MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #21 Retrial

[Wishbone]

In yesterday's and today's testimony from the ambulance crew.

Today's:

Thanks, I thought it might be something that came from KR herself

 

[Forest_Wood]

I think the manner was off. Too aggressive. Grandstanding. It's not the content, it's tone and manner, over the top, borne of a desperation to pull everyone on the prosecution witness list into a conspiracy of collusion and dishonesty. People do misspeak, mishear, and misunderstand. Had she wanted to help Jen she could have lied from the beginning and said she did hear it, if she was a dishonest person. She came across as a very caring woman, trying to help people she loved in a blizzard at 5am. She said she and Jen had worked together on a timeline so she was aware of it.

Another instance is going at the paramedic for saying sitting there instead of lying there, which was clearly a turn of phrase and everyone knew John was lying down. I doubt anyone took it literally and thought 'oh did she think John was sitting up for hours?' or even noticed the discrepancy.

I thought they would have come up with a better, pared down strategy for trial 2. It's important for jurors to connect with advocates. I've done jury service in a murder case and I draw on that experience. IMO

I didn't find the defense aggressive or grandstanding when they cross examined KerR. Actually, I thought they even toned it down while she was on the stand. They questioned her about two different examples of false testimony (the time when KR pointed out her cracked taillight and that Kerry told the GJ she heard Karen say something that she never in fact heard but was only told had happened by JMc.
This is otherwise known as perjury no matter how sweet you come across as a person.
IIRC, they didn't cross examine her at all during Trial 1 so it was important that they point out these discrepancies in her various testimonies IMO.
As a point of interest to me, she testified at some point that she didn't want to "point the finger" at KR, which was very sweet to hear, and at the same time, she drove Peg and John Sr to the hospital and seemed to be pointing her finger at Karen for the entire trip, to the point that John Sr asked them to give Karen a break. Later, Peg didn't even talk to Karen when she saw her at the hospital and even asked a nurse why she was there! Why wouldn't the girlfriend who found John be there? Why was Peg so bitter after a car ride with KerR?
These are exactly the nuances that need to be flushed out.
Since you've done jury service in a murder case, you could also draw on that experience to know how crucial it is to the integrity of a trial for witnesses to provide consistent, truthful testimony.
MOO

 

[Derph]

So the Doctor admitted he didn't adjust 30% to whole blood???!!!!! WTH??? Dude was lazier than proctor.

 

[Forest_Wood]

People justifying, handwaving away, or simply ignoring Proctors behavior truly scares me. IMO, allowing police(and anyone in general)to think and behave as if this is normal is how we wind up with cases like Sandra Birchmore. Allowing this behavior to stand unchallenged simply because you have feels about the defendant doesn't say much about the future of fair and just trials. I hope those people never find themselves or their loved ones on the wrong side of a Proctor.

Not just Proctor, but Proctor's supervisor who gave his texts a thumbs up, Proctor's wife and sister calling his hateful, degrading, misogynistic texts normal because they were only on his personal phone, and making outrageous public statements minimizing his conduct. There's an entire network of backwards thinking people in the world who are stuck in a 1950s mentality, refusing to grow and advance with the times. The irony here is that the people who ended up on the wrong side of a Proctor were his so-called friends and co-workers and even John O'Keefe! He has hurt so many people.
MOO

 

[keek]

I would tend to agree that PO didn’t/doesn’t like KR. During trial 1, one of the first couple of days, maybe Defense opening statement, she leaned over to the person on her left and laughed during when defense spoke of Proctor looking for nude photos of her. I was looking at her feeling so sorry for her, then when she did this I thought ‘ok, she’s a feisty one.’

Ship sailed, over and over again is right.

 

[Deleted member 246707]

Respectfully, I actually CAN reasonably say it's a big nothing burger to ME, which is what I said. I also don't believe he was murdered. IMO

Sorry. One can believe anything one wants to believe. I agree. However, I don't think it's a terribly reasonable position (for the reasons I stated).

I haven't heard the theory he wasn't murdered. What do you think happened? Accidental slip and fall?

 

[keek]

I’d like to know what the jury members are thinking. Prosecution SEEMS to be doing a good job painting KR as an outspoken, stubborn, clingy girlfriend with a bad temper and a penchant for alcohol.

THEY all have a penchant for alcohol, but she is the one trial, unfortunately.

 

[Tortoise]

This is otherwise known as perjury no matter how sweet you come across as a person.

RSBM

No, perjury is intentional lying. Anyone so accused has the right to defend against such an accusation and to be judged by the right people in the proper setting. Kerry Roberts said she misunderstood and it's not for anyone outside of a formal legal proceeding against her to say it's a fact she committed perjury. She admitted she gave an answer that was not factually correct because she misunderstood the question, she did not admit intention to do that.

Later, Peg didn't even talk to Karen when she saw her at the hospital and even asked a nurse why she was there!

Peggy said Karen was (wtte of) bellowing down a corridor at her 'Peg, is John dead, is he dead?' What kind of behaviour is that, from an adult person addressing a mother who has just lost her son? So unempathetic and insensitive, IMO.

Since you've done jury service in a murder case, you could also draw on that experience to know how crucial it is to the integrity of a trial for witnesses to provide consistent, truthful testimony.

I do know how jurors are instructed to judge the matter of truthfulness of testimony. It is up to each individual juror to decide whether the lie was intentional, how much weight to place on it if any, and whether or not to disregard all, some or none of the testimony.

https://www.mass.gov/doc/2120-function-of-the-jury-what-is-evidence-credibility-of-witnesses/download

 

[keek]

People justifying, handwaving away, or simply ignoring Proctors behavior truly scares me. IMO, allowing police(and anyone in general)to think and behave as if this is normal is how we wind up with cases like Sandra Birchmore. Allowing this behavior to stand unchallenged simply because you have feels about the defendant doesn't say much about the future of fair and just trials. I hope those people never find themselves or their loved ones on the wrong side of a Proctor.

I too always had the impression that KerR was credible, caring and kind. I didn't notice the defense treated her in a negative manner. They pointed out discrepancies in what she had already testified to. How is that a poor way of treating her?

She didn't know she was being bamboozled and seems still does not realize it. MAYBE after all she will.

 

[keek]

Link for the terms of the plea deal she turned down?

I'd love to see people who know they did not commit a crime plea deal, which happens horribly all the time due to lack of money for good defense atty's and public outcry, FBI information on some involved. I mean people who suggest she would of been out by now if she did.. SOOOO judged her guilty and a murderer, smh. IMO.

 

[keek]

A sobering reality in all of this is that if KR had accepted a plea, there is a good chance (based on the anticipated terms) she'd already be free.

Not sobering to KR or her family or people who have a social conscience of innocent until proven without a doubt guilty.. NOT what has happened and THANKFULLY she did not, used her head and the tip that came in. Turns out lotttts of truth to that one in the facts of deleted texts by all, lies being caught out, it goes on and on and on, much to the surprise and CONSTERNATION of people in that party house.

 

[Linda7NJ]

A sobering reality in all of this is that if KR had accepted a plea, there is a good chance (based on the anticipated terms) she'd already be free.

It’s strange how Karen’s memory changes.

When her first lawyer stated publicly that she loved him and there was no intent - then privately he informed her that if she indeed clipped him, she would be culpable.
She spent three days thinking about it and concocted the ridiculous tale that EVERYONE conspired to frame her.

IMO

 

[keek]

Not sobering to KR or her family or people who have a social conscience of innocent until proven without a doubt guilty.. NOT what has happened and THANKFULLY she did not, used her head and the tip that came in. Turns out lotttts of truth to that one in the facts of deleted texts by all, lies being caught out, it goes on and on and on, much to the surprise and CONSTERNATION of people in that party house.

LET ME not forget the investigation into the lead state trooper who is fired and that takes being criminal

 

[keek]

LET ME not forget the investigation into the lead state trooper who is fired and that takes being criminal

 

[Linda7NJ]

Not sobering to KR or her family or people who have a social conscience of innocent until proven without a doubt guilty.. NOT what has happened and THANKFULLY she did not, used her head and the tip that came in. Turns out lotttts of truth to that one in the facts of deleted texts by all, lies being caught out, it goes on and on and on, much to the surprise and CONSTERNATION of people in that party house.

The “tip that came in”
Odd isn’t it, the tipster is not on the defense witness list?

My guess, it was another one of Karen’s flunkys like TB
IMO

 

[keek]

RSBM

No, perjury is intentional lying. Anyone so accused has the right to defend against such an accusation and to be judged by the right people in the proper setting. Kerry Roberts said she misunderstood and it's not for anyone outside of a formal legal proceeding against her to say it's a fact she committed perjury. She admitted she gave an answer that was not factually correct because she misunderstood the question, she did not admit intention to do that.



Peggy said Karen was (wtte of) bellowing down a corridor at her 'Peg, is John dead, is he dead?' What kind of behaviour is that, from an adult person addressing a mother who has just lost her son? So unempathetic and insensitive, IMO.


I do know how jurors are instructed to judge the matter of truthfulness of testimony. It is up to each individual juror to decide whether the lie was intentional, how much weight to place on it if any, and whether or not to disregard all, some or none of the testimony.

https://www.mass.gov/doc/2120-function-of-the-jury-what-is-evidence-credibility-of-witnesses/download

Such a PROBLEM for the person on trial if the quality of a juror or jurors from the pool, is just NOT THERE.

 

[Tortoise]

I thought today was scheduled to be voir dire of ARRCA witnesses?

Ah just seen

9:30 a.m. update: ARCCA experts voir dire postponed​

Judge Beverly Cannone postponed a voir dire hearing to vet two crash reconstructionists from ARCCA Inc., agreeing to move the proceedings to Monday afternoon in light of a scheduling conflict.

Karen Read murder trial: John O’Keefe’s mother chokes up as she recalls the day he was killed

Karen Read's murder retrial continued Wednesday as additional witnesses took the stand, including Peggy O'Keefe.

www.boston.com

 

[Forest_Wood]

I do know how jurors are instructed to judge the matter of truthfulness of testimony. It is up to each individual juror to decide whether the lie was intentional, how much weight to place on it if any, and whether or not to disregard all, some or none of the testimony.

Yes I agree. We need defense attorneys who question witnesses about discrepancies in their testimonies. This defense is doing what they're trained to do, bringing previous testimonies into the light so the jury can make a reasoned decision. If KR is found guilty this time around, we will know it's because she was given the best defense against a prosecution that is better prepared. And the same applies if she is found not guilty. Isn't that what we want to see?

 

[Tortoise]

Yes I agree. We need defense attorneys who question witnesses about discrepancies in their testimonies. This defense is doing what they're trained to do, bringing previous testimonies into the light so the jury can make a reasoned decision. If KR is found guilty this time around, we will know it's because she was given the best defense against a prosecution that is better prepared. And the same applies if she is found not guilty. Isn't that what we want to see?

Of course.

 

[Forest_Wood]

She didn't know she was being bamboozled and seems still does not realize it. MAYBE after all she will.

Maybe KerR is naiive and easily manipulated.
I hope she rethinks her friendships because she doesn't need to be associated with those drunks.
JMc: "She's telling them everything. All the stuff."
Sure she was telling them everything Jen fed her.
MOO