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

[mrjitty]

For Pete's sake! Drama much? Guess Julie couldn't wait until the Court ruled that AK/Turtle Boy has a valid, legal basis to plead the fifth if the CW called him as a witness -- not to mention it's his constitutional right to do so. His sequestration is waived -- why not report this. Pfft...

Seriously, I'm no fan but it's a fact he has pending litigation involving witnesses in this case and isn't even allowed to be present in the Courtroom when certain witnesses testify.

Yeah. Silly coverage.

I am hopeful this is a warning to influencers and law tubers in other cases to stay on the right side of the line. In my opinion his behaviour with witnesses was shocking, but I am also a huge fan of the dynamic of bringing the texts into trial. if D teams are going to use this tactic to seed narratives, then those comms can come back to bite them (see also Delphi).

Maybe it's the case that D-teams are just going to have embedded influencers who will be protected by privilege, but I'd rather that than people like TB pretending to be independent.

 

[mrjitty]

Re: ARCCA witnesses

According to Special Prosecutor Hank Brennan we do not have all the billing, all the communications, all the text messages, all the emails between the parties and if the defense’s position is not in their control custody well its certainly in the custody control of ARCCA we do not have all prior reports all prior testing all failed testing photographs pictures we dont even know who was what part of this report

This is an extraordinary problem for the CW.


Jackson: What they have, we have.


Calling bs on Jackson weak response. He's got nothing - is he hiding powerful evidence which would not be favorable toward defendant???

It's kind of bizarre to me that this situation can exist at all, where the Feds are regarded as independent of the CW, and not subject to full discovery

What if their investigation found evidence of corruption in this case, but they shelved it due to lack of evidence? Why should the D not have access to those witnesses and exhibits?

What if conversely they determined the crime scene was not staged so shelved their inquiry? Ditto that should be discoverable for the CW IMO

Bizarre

 

[mrjitty]

Something I've seen suggested is maybe JOK threw the glass and hit and shattered the tail light - and then was hit with the damaged light. Or some variation.

This could explain why ARCCA was looking to see if it was possible. But because we can't see the brief, we can't know that.

 

[twhel]

I certainly agree he is the biggest weakness in the CW case.

Without his 'work', the glass in JOKs shirt would dispose of the case. Reading the tea leaves, jury 1 seems to have believed he did not plant that evidence. I am not sure how his subsequent firing will impact there. Personally I think if he really was railroading KR to protect cops, he never would have been fired. However the jury is unlikely to think of it that way IMO.

mrj, if I may, since the distinction between glass and plastic is significant to this case, what were found in JOK's shirt were very small pieces of plastic (both clear and red) that were forensically examined and found to be consistent, in their physical characteristics, with the larger pieces of KR's (plastic) tail light.

ADA Lally developed a bad habit of referring to these pieces as "microscopic" in size, rather than as small pieces, readily visible to the naked eye, that were microscopically examined, as were the larger pieces they were compared to. I've noticed Lally's mischaracterization lead to confusion and wrongly premised arguments, elsewhere.

On ARCCA, and the mission they were assigned, it strikes me that the FBI may well have been interested in seeing if a determination could be made whether JOK's injuries were vehicle-related, or the result of a physical altercation/assault. And the FBI could have had this interest without necessarily assigning any significant credence to a theory of planting of evidence by Massachusetts law enforcement.

 

[mrjitty]

mrj, if I may, since the distinction between glass and plastic is significant to this case, what were found in JOK's shirt were very small pieces of plastic (both clear and red) that were forensically examined and found to be consistent, in their physical characteristics, with the larger pieces of KR's (plastic) tail light.

ADA Lally developed a bad habit of referring to these pieces as "microscopic" in size, rather than as small pieces, readily visible to the naked eye, that were microscopically examined, as were the larger pieces they were compared to. I've noticed Lally's mischaracterization lead to confusion and wrongly premised arguments, elsewhere.

On ARCCA, and the mission they were assigned, it strikes me that the FBI may well have been interested in seeing if a determination could be made whether JOK's injuries were vehicle-related, or the result of a physical altercation/assault. And the FBI could have had this interest without necessarily assigning any significant credence to a theory of planting of evidence by Massachusetts law enforcement.

yes you are correct! I am always switching glass and plastic - sorry about that.

On the FBI interest, I guess you could be right but i feel if vehicle was not involved, the corruption by the officers is evident IMO. What other interest do you think they might have had?

 

[mrjitty]

4/16/25


COURT TV TRIAL NOTES:
00:56:29 ON THE RECORD - Judge Beverly Cannone
00:57:32 MOTION TO RECONSIDER - Sallyport Video & Dog Bite Expert (Defense Elizabeth Little / Prosecutor Hank Brennan)
01:09:20 MOTION TO RECONSIDER - Dr. Crosby (Prosecutor Hank Brennan / Defense Robert Alessi)
01:27:31 MOTION - Audio Visual Aids (Prosecutor Hank Brennan / Defense Alan Jackson)
02:05:23 MOTION - AARCA Witnesses (Prosecutor Hank Brennan / Defense Alan Jackson)
02:44:58 MOTION - Aidan Kearney Takes the 5th (Tim Bradl - Turtleboy’s attorney)

It appears Brennan was most animated (2hrs 5mins) about the D wanting to do more ARCCA testing at the 11th hour. The Judge has allowed it, and added timeframes.

I am quite surprised she would allow this given how much time they've had, but then I've seen discovery mere days before, or even day of in other cases so she is being quite generous to the defence here.

The reason this can be unfair, is the CW experts will have little opportunity to consider the validity, strengths and weaknesses of the evidence created.

Jackson had a very good rebuttal on his feet though - and appeared to carry the day.

For those with an interest - these are two elite tier layers going toe to toe with great arguments, brilliantly articulated.

 

[Spectrix]

Someone please explain to me the significance of whatever is going on with TB in terms of this murder trial?

I typically only watch the actual trial (as the jury would) so I'm out of the loop at the moment. Thanks!

 

[mrjitty]

Someone please explain to me the significance of whatever is going on with TB in terms of this murder trial?

I typically only watch the actual trial (as the jury would) so I'm out of the loop at the moment. Thanks!

The CW claims that the comms between TB and the defendant illustrate consciousness of guilt. I am not sure exactly what those comms are. Presumably the CW would want to call TB about the content of those out of court statements by the defendant. But now they cannot call him because he has taken the 5th.

 

[jepop]

While I disagree with the Judge's ruling on this, it is quite a difficult issue IMO.

I guess BTL, it is clear enough ARCCA were commissioned not to examine the accident in the usual way and determine what happened, but rather to investigate if the tail light evidence must have been planted.

IMO Brennan believes the defence effectively instigated that investigation - which if so, would be a smart move by them. The problem is, due to FBI policy, we have no idea what their eventual conclusions were.

So to allow any of this in opens up a huge can of worms which the Judge prefers not to do - and I think this is at least in part because she suspects correctly the relationship is not as clear cut as it seems - AJ did himself no favours on that score either.

Very bizarre situation IMO

No. Imo ARCA were commissioned by the FBI to ascertain whether the tail light damage and the injuries to John O'Keefe fitted. I don't know how many times that's been said. For all we know, KR could have backed into Higgins snow plow on his jeep which was supposedly parked around there somewhere and done some damage to her tail light when she was leaving.
The point is that no other possibilities were ever checked. Was Higgins car looked at? No. Was the glass on KR's bumper traced to it's origin? Imo, no. What about where that glass came from? From a glass in the Fairview residence? From the glass of a snow plow light? We know it was inconsistent with both JOK's cocktail glass and supposedly another random piece of glass located on the lawn at some point.

Imo ARCA had a specific job to do and they did it. With the damage to the tail light being what it was and JOK's injuries being what they were, his injuries were not acquired via impact with that tail light. ARCA's experiment was pure. I am not about to ignore that. So however those tail light pieces ended up where they did, it was not because Karen hit John with enough force to break it, or alternatively if she just side swiped nudged him then the tail light would not have sustained the damage that it did.

I have no idea what you mean by the defense instigating the ARCA investigation. If that is what Brennan believes then that is wrong. Are you sure you are understanding this correctly.

Moo

 

[Seattle1]

It appears Brennan was most animated (2hrs 5mins) about the D wanting to do more ARCCA testing at the 11th hour. The Judge has allowed it, and added timeframes.

I am quite surprised she would allow this given how much time they've had, but then I've seen discovery mere days before, or even day of in other cases so she is being quite generous to the defence here.

The reason this can be unfair, is the CW experts will have little opportunity to consider the validity, strengths and weaknesses of the evidence created.

Jackson had a very good rebuttal on his feet though - and appeared to carry the day.

For those with an interest - these are two elite tier layers going toe to toe with great arguments, brilliantly articulated.

Also, I think you'll enjoy Peter's (LYK) take on the hearing today!

 

[mrjitty]

No. Imo ARCA were commissioned by the FBI to ascertain whether the tail light damage and the injuries to John O'Keefe fitted. I don't know how many times that's been said. For all we know, KR could have backed into Higgins snow plow on his jeep which was supposedly parked around there somewhere and done some damage to her tail light when she was leaving.
The point is that no other possibilities were ever checked. Was Higgins car looked at? No. Was the glass on KR's bumper traced to it's origin? Imo, no. What about where that glass came from? From a glass in the Fairview residence? From the glass of a snow plow light? We know it was inconsistent with both JOK's cocktail glass and supposedly another random piece of glass located on the lawn at some point.

The problem is the plastic in JOKs shirt. IMO that's conclusive as to vehicle involved unless there is staging. So how would you prove staging? One way would be to show the injuries were inconsistent with a vehicle strike. Hence ARCCA

I have no idea what you mean by the defense instigating the ARCA investigation. If that is what Brennan believes then that is wrong. Are you sure you are understanding this correctly.

Moo

RSBM

As Peter Tragos correctly argues, the defence has no control over an FBI investigation, and there are huge risks in talking to the feds for any defendant. However it now seems clear the defence is the source for the FBIs copy of the discovery and IMO a possibility the defence put the theory to the FBI in the first place, prompting them to look at it. Or they did that independently. There really is no way to know.

What's unsatisfactory to me is the FBI apparently dropped their inquiry, and Proctor was fired. Had proctor really been part of a corrupt staging its my opinion he would not be cut loose right before trial.

 

[mrjitty]

Also, I think you'll enjoy Peter's (LYK) take on the hearing today!

I would not like to be a Judge trying to keep these big beats on a leash!

 

[jepop]

The problem is the plastic in JOKs shirt. IMO that's conclusive as to vehicle involved unless there is staging. So how would you prove staging? One way would be to show the injuries were inconsistent with a vehicle strike. Hence ARCCA


RSBM

As Peter Tragos correctly argues, the defence has no control over an FBI investigation, and there are huge risks in talking to the feds for any defendant. However it now seems clear the defence is the source for the FBIs copy of the discovery and IMO a possibility the defence put the theory to the FBI in the first place, prompting them to look at it. Or they did that independently. There really is no way to know.

What's unsatisfactory to me is the FBI apparently dropped their inquiry, and Proctor was fired. Had proctor really been part of a corrupt staging its my opinion he would not be cut loose right before trial.

Moo, the plastic on the shirt is not a problem. Embedded is not how the testimony came out to me. Initially there was testimony that it was brushed off as irrelevant as debris and only much later was it was examined. Jmo

Look at the chaotic scene when JOK was found, at least one first responder got into the ambulance, JOK's shirt was removed, a million opportunities for debris and cross contamination. Lucky's Snow plow could have pushed debris from road to that area where tail light pieces were found including tiny bits. Some may not have even been tail light. Jmo

The defense addressed this quite reasonably at trial X 1. The shirt debris isn't an issue and shouldn't be given more weight than ARCA's experts who understand physics and the forces required. Jmo

On your second point, again, all I know is that both the defense and the prosecution were contacted by DOJ or whoever, prior to first trial and the ARCA findings were made available to both. The CW declined, I assume after perusing the report's findings.

I do not believe the defense has behaved untowardly in this matter and that is jmo because I see no evidence of it. ARCA were only approved to be defense experts for this trial by cannone in Feb this year or some time around then I can't remember when exactly. If cannone makes a ruling in favour of the defense then imo it's because she has to legally speaking. Moo

Defense received some sort of final report from CW's new accident recon physics witness on 26 March imo and are wanting their own experts, ARCA, for this trial to have a look at it. Seems fair to me. They got a CV for this cw witness last Nov, but not their anticipated testimony until this year after Feb. Jmo.

 

[Forest_Wood]

It appears Brennan was most animated (2hrs 5mins) about the D wanting to do more ARCCA testing at the 11th hour. The Judge has allowed it, and added timeframes.

I am quite surprised she would allow this given how much time they've had, but then I've seen discovery mere days before, or even day of in other cases so she is being quite generous to the defence here.

The reason this can be unfair, is the CW experts will have little opportunity to consider the validity, strengths and weaknesses of the evidence created.

Jackson had a very good rebuttal on his feet though - and appeared to carry the day.

For those with an interest - these are two elite tier layers going toe to toe with great arguments, brilliantly articulated.

This case has naturally transformed into a show-down between elite attorneys for sure!

 

[Forest_Wood]

Had proctor really been part of a corrupt staging its my opinion he would not be cut loose right before trial.

Why would the MSP NOT fire Proctor right away? I would think that to keep him on would be tampering with justice if terminating his employment was their verdict.

 

[mrjitty]

Why would the MSP NOT fire Proctor right away? I would think that to keep him on would be tampering with justice if terminating his employment was their verdict.

If he really was part of a larger plot to frame the defendant to protect officers then throwing him under the bus loses control over him. I suspect he was fired precisely because he doesn't have any cards to play.

 

[Spectrix]

If he really was part of a larger plot to frame the defendant to protect officers then throwing him under the bus loses control over him. I suspect he was fired precisely because he doesn't have any cards to play.

Perhaps he was the sacrificial lamb, as such.
Like Trooper Paul drawing the short straw and having to explain the CW's peculiar theory of JOK flying through the air and magically landing no where near the road.

 

[mrjitty]

Perhaps he was the sacrificial lamb, as such.
Like Trooper Paul drawing the short straw and having to explain the CW's peculiar theory of JOK flying through the air and magically landing no where near the road.

My opinion is as worthless as the next, but I do feel strongly the CW wouldn't have brought this goat rodeo back to town if they had thought Proctor was about to get perp walked by the FBI.

My guess is they cut him loose because the damage is done and HB will now say "look - LE even sacked this bad apple"

 

[shotgun09]

My opinion is as worthless as the next, but I do feel strongly the CW wouldn't have brought this goat rodeo back to town if they had thought Proctor was about to get perp walked by the FBI.

My guess is they cut him loose because the damage is done and HB will now say "look - LE even sacked this bad apple"

What else does Brennan do with the Proctor situation?
The defense will continuously pound the "Proctor effect"...you know, the conflicted ( knows family of 34 Fairview), the laziness, the bias, the misogyny, the grossness of Proctor, the negligent covered crime scene, the questionable 'interviews', the never properly logged in evidence, the mistaken ( on purpose?) spelling and description of the homeowner at 34 Fairview on the initial report?, the 'sure, Jan' moment of the questionable 'gift' to him....subtly suggested to give to his wife, by none other than a witness in this case... And lastly...the all important keeper of the mysterious sally port video. I could go on. Proctor equals a butt-dial load of reasonable doubt. And IMO, Brennan has a huge uphill battle to clean up that mess.

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

Yeah. Silly coverage.

I am hopeful this is a warning to influencers and law tubers in other cases to stay on the right side of the line. In my opinion his behaviour with witnesses was shocking, but I am also a huge fan of the dynamic of bringing the texts into trial. if D teams are going to use this tactic to seed narratives, then those comms can come back to bite them (see also Delphi).

Maybe it's the case that D-teams are just going to have embedded influencers who will be protected by privilege, but I'd rather that than people like TB pretending to be independent.

What does staying on the right side of the line mean? That these lawtubers can only have a public opinion if it's pro-prosecution?