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

[nodamselindistress]

So Kerry Roberts' car was warm? Wow, I really wondered about that, thanks Mr. Brennan!

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

KerR and JMc were heroes trying to save Officer John O’Keefe. Unfortunately, thanks to KR that wasn’t possible because she left him to die in the snow. moo

First Responders are also heroes.

What a tragic event caused by an enraged drunk driver. moo

LOL what about the first responder in the Albert bedroom who couldn't be bothered to get out of bed and check on his fellow first responder. WHAT A HERO! JMO

 

[Derph]

Amazing how NO ONE recorded interviews with the witnesses! Hos can anyone be OK with this in this day and age. Just another few dozen coincidences that none of them were recorded right? Shows hos bad and lazy the investigation was!!!!

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

Amazing how NO ONE recorded interviews with the witnesses! Hos can anyone be OK with this in this day and age. Just another few dozen coincidences that none of them were recorded right? Shows hos bad and lazy the investigation was!!!!

Defense shouldn't bring that up, it would be cheating. JMO

 

[Tricia]

Remember scroll to the top of this thread and you'll see the live stream of the Read trial. Click on the play button and then you don't have to leave Websleuths to watch the stream

 

[Spectrix]

So Kerry Roberts' car was warm? Wow, I really wondered about that, thanks Mr. Brennan!

Remember the first trial where the CW subjected the jury to enduring countless irrelevant witnesses before they got anywhere near the nuts and bolts of the trial, which was basically that JOK injuries weren't caused by being hit by a car and that the Lexus' damage was not caused by running into a person?

Yeah. It's groundhog day!

 

[dlsully62]

I followed trial 1 - it was actually the case that got me onto WS.

I don’t believe John was hit by a car, and I don’t believe this case was handled properly. Between the misconduct, missing evidence, and lack of any clear proof of a car strike, there’s no way i could vote guilty. Could something else have happened? Of course. But the investigation was so compromised that I honestly don’t know if John will ever get real justice. MOO.

I agree with you after watching the first trial ARRCA testimony and then yesterday's court proceedings. The pictures of John's arm and the testimony by ARRCA about dog bites is so, so convincing. I also believe that KR had had so much to drink, she really didn't know WHAT happened. Not to mention the corruption that abounded with the law enforcement. I just don't see how the jury can reach a verdict without reasonable doubt.

 

[shotgun09]

Remember the first trial where the CW subjected the jury to enduring countless irrelevant witnesses before they got anywhere near the nuts and bolts of the trial, which was basically that JOK injuries weren't caused by being hit by a car and that the Lexus' damage was not caused by running into a person?

Yeah. It's groundhog day!

Yep !
This is still the " Protect the McCabes and Alberts show" You know, the true victims......Kerry Roberts really tried hard to get the witness harassment issue front and center, shortly in to her testimony.

 

[Angelwatch]

I just started following this case so don't know many of the details of evidence that came out in the first trial but Kerry Roberts' testimony yesterday seemed pretty damning to me. She said Read called her at 5am saying John is dead (not that she was afraid he may be dead), she was afraid he was hit by a snow plow (seems like a bizarre fear unless she knew he was hit) and then spotted his body in the front yard when no one else could see it when they they drove up. Roberts also said she saw pieces missing from Read's tail light. Is there reason not to believe Roberts? Wasn't she Read's friend?

I take that in the same manner as John O'Keefe Sr. saying nearly the same thing in the car with Kerry (according to her testimony today) and Peggy before they knew John had passed away. I think that was everyone's worst fear.

Kerry comes across to me as believable and sincere, though manipulated and influenced by JM. To what extent, I'm not sure. She clearly loved John and wants to do right by him and his family.

 

[Tricia]

Good Afternoon,
I need your help with this case. I only know the bare outline.
Can someone please tell me what evidence the prosecution has other than Karen's words and a broken tail-light that shows she hit John with her car? Post as bullet points would be great.
I'm trying to understand the strengths of the prosecution's case.
If someone could post the strengths of the defense's case, I would appreciate that too.
Honestly, I avoided doing deep dives into this case because of all the Internet drama. It makes my head hurt. Plus, I have found that in cases with a lot of Internet drama, the facts tend to get lost.
From what I have read I am surprised the prosecution decided to retry Karen after the mistrial. That's why I need to find out what they have that I am missing.
Thank you very much. I really appreciate it.
Tricia
PS. We will be discussing the case tonight on Websleuths YouTube Live. I'll post the link when it is available on YouTube

 

[waldojabba]

Remember the first trial where the CW subjected the jury to enduring countless irrelevant witnesses before they got anywhere near the nuts and bolts of the trial, which was basically that JOK injuries weren't caused by being hit by a car and that the Lexus' damage was not caused by running into a person?

Yeah. It's groundhog day!

You betcha !

Deja vu - with Kerry -I just saw a tiny bit and here we are with the shoes again...paraphrasing:

"So when you got to John's house did you take off your shoes? etc etc etc. Neat freak or not, the man is missing and time would seem to be of the essence .
But no lets struggle with removing our boots before we enter and search because thats how John likes it ? John I am sure understood that emergencies can be messy.

I am not sure what the question does for the P ? Karen left her shoes on against Johns wishes bc ...she knew he was dead??? Is that the jump I am supposed to make? if so ..clearly a bridge too far.

Also how do you misunderstand a question about what did you hear. Interesting that Brennan wanted to make it clear how close she is with John's family and that she has discussed the story
many many times with anybody and everybody. Constant rehash can give an account of something in the past "legs" and cause people to misremember IME/IMO.

Kerry was not Karen's friend. She was John's friend. This was not Karen's crowd .
Karen was referred to as the " babysitter with benefits" by the local women iirc. Karen was trying to fit in imo but meanwhile the Canton women folk were taking bets/ money on when Karen would be gone.

JMO

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Good Afternoon,
I need your help with this case. I only know the bare outline.
Can someone please tell me what evidence the prosecution has other than Karen's words and a broken tail-light that shows she hit John with her car? Post as bullet points would be great.
I'm trying to understand the strengths of the prosecution's case.
If someone could post the strengths of the defense's case, I would appreciate that too.
Honestly, I avoided doing deep dives into this case because of all the Internet drama. It makes my head hurt. Plus, I have found that in cases with a lot of Internet drama, the facts tend to get lost.
From what I have read I am surprised the prosecution decided to retry Karen after the mistrial. That's why I need to find out what they have that I am missing.
Thank you very much. I really appreciate it.
Tricia
PS. We will be discussing the case tonight on Websleuths YouTube Live. I'll post the link when it is available on YouTube

The prosecution has several points they’re are relying on:
-Witness testimony of Karen allegedly either saying ‘I did it’ or ‘I hit him’ - However, Karen maintains she said ‘Did I hit him? Could I have hit him?’
-Broken taillight fragments matching Read’s SUV were found near John O’Keefe’s body, with some pieces reportedly containing his DNA (DNA evidence links Karen Read's car to death of police officer, prosecutors say) - However, chain of custody on the taillight pieces has led to major question regarding the integrity of the evidence.
-Motive: The prosecution suggests Karen has motive to kill John because she was angry with him regarding relationship issues and drunk.
-Kerry Robert’s testimony, who just testified yesterday, was a key point of trial 1. She says Karen called her and said ‘John is dead’ before anyone saw the body. The prosecution claims this is evidence that Karen was aware she had struck John.
-Timing: the prosecution claims the window of time where O’Keefe could have left the car and been fatally struck is consistent with their version of events.

What’s not in their favor:
-No one saw Karen hit John, and there’s no surveillance footage of the incident.
-No blood, hair, or tissue were found on Karen’s car.
-No tire marks, bumper damage, or body dents on the car that would be consistent with a fatal strike.
-John’s wounds can’t be said to certainly have been caused by a car strike
-The lead investigator, Proctor, was just dishonorably discharged and fired for misconduct.

 

[detectivewannab]

Well I reject that conspiracy notion outright!

Counsel deleting messages with the expert witnesses is simply not allowed - though I am not naive that such back channels go on.

Why would AJ delete texts that relate to the critical period if not to obscure the formative period of the relationship? The CW is entitled to those messages to understand the true nature of the engagement. Worse still, the defence then concealed the deletion of those messages until Hank Brennan confronted the court with evidence that proved they existed. The defence falsely certified that they had complied with discovery, until on the eve of trial, they had to reveal what had been destroyed. Then Alessi has the nerve to hector the Judge that she said only emails and not texts?

I do not know what is in those texts but there is certainly an implication that ARCCA is not so independent and the CW is entitled to that info for it's cross examination.

That is not a conspiracy. Just hard law. And if Hank had 100 deleted messages with a CW witness posters would be justifiably outraged.



I certainly hope that the ARCCA witnesses have not deleted their side of the messages and that the CW will now be able to get access to them. The Judge ordered that the ARCCA witnesses must bring them along. I agree it would be extremely unprofessional if they have also deleted them. I truly hope that is not the case and it would confront the Judge with a train wreck situation.

IMO the Judge has acted completely properly here to ensure discovery is complied with - I just hope the messages still exist so that is possible.

MOO

AJ would do anything or have someone do something to win this case.

 

[detectivewannab]

You betcha !

Deja vu - with Kerry -I just saw a tiny bit and here we are with the shoes again...paraphrasing:

"So when you got to John's house did you take off your shoes? etc etc etc. Neat freak or not, the man is missing and time would seem to be of the essence .
But no lets struggle with removing our boots before we enter and search because thats how John likes it ? John I am sure understood that emergencies can be messy.

I am not sure what the question does for the P ? Karen left her shoes on against Johns wishes bc ...she knew he was dead??? Is that the jump I am supposed to make? if so ..clearly a bridge too far.

Also how do you misunderstand a question about what did you hear. Interesting that Brennan wanted to make it clear how close she is with John's family and that she has discussed the story
many many times with anybody and everybody. Constant rehash can give an account of something in the past "legs" and cause people to misremember IME/IMO.

Kerry was not Karen's friend. She was John's friend. This was not Karen's crowd .
Karen was referred to as the " babysitter with benefits" by the local women iirc. Karen was trying to fit in imo but meanwhile the Canton women folk were taking bets/ money on when Karen would be gone.

JMO

Happens all the time.

 

[Tricia]

The prosecution has several points they’re are relying on:
-Witness testimony of Karen allegedly either saying ‘I did it’ or ‘I hit him’ - However, Karen maintains she said ‘Did I hit him? Could I have hit him?’
-Broken taillight fragments matching Read’s SUV were found near John O’Keefe’s body, with some pieces reportedly containing his DNA (DNA evidence links Karen Read's car to death of police officer, prosecutors say) - However, chain of custody on the taillight pieces has led to major question regarding the integrity of the evidence.
-Motive: The prosecution suggests Karen has motive to kill John because she was angry with him regarding relationship issues and drunk.
-Kerry Robert’s testimony, who just testified yesterday, was a key point of trial 1. She says Karen called her and said ‘John is dead’ before anyone saw the body. The prosecution claims this is evidence that Karen was aware she had struck John.
-Timing: the prosecution claims the window of time where O’Keefe could have left the car and been fatally struck is consistent with their version of events.

What’s not in their favor:
-No one saw Karen hit John, and there’s no surveillance footage of the incident.
-No blood, hair, or tissue were found on Karen’s car.
-No tire marks, bumper damage, or body dents on the car that would be consistent with a fatal strike.
-John’s wounds can’t be said to certainly have been caused by a car strike
-The lead investigator, Proctor, was just dishonorably discharged and fired for misconduct.

THANK YOU. This is beyond helpful

 

[rrsafety]

That’s totally fair, and I agree that people respond to trauma in unpredictable ways. But to highlight what you said in your second paragraph, that Kerry maybe omitted what she heard Karen say - even if she omitted something to protect Karen, IMO that still makes her an unreliable witness.

And now that she is best friends with Jen McCabe, isn’t it fair to ask what she is leaving out of her testimony regarding Jen? Once you go down the rabbit hole of an unreliable witness, you can’t just pick and choose what may be true or not.

 

[bobbymkii]

Good Afternoon,
I need your help with this case. I only know the bare outline.
Can someone please tell me what evidence the prosecution has other than Karen's words and a broken tail-light that shows she hit John with her car? Post as bullet points would be great.
I'm trying to understand the strengths of the prosecution's case.
If someone could post the strengths of the defense's case, I would appreciate that too.
Honestly, I avoided doing deep dives into this case because of all the Internet drama. It makes my head hurt. Plus, I have found that in cases with a lot of Internet drama, the facts tend to get lost.
From what I have read I am surprised the prosecution decided to retry Karen after the mistrial. That's why I need to find out what they have that I am missing.
Thank you very much. I really appreciate it.
Tricia
PS. We will be discussing the case tonight on Websleuths YouTube Live. I'll post the link when it is available on YouTube

Other than KR's words and the taillight, the prosecution have:

- a data readout from Karen's SUV which suggests there was an event in the car's recent history where it reversed to a top speed of 24mph.
- shards of glass on the bumper of the Lexus. John had taken a cocktail glass with him from the Waterfall bar and was found broken next to his body

The strength of the defense's case is quite simply, the weakness of the prosecution case, of which I think even those who believe she is guilty, would not argue that it was an atrocious investigation by the police. For me personally I just cannot conclude that the injuries found on JO'K's body were caused by a car.

Hope any of the above info is useful for the podcast!

 

[Tricia]

Other than KR's words and the taillight, the prosecution have:

- a data readout from Karen's SUV which suggests there was an event in the car's recent history where it reversed to a top speed of 24mph.
- shards of glass on the bumper of the Lexus. John had taken a cocktail glass with him from the Waterfall bar and was found broken next to his body

The strength of the defense's case is quite simply, the weakness of the prosecution case, of which I think even those who believe she is guilty, would not argue that it was an atrocious investigation by the police. For me personally I just cannot conclude that the injuries found on JO'K's body were caused by a car.

Hope any of the above info is useful for the podcast!

Yes, thank you very much bobbymkii.

 

[rescuemom]

How is a witness, in this case JOKs mother Margaret allowed to sit in on other witnesses and then testify???

 

[Tricia]

And now that she is best friends with Jen McCabe, isn’t it fair to ask what she is leaving out of her testimony regarding Jen? Once you go down the rabbit hole of an unreliable witness, you can’t just pick and choose what may be true or not.

That is what I am running into. So many rabbit holes. I appreciate this. Thank you.