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

[Forest_Wood]

There is a copy of the motion at the link provided. There is no different opinion, the original analyst is medically unable to travel.

Yes, I read it, and it also stated that the analyst will share his own opinions of the results. If those results differ from her results, it will be concerning. Note that he is identified as Senior DNA Analyst while she is DNA Analyst and he will give his own opinions based on his review of the testing conducted.

 

[Tortoise]

Yes, I read it, and it also stated that the analyst will share his own opinion of the results. If those results differ from her results, it will be concerning.

Apologies!

 

[Forest_Wood]

Apologies!

The document makes it sound like he might have a differing opinion IMO.

 

[rescuemom]

Nah, the defense was more than happy with mistrial.

The SCOTUS is not going to hear a state case when the 200 years of case law was followed.

Verdicts must be made public & in open court.

Karen Read's motion to dismiss 2 charges denied by Judge Beverly Cannone

Karen Read's attempt to get two of the charges against her dismissed has been rejected, but she plans to appeal.

www.cbsnews.com

She failed to make those two items public

 

[rescuemom]

Nah, the defense was more than happy with mistrial.

The SCOTUS is not going to hear a state case when the 200 years of case law was followed.

Verdicts must be made public & in open court.

Karen Read's motion to dismiss 2 charges denied by Judge Beverly Cannone

Karen Read's attempt to get two of the charges against her dismissed has been rejected, but she plans to appeal.

www.cbsnews.com

She rushed to call a mistrial. Seeing the verdict on 2 counts she could have asked them to continue to deliberate. She failed to adequately instruct the jury. She couldn't risk an acquital.

 

[cocomod]

She rushed to call a mistrial. Seeing the verdict on 2 counts she could have asked them to continue to deliberate. She failed to adequately instruct the jury. She couldn't risk an acquital.

She really did rush the jury out of the courtroom. From the start of deliberations when she gave them a verdict form that was inadequate and bias, she made sure the jury's job was convoluted.

 

[Tortoise]

The document makes it sound like he might have a differing opinion IMO.

I think that's exceedingly unlikely, but we shall see. I think it might just be a requirement for an expert to testify as to his own opinion, rather than a colleague's expert opinion. Being as it's DNA analysis and the defense didn't dispute the results, I think the CW is unlikely to have a differing opinion on this. MOO

 

[mrjitty]

I think that's exceedingly unlikely, but we shall see. I think it might just be a requirement for an expert to testify as to his own opinion, rather than a colleague's expert opinion. Being as it's DNA analysis and the defense didn't dispute the results, I think the CW is unlikely to have a differing opinion on this. MOO

Yes - he can only give his own opinion IMO. Maybe given the lateness of the day his role will only to be to interpret the colleagues report. I don't know the technicalities of it.

IMO

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

She rushed to call a mistrial. Seeing the verdict on 2 counts she could have asked them to continue to deliberate. She failed to adequately instruct the jury. She couldn't risk an acquital.

Yes @rescuemom and IMO the judge I believe did so possibly to prevent any request to poll the jury. Seemed there was a rush to end things at the end of the first trial which was declared a mistrial. Almost akin to the effort to move this trial so quickly. And I am still perplexed why more is not said about the investigation into Canton PD, trooper proctor, and others associated with the earlier investigation. Hoping that still comes into evidence in some fashion. MOO

 

[Linda7NJ]

She failed to make those two items public

Karen Read's appeal denied by Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts denied Karen Read's appeal to get some charges dismissed.

www.cbsnews.com

Those tasked with deciding that question disagree

 

[Linda7NJ]

Yes, I read it, and it also stated that the analyst will share his own opinions of the results. If those results differ from her results, it will be concerning. Note that he is identified as Senior DNA Analyst while she is DNA Analyst and he will give his own opinions based on his review of the testing conducted.

I don’t believe an expert to give sworn testimony for someone else.
My understanding is he’s using her work to form his own opinion.
I highly doubt testimony would be any different. DNA is pretty straight forward

All IMO

 

[Forest_Wood]

Diid it ever come out who the guy named Mike was who called up David Yannetti and told him to look deeper into the Alberts. He spoke of it in one of the early documentaries with either 20/20 or Dateline.

 

[cocomod]

Diid it ever come out who the guy named Mike was who called up David Yannetti and told him to look deeper into the Alberts. He spoke of it in one of the early documentaries with either 20/20 or Dateline.

My understanding is he recanted. But, he let the cat out of the bag and there was no need putting it back at that point

 

[Forest_Wood]

Some history on David Yannetti.

Boston College Law School Magazine | Defending Karen Read

David Yannetti ’89 provides a look at his role in one of the highest profile Massachusetts murder cases in years.

lawmagazine.bc.edu

"The next turning point for Yannetti was a phone call from an anonymous source (who first claimed to be Mike Lynch, a popular sportscaster). He told Yannetti that Read was innocent and that he should “look at the homeowner [of the property where the death occurred] and his nephew. They beat [the victim] up and left him outside,” the caller claimed."

 

[mrjitty]

She failed to make those two items public

I get why the defence has skillfully advocated and publicised this issue, but it really is just black letter law that there was no verdict on any count. There are at least 2 good reasons. The first is not all jurors have been asked what their thinking was - we just have claims from some jurors. The second is once the jurors leave the courtroom, they are exposed to outside info, so there is no safe way to re-poll them.

So while it might be frustrating for the defence in that they now realise they were close to 'winning', they did have the opportunity to poll the jury and chose not to. The Judge followed the correct procedures as the jury deliberated - as confirmed on appeal. So while I am unhappy with the Judge on some points - this is not one of them.

I feel this was a high stakes situation where Yanetti and co, as highly experienced attorneys, decided they did not want to open the box. That is on them and not the Judge.

Something I found interesting in the appeal and habeas judgements is just how limited the Judge is in terms of how she can inquire of the jury. But I get why this is. e.g if the facts were reversed, you would not want to see the Judge teasing out a guilty verdict when the Jury had told the Judge 3 times clearly in writing they were deadlocked. Nor would you want a Federal judge stepping in to manufacture a verdict later.

Judge Saylor said there is no basis to conclude that any agreement was final, because it was not reported in open court.

"Accordingly, and as a matter of federal constitutional law, petitioner was not actually acquitted of any of the relevant offenses," Saylor said.

Judge Saylor said, "a federal-court voir dire of the state-court jurors-a voir dire that would necessarily subject their private deliberations to intense public scrutiny-is probably unlawful and certainly ill-advised."

IMO

Federal judge denies Karen Read's request to drop 2 charges, question jurors

A federal judge has denied Karen Read's request to drop two charges against her and said Judge Cannone was not wrong in declaring a mistrial.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[mrjitty]

Some history on David Yannetti.

Boston College Law School Magazine | Defending Karen Read

David Yannetti ’89 provides a look at his role in one of the highest profile Massachusetts murder cases in years.

lawmagazine.bc.edu

"The next turning point for Yannetti was a phone call from an anonymous source (who first claimed to be Mike Lynch, a popular sportscaster). He told Yannetti that Read was innocent and that he should “look at the homeowner [of the property where the death occurred] and his nephew. They beat [the victim] up and left him outside,” the caller claimed."

Top talent!

 

[Linda7NJ]

Some history on David Yannetti.

Boston College Law School Magazine | Defending Karen Read

David Yannetti ’89 provides a look at his role in one of the highest profile Massachusetts murder cases in years.

lawmagazine.bc.edu

"The next turning point for Yannetti was a phone call from an anonymous source (who first claimed to be Mike Lynch, a popular sportscaster). He told Yannetti that Read was innocent and that he should “look at the homeowner [of the property where the death occurred] and his nephew. They beat [the victim] up and left him outside,” the caller claimed."

That’s a huge “allegedly”
I’m not convinced it happened at all.
There’s zero evidence

 

[mrjitty]

That’s a huge “allegedly”
I’m not convinced it happened at all.
There’s zero evidence

It’s interesting how the attorneys are increasingly becoming main characters in these trials.

 

[Forest_Wood]

It’s interesting how the attorneys are increasingly becoming main characters in these trials.

Which is likely the very reason Hank Brennan wanted to become involved in this case.

 

[Forest_Wood]

That’s a huge “allegedly”
I’m not convinced it happened at all.
There’s zero evidence

Except for a full name.