining room?

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

I didnt say anything about having enough evidence to convict. IMO, she is guilty but she may not get convicted.
The alternative to her hitting JOK are simply not believable and there is zero evidence of collusion.

There is zero evidence she hit him. Oh wait, a bunch of drunk liars at a party said so? Sounds like really SOLID evidence. JMO

 

[kuromiiiilove]

I didnt say anything about having enough evidence to convict. IMO, she is guilty but she may not get convicted.
The alternative to her hitting JOK are simply not believable and there is zero evidence of collusion.

I was using the plural you, as in ‘people can also believe there is not enough evidence to convict’.

 

[Spectrix]

Two jurors have been seated (a man and a woman) after yesterday's selection process.
This was out of a pool of 62 prospective jurors who made it as far as the interview process.

They will aim to secure 16 total.

Karen Read trial jury selection begins with 2 jurors seated

Two jurors have now been seated for Karen Read's high-profile second trial in Dedham, Massachusetts.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[Lorenathered]

I haven't watched the documentary yet but don't have high hopes that it will tell me anything I didn't know from watching the trial. I learned the hard way with the Paradise Lost documentaries that all documentaries have a agenda and none are without bias. No one should rely solely on a documentary for their evidence and impressions in my opinion.

 

[Sustained]

So he could have been in the basement? Are there more rooms and entrances into a house or are the only rooms the kitchen and dining room?

Geez, maybe he fell off the roof and stumbled to the edge of the front yard.

Nagel testified all partiers were in the kitchen and dining room. All testified during the 1st trial that JOK didn't come in the house.

 

[Tortoise]

I think she knew he vomited, from her own words.

'Like David, what if I ran his foot over or clipped him in the knee and he passed out and went to care for himself and he threw up or passed out?' MSN

I don't think you would guess that, and that he had not been dead at the time he was first lying there, from her request to JMcC to search how long it takes to die in the cold, which is the only realistic and reasonable scenario, IMO.

 

[angkg]

About the phone, my understanding is Higgins disposed of it only after the court ruled in his favour over the protective order. There may of course be many other reasons why he did not want investigators or the D to get hold of it.

Anyway - i only note this because the idea he destroyed evidence is a bit overstated IMO.

No, he destroyed the phone one day before he was given an order to turn it over. Very suspicious timing - almost as if he knew the order was coming.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Would you trust the LE in this area right now if something like this happened to you or a family member? I sure wouldn't be able to trust that they would investigate fairly after everything revealed here. So yes, in my opinion, it is about the cops as much as KR. They failed in their duty and several LE were reprimanded, disciplined and fired for that very reason.
MOO

Every single trial I’ve ever watched the police investigation is criticized. It’s SOP for a defense.
Which leads me to believe, no investigation is perfect and there’s always room for improvement.
This defense strategy usually doesn’t work.
It’s my opinion, it gained traction in this case because of BLM & and anti- police sentiment & propaganda coupled with YouTubers and especially TB.
ALL IMO

 

[Linda7NJ]

I haven't watched the documentary yet but don't have high hopes that it will tell me anything I didn't know from watching the trial. I learned the hard way with the Paradise Lost documentaries that all documentaries have an agenda and none are without bias. No one should rely solely on a documentary for their evidence and impressions in my opinion.

Watch it and listen to Karen Read’s own words

 

[Forest_Wood]

I didnt say anything about having enough evidence to convict. IMO, she is guilty but she may not get convicted.
The alternative to her hitting JOK are simply not believable and there is zero evidence of collusion.

What you did say was that a person had to believe one side or the other - that she either hit JOK with the vehicle OR that there was a mass collusion. That is false, since we can believe there is not enough evidence to convict. It's not just black or white the way you stated. Three scenarios could be true at the same time. JOK could have made contact w/KRs taillight somehow. There may have been a coverup of something between BA, BH and others. And LE performed such a shoddy investigation that the truth may never be known, and therefore, not enough evidence proved to convict.
MOO.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I think she knew he vomited, from her own words.

'Like David, what if I ran his foot over or clipped him in the knee and he passed out and went to care for himself and he threw up or passed out?' MSN

I don't think you would guess that, and that he had not been dead at the time he was first lying there, from her request to JMcC to search how long it takes to die in the cold, which is the only realistic and reasonable scenario, IMO.

Yes, the foreshadowing is impressive…Don’t forget.
He’s dead
He was hit by a plow
No one knows where you are (except Karen)

Then we have her attempts to distance herself-
I left him at the Waterfall

I know I hit something
I hit him

All IMO

 

[Linda7NJ]

No, he destroyed the phone one day before he was given an order to turn it over. Very suspicious timing - almost as if he knew the order was coming.

It’s not suspicious
I’d ditch my phone too, if I was legally allowed to. That’s exactly what he did.

 

[mrjitty]

No, he destroyed the phone one day before he was given an order to turn it over. Very suspicious timing - almost as if he knew the order was coming.

Again my understanding is when he knew the litigation was coming (motion 15 September), he got a new phone. But he only disposed of his old phone in late October after the motion was denied on 5 October 2022.

Source:

 

[Linda7NJ]

What you did say was that a person had to believe one side or the other - that she either hit JOK with the vehicle OR that there was a mass collusion. That is false, since we can believe there is not enough evidence to convict. It's not just black or white the way you stated. Three scenarios could be true at the same time. JOK could have made contact w/KRs taillight somehow. There may have been a coverup of something between BA, BH and others. And LE performed such a shoddy investigation that the truth may never be known, and therefore, not enough evidence proved to convict.
MOO.

Imo
It’s not that complicated.
There’s no other reasonable explanation other than she hit him and she left him there, knowingly.
She may have side swiped him, injured him, he staggers, falls backwards and smashed his head on the rock hard frozen ground.
That’s a realistic scenario.

What Karen’s defence is putting forth is not reasonable or believable

All IMO

 

[mrjitty]

It’s not suspicious
I’d ditch my phone too, if I was legally allowed to. That’s exactly what he did.

Yes.

I guess i don't infer so much as others from this. If it were me and I was innocent I would do the following when I found out that a motion had been filed to get my phone

1. Get a new phone (because I might be about to lose my current one)
2. Get a back up of any key data
3. Once the defence lost the motion and the preservation order is moot, I would destroy the phone

The point is, I would not want the commonwealth OR the defence (and thus turtleboy) up in my stuff, even if innocent (who knows what else is on there). So once legally able to do so, i would dump it. Just in case this issue ever came back around.

He did not dump the phone before the D lost the motion, IMO. Indeed he was served with a preservation order dated 23 Sept 2022 requiring him not to do so.

I would not be surprised if he was advised to do all this by his attorney - as is right and proper.

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

Another point here. While BH did get a new phone/number the day before the preservation order (see his examination above), that motion was filed by the defence a whole week before that.

So I don't see anything obviously nefarious here. Knowing he could lose his phone, he went and got a new one. He was subsequently served with a preservation order. But then the D lost the motion, he dumped the phone - as he was allowed to do.

Have i missed something?

Source

MOO

 

[Izzylizzy]

Not sure if this had been posted.

"Premiered 13 hours ago " going over jury questions, opinions, hidden biases.

 

[mrjitty]

Another thing here. If BH were really involved in the conspiracy - why would he still have the murder phone 7 months later?