MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #20 Retrial

[Bishop Black]

Professor Was Accused of Hitting Cop Boyfriend with Car, Leaving Him to Die. Does New Evidence Exonerate Her?

Karen Read has been charged with second-degree murder, motor vehicle manslaughter and leaving the scene of a collision in the death of her off-duty Boston Police Officer boyfriend John O'Keefe.

people.com

Karen Read has been charged with second-degree murder, motor vehicle manslaughter and leaving the scene of a collision in the January 2022 death of her off-duty Boston Police Officer boyfriend John O'Keefe outside a Canton, Mass., home.

She's pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Leading up to his death, the couple of two years reportedly spent the night drinking and bar hopping with friends before Read, 43, dropped O'Keefe, 46, off at the home of a fellow off-duty police officer for an after-party, PEOPLE previously reported.

Prosecutors say as O'Keefe exited the vehicle, Read allegedly proceeded to make a three-point turn during a winter storm, striking her boyfriend in the process before driving off.

After O'Keefe failed to return home hours later, Read allegedly went looking for him, before finding his body in a snowbank outside the home where she allegedly left him.

Thread #1Thread #2 Thread #3Thread #4 Thread #5 Thread #6 Thread #7 Thread #8 Thread #9 Thread #10 Thread #11 Thread #12 Thread #13 Thread #14 Thread #15 Thread #16 Thread #17 Thread #18 Thread #19

 

[Knitty]

Please review Best Practices - Dealing with your fellow posters.

Once you've done that, please continue here.

 

[Linda7NJ]

ARCCA's testing focused on two primary scenarios:

1. whether John’s head was struck by the vehicle
2. whether the taillight damage could have resulted from glass traveling at 30 mph using a potato gun.

They did not consider the possibility John was hit by the car, projected - got up & fell backwards and died as a result.

Variable factors like impact speed, angle, or the body's position and movement post-impact or weather conditions were not considered at all.

I’m so hoping this time around this is addressed by the prosecution with an expert than can explain actual physics & science & variables in easy to understand language for the jury.

All IMO

Edited to add - ARCCA didn’t have the evidence transfer evidence either.

 

[Spectrix]

ARCCA's testing focused on two primary scenarios:

1. whether John’s head was struck by the vehicle
2. whether the taillight damage could have resulted from glass traveling at 30 mph using a potato gun.

They did not consider the possibility John was hit by the car, projected...

Trooper Paul explored this possibility. He'd be your kind of expert, no?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Trooper Paul explored this possibility. He'd be your kind of expert, no?

No.
Trooper Paul is your standard basic police department traffic accident reconstructionist.

Police departments don’t have Ph.D level physics experts on staff.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

ARCCA's testing focused on two primary scenarios:

1. whether John’s head was struck by the vehicle
2. whether the taillight damage could have resulted from glass traveling at 30 mph using a potato gun.

They did not consider the possibility John was hit by the car, projected - got up & fell backwards and died as a result.

Variable factors like impact speed, angle, or the body's position and movement post-impact or weather conditions were not considered at all.

I’m so hoping this time around this is addressed by the prosecution with an expert than can explain actual physics & science & variables in easy to understand language for the jury.

All IMO

The idea that ARCCA ignored physics and science is just nonsense. If the prosecution had an expert who could refute their findings with actual physics, they would have already presented one.

 

[Linda7NJ]

The idea that ARCCA ignored physics and science is just nonsense. If the prosecution had an expert who could refute their findings with actual physics, they would have already presented one.

The CW has one lined up with decades of experience.
Buckle up - defense tactics like - smoke, mirrors, dimples and potato guns won’t be on this expert’s agenda

All IMO

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

The CW has one lined up with decades of experience.
Buckle up - defense tactics like - smoke, mirrors, dimples and potato guns won’t be on this expert’s agenda

All IMO

Yeah the defense should just roll over and not present a case.

 

[Forest_Wood]

The CW has one lined up with decades of experience.
Buckle up - defense tactics like - smoke, mirrors, dimples and potato guns won’t be on this expert’s agenda

All IMO

I do agree the CW has to bring in qualified experts to try this case successfully a second time. The public can't handle another farce of a trial like last time.
But it's silly for you to argue that the ARCCA expert Dr Wolfe's opinion influenced the jury by his appearance only. The guy has more education than most with a PhD. He's smart and knowledgable, which is why the FBI hired him and his partner to begin with, tasked with a scenario to try to solve. Same with your other comments about smoke and mirrors.The defense team put tremendous effort, resources and research into their work to bring forth important information relevant to this case. If not for them, Proctor would still be roaming around MA as king of the castle, drinking and driving police vehicles on others' tax dollars while putting other road users' safety at risk, acting like judge and jury within hours of showing up, sharing confidential information, and even taking bribes cloaked as gifts "for his wife Elizabeth", during his "investigations". You seem to only want to tear down what they've accomplished rather than see them for what they are - intelligent, effective, capable attorneys who will continue to keep the CW on their toes. The CW has the burden to illustrate that Karen is guilty of this crime. We pay them to do that. They should be getting the proper experts so we're not in this mess. I doubt this defense team is afraid of a qualified expert because they too are qualified experts in their field.
MOO

 

[Linda7NJ]

The idea that ARCCA ignored physics and science is just nonsense. If the prosecution had an expert who could refute their findings with actual physics, they would have already presented one.

Didn’t Dr. Rentschler acknowledged under cross-examination that it was possible John was “nudged" by the car, fell, and died?
IIRC

“Nudged” “clipped” both mean HIT

 

[Linda7NJ]

I do agree the CW has to bring in qualified experts to try this case successfully a second time. The public can't handle another farce of a trial like last time.
But it's silly for you to argue that the ARCCA expert Dr Wolf's opinion influenced the jury by his appearance only. The guy has more education than most with a PhD. He's smart and knowledgable, which is why the FBI hired him and his partner to begin with, tasked with a scenario to try to solve. Same with your other comments about smoke and mirrors.The defense team put tremendous effort, resources and research into their work to bring forth important information relevant to this case. If not for them, Proctor would still be roaming around MA as king of the castle, drinking and driving police vehicles on others' tax dollars, acting like judge and jury within hours of showing up, and even taking bribes cloaked as gifts "for his wife Elizabeth", during his "investigations". You seem to only want to tear down what they've accomplished rather than see them for what they are - intelligent, effective, capable attorneys who will continue to keep the CW on their toes. The CW has the burden to illustrate that Karen is guilty of this crime. We pay them to do that. They should be getting the proper experts so we're not in this mess. I doubt this defense team is afraid of a qualified expert because they too are qualified experts in their field.
MOO

I never degraded Wolfs qualifications, ever.
I just didn’t feel he was a honest broker.

But ya gotta admit - his looks don’t hurt

 

[rescuemom]

ARCCA's testing focused on two primary scenarios:

1. whether John’s head was struck by the vehicle
2. whether the taillight damage could have resulted from glass traveling at 30 mph using a potato gun.

They did not consider the possibility John was hit by the car, projected - got up & fell backwards and died as a result.

Variable factors like impact speed, angle, or the body's position and movement post-impact or weather conditions were not considered at all.

I’m so hoping this time around this is addressed by the prosecution with an expert than can explain actual physics & science & variables in easy to understand language for the jury.

All IMO

Edited to add - ARCCA didn’t have the evidence transfer evidence either.

ARCCA was not asked to assess this case. They, independant of eachother, were presented with 2 theories/scenarios. One involved the known facts about the damage to a car. Same make and model as KRs and asked about damage to a tailight at a certain speed, etc. The second was injuries to a body the size of JOK and asked if scenario 1 would/could cause scenario 2. They told the interviewer that they didn't know anything about Karen Read or JOK and knew nothing about the trial(s)

 

[Linda7NJ]

I do agree the CW has to bring in qualified experts to try this case successfully a second time. The public can't handle another farce of a trial like last time.
But it's silly for you to argue that the ARCCA expert Dr Wolf's opinion influenced the jury by his appearance only. The guy has more education than most with a PhD. He's smart and knowledgable, which is why the FBI hired him and his partner to begin with, tasked with a scenario to try to solve. Same with your other comments about smoke and mirrors.The defense team put tremendous effort, resources and research into their work to bring forth important information relevant to this case. If not for them, Proctor would still be roaming around MA as king of the castle, drinking and driving police vehicles on others' tax dollars while putting other road users' safety at risk, acting like judge and jury within hours of showing up, sharing confidential information, and even taking bribes cloaked as gifts "for his wife Elizabeth", during his "investigations". You seem to only want to tear down what they've accomplished rather than see them for what they are - intelligent, effective, capable attorneys who will continue to keep the CW on their toes. The CW has the burden to illustrate that Karen is guilty of this crime. We pay them to do that. They should be getting the proper experts so we're not in this mess. I doubt this defense team is afraid of a qualified expert because they too are qualified experts in their field.
MOO

I have the upmost respect for defense attorneys-
especially the good ones. and by good, I mean go the extra mile for their clients. Like José Baez.

I hated the verdict in the Casey Anthony trial but he’s a damn good lawyer.

Our system doesn’t work without them.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Didn’t Dr. Rentschler acknowledged under cross-examination that it was possible John was “nudged" by the car, fell, and died?
IIRC

“Nudged” “clipped” both mean HIT

Yes, for the same reason that CW witnesses admitted on cross that they could not prove JOK had been hit at all. JOK’s cause of death is underdetermined. Stating someone ‘could’ have been clipped or nudged is not evidence that he was hit. Dr. Rentschler understood that it is important to stick to the facts and not overstate possibilities when there’s no conclusive proof.

Honestly, with the sheer amount of mishandling and inconsistency in this case, you and I could go back and forth on what ifs all day and keep matching each other point for point. But to me, that’s exactly the problem. It’s a sign of how muddled the investigation was. The lack of clarity and concrete evidence is what’s most telling here, IMO.

 

[Wishbone]

ARCCA's testing focused on two primary scenarios:

1. whether John’s head was struck by the vehicle
2. whether the taillight damage could have resulted from glass traveling at 30 mph using a potato gun.

They did not consider the possibility John was hit by the car, projected - got up & fell backwards and died as a result.

Variable factors like impact speed, angle, or the body's position and movement post-impact or weather conditions were not considered at all.

I’m so hoping this time around this is addressed by the prosecution with an expert than can explain actual physics & science & variables in easy to understand language for the jury.

All IMO

Edited to add - ARCCA didn’t have the evidence transfer evidence either.

I'm not clear on the two scenarios you referenced. Are these your opinions or is there somewhere I can find documentation or testimony about these being the only issues tested for?

 

[keek]

I do agree the CW has to bring in qualified experts to try this case successfully a second time. The public can't handle another farce of a trial like last time.
But it's silly for you to argue that the ARCCA expert Dr Wolfe's opinion influenced the jury by his appearance only. The guy has more education than most with a PhD. He's smart and knowledgable, which is why the FBI hired him and his partner to begin with, tasked with a scenario to try to solve. Same with your other comments about smoke and mirrors.The defense team put tremendous effort, resources and research into their work to bring forth important information relevant to this case. If not for them, Proctor would still be roaming around MA as king of the castle, drinking and driving police vehicles on others' tax dollars while putting other road users' safety at risk, acting like judge and jury within hours of showing up, sharing confidential information, and even taking bribes cloaked as gifts "for his wife Elizabeth", during his "investigations". You seem to only want to tear down what they've accomplished rather than see them for what they are - intelligent, effective, capable attorneys who will continue to keep the CW on their toes. The CW has the burden to illustrate that Karen is guilty of this crime. We pay them to do that. They should be getting the proper experts so we're not in this mess. I doubt this defense team is afraid of a qualified expert because they too are qualified experts in their field.
MOO

Right, it is all I see as well. Just seems one dimensional. IMO

 

[Linda7NJ]

ARCCA was not asked to assess this case. They, independant of eachother, were presented with 2 theories/scenarios. One involved the known facts about the damage to a car. Same make and model as KRs and asked about damage to a tailight at a certain speed, etc. The second was injuries to a body the size of JOK and asked if scenario 1 would/could cause scenario 2. They told the interviewer that they didn't know anything about Karen Read or JOK and knew nothing about the trial(s)

Did they test variables simple scenarios. such as was John Walking, running or standing ? the same direction as the vehicle? Was it slippery? impacted on his side? Front? Back?

All of those things affect force & velocity and how far a person would travel. airbone or slide?
If it was icy & slick he would slide further.

A large SUV sideswiping a human at 24 mph would likely move them 1-5 meters (3-16 feet), with airborne displacement on the higher end and sliding on the lower end. Body position matters— upright pedestrians might travel farther due to lift, while sideways or crouched ones might slide or roll less.

All IMO

 

[keek]

Right, it is all I see as well. Just seems one dimensional. IMO

The focus on appearance is insulting and that is an example of comments seeming to be one dimensional. KR's as well. This is a trial. Seeing the big picture is crucial if one is a juror and I can only hope that is the focus and assume these people are qualified on that level of perception and intellect.

 

[Forest_Wood]

I never degraded Wolfs qualifications, ever.
I just didn’t feel he was a honest broker.

But ya gotta admit - his looks don’t hurt

Haha. Well, conversely, if he looked this handsome yet presented like Trooper Paul, the jury would recognize his incompetence in a jiffy. Don't forget there was another ARCCA expert who testified as well.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I'm not clear on the two scenarios you referenced. Are these your opinions or is there somewhere I can find documentation or testimony about these being the only issues tested for?

Watch the cross examinations of the first trial

Yes, for the same reason that CW witnesses admitted on cross that they could not prove JOK had been hit at all. JOK’s cause of death is underdetermined. Stating someone ‘could’ have been clipped or nudged is not evidence that he was hit. Dr. Rentschler understood that it is important to stick to the facts and not overstate possibilities when there’s no conclusive proof.

Honestly, with the sheer amount of mishandling and inconsistency in this case, you and I could go back and forth on what ifs all day and keep matching each other point for point. But to me, that’s exactly the problem. It’s a sign of how muddled the investigation was. The lack of clarity and concrete evidence is what’s most telling here, IMO.

Cheers
Let’s both hope the Truth and Justice prevails this go around and the jury doesn’t hang!