MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #23 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 Thread #20 Thread #21 Thread #22

 

[Knitty]

Please review Best Practices - Dealing with your fellow posters.

Once you've done that, please continue here.

 

[mzmarymac]

Spitballing.....

I'd like to see some scenarios where JMC is NOT involved and is just a well....ya know...not nice person...

I thought of this in the very early days of the case when discussing what door JOK entered the house through. What if JOK never did enter the house and instead, was called around to the back yard? What if a couple of the guys were out there smoking say and maybe letting Chloe out? What if they saw JOK walking up to the house and said "Hey! We're back here!" and he went to the back yard where all that stuff happened.

That might explain whey no one saw him IN the house and those who testified that JOK was never INSIDE the house, aren't "lying." Maybe it was simply BA, BH, JOK and poooossssibly CA in the back yard at the time with Chloe and they would be the only ones who knew what happened. Maybe Jen knew, I don't know, but it would certainly explain how so many people are saying they didn't see him in the house because they never did see him, in the house or otherwise.

Blinds are drawn, music is playing inside, lots of people chatting and wouldn't hear what might have been going on outside. These things can't happen in the blink of eye, a fight AND a dog attack. You always here that said when a dog attacks - it all happened so fast!

I do believe that many of these people honestly believe KR is guilty, such as the O'K family, BAs wife, the other partygoers, etc... albeit maybe not seeing clearly. I don't believe it takes an entire village of conspiracy to cover up a murder, as all it really needs is 2-3 people who can use their authority to push a narrative, and others to perhaps "help it along the way" to solidify the case.

JMO

 

[MerlinFalcon]

Vinnie Politan Live

 

[lohrtabitha]

Here’s what I’d like to see: More data, more science, and more crime scene analytics. Get away from all the witnesses that have been influenced and have scripted together their supposed recollection.

I’d like location data for KR’s phone. Does her phone show 3 flights of stairs at the exact time JOK’s does? They were traveling together so these supposed stairs should match. What time does it show her leaving?
I’d like the event immediately after the key cycle showing 24 mph in reverse. Were brakes applied? Why didn’t she end up slamming into the Jeep?
I’d like a map with measurements of the crime scene. How far was the flagpole to the mailbox? How far was the flagpole to the bedroom window?
I’d like to know why not a single witness reported seeing 40+ pieces of red taillight. There was only a light dusting of snow so the pieces should have been visible and reflective.

Someone earlier today posted this and I have only watched the first ten minutes. Real Lawyer You Know and Mark Bedrow talks about the timeline and car situation. Watch the first ten minutes and see what you think. I found it eye opening.

 

[Amber29]

Here’s what I’d like to see: More data, more science, and more crime scene analytics. Get away from all the witnesses that have been influenced and have scripted together their supposed recollection.

I’d like location data for KR’s phone. Does her phone show 3 flights of stairs at the exact time JOK’s does? They were traveling together so these supposed stairs should match. What time does it show her leaving?
I’d like the event immediately after the key cycle showing 24 mph in reverse. Were brakes applied? Why didn’t she end up slamming into the Jeep?
I’d like a map with measurements of the crime scene. How far was the flagpole to the mailbox? How far was the flagpole to the bedroom window?
I’d like to know why not a single witness reported seeing 40+ pieces of red taillight. There was only a light dusting of snow so the pieces should have been visible and reflective.

Here’s something I made off of google maps, with their measurements tool. Of course it’s unofficial but you can get an idea.

 

[Angelwatch]

Here’s something I made off of google maps, with their measurements tool. Of course it’s unofficial but you can get an idea.

Hugely helpful. So JOK gets hit and supposedly stumbles around for 84ft worth of movement in 20-some seconds, looks at his texts, locks his phone and somehow ends up approximately 9 ft from where he was hit? Am I understanding the CW’s theory?

And even though his head injury was to the back of his head and was immediately incapacitating, he somehow ends up face down.

 

[Recidivist]

Someone earlier today posted this and I have only watched the first ten minutes. Real Lawyer You Know and Mark Bedrow talks about the timeline and car situation. Watch the first ten minutes and see what you think. I found it eye opening.

I watched it too. The one that stuck with me is when the Mom testified, she was saying that when she arrived at the hospital and saw Karen, she said " What the heck is she (karen) doing here." I thought why wouldn't she be there? She was his partner, and the woman he trusted enough to help him raise the kids. It must have been very hurtful to be treated like that

 

[clearskies1]

Nothing makes sense. I'm thinking he never made it in the house. I don't see how the state can get a conviction. JMO.

 

[jepop]

R

Post in thread 'MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #22 Retrial'

May 2, 2025

Someone earlier today posted this and I have only watched the first ten minutes. Real Lawyer You Know and Mark Bedrow talks about the timeline and car situation. Watch the first ten minutes and see what you think. I found it eye opening.

I watched it too. The one that stuck with me is when the Mom testified, she was saying that when she arrived at the hospital and saw Karen, she said " What the heck is she (karen) doing here." I thought why wouldn't she be there? She was his partner, and the woman he trusted enough to help him raise the kids. It must have been...

• Recidivist

• 
• 

RE: LYK's and Bedrow's discussion of the trial so far.

For anyone interested, from around time stamp 1hr.08mins, you can listen to them express their genuine incredulity as they try to comprehend judge cannone's unhidden, inexplicable, inappropriate insertion of herself into defense cross examinations on several occasions. Moo

They also discuss her inappropriate behaviour and public comments after the ARCCA voir dire on Monday and how in both their opinions she allowed that whole situation to play out on the basis of Brennan's non supported speculation. Moo

What comes out in the wash is just one more instance on blatant public display of this judge's anti defense/pro cw bias. Jmo

ETA: Towards the end they also discuss this judge's limiting of closing arguments last trial to one hour. This is something that bothered me a lot last time.

The points made in this video make complete sense moo. This judge interfered in the defendant's fundamental right to a fair defense by forcing her counsel to pick and chose what to include in closing. It doesn't matter that the CW was subject to the same time limit. Moo

Given the complexities of the trial, the uncompromised cutting off of closing time was another questionable action by this judge, one I hope is not repeated in trial x2. Jmo

Edited x2. Sorry, I didn't realise the LYK video had already been brought forward when I posted it again. I was listening in the last thread.

 

[Forest_Wood]

And even though his head injury was to the back of his head and was immediately incapacitating, he somehow ends up face down.

John was found laying on his back, according to testimony. Karen ran over to his body, lifted her shirt and laid on top of him to warm him up, and Kerry R wiped the snow that had accumulated off his face.

 

[jepop]

R

Post in thread 'MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #22 Retrial'

May 2, 2025

Someone earlier today posted this and I have only watched the first ten minutes. Real Lawyer You Know and Mark Bedrow talks about the timeline and car situation. Watch the first ten minutes and see what you think. I found it eye opening.

I watched it too. The one that stuck with me is when the Mom testified, she was saying that when she arrived at the hospital and saw Karen, she said " What the heck is she (karen) doing here." I thought why wouldn't she be there? She was his partner, and the woman he trusted enough to help him raise the kids. It must have been...

• Recidivist

• 
• 

RE: LYK's and Bedrow's discussion of the trial so far.

For anyone interested, from around time stamp 1hr.08mins, you can listen to them express their genuine incredulity as they try to comprehend judge cannone's unhidden, inexplicable, inappropriate insertion of herself into defense cross examinations on several occasions. Moo

They also discuss her inappropriate behaviour and public comments after the ARCCA voir dire on Monday and how in both their opinions she allowed that whole situation to play out on the basis of Brennan's non supported speculation. Moo

What comes out in the wash is just one more instance on blatant public display of this judge's anti defense/pro cw bias. Jmo

ETA: Towards the end they also discuss this judge's limiting of closing arguments last trial to one hour. This is something that bothered me a lot last time.

The points made in this video make complete sense moo. This judge interfered in the defendant's fundamental right to a fair defense by forcing her counsel to pick and chose what to include in closing. It doesn't matter that the CW was subject to the same time limit. Moo

Given the complexities of the trial, the uncompromised cutting off of closing time was another questionable action by this judge, one I hope is not repeated in trial x2. Jmo

Edited x2. Sorry, I didn't realise the LYK video had already been brought forward when I posted it again. I was listening in the last thread.

Too late to edit. I wanted to add a time stamp for the discussion on what played out with ARCCA. It begins at approx 55mins, 30 secs.

 

[MerlinFalcon]

I couldn’t figure out why people on social media were making a big deal out of JM saying the car repairman was among the people at John’s. I can’t remember if it was the day after his death or day of his death or another day. But if the car repairman was there to fix John’s car because Karen’s car hit his and they wanted it repaired ASAP that’s another massive red flag.

 

[mrjitty]

I've been looking at the drive back to Meadows.

According to the CW, the collision is at approx 12:32:09. Router connection is at 12.36 (not sure how many seconds).

So it looks like the defendant has at least 4 mins, but maybe closer to 5 to get to close enough to the house to connect.

I make the drive to be 2.3 miles for an average speed of 34.5 miles p/h for a 4 min drive (or less if its closer to 5).

In the context of a drunk driver fleeing a pedestrian strike I think that is completely feasible, and certainly not impossible. On the straights one can easily manage 70 km p/h (around 43 miles per hour)

IMO

 

[Soulmagent]

I've been looking at the drive back to Meadows.

According to the CW, the collision is at approx 12:32:09. Router connection is at 12.36 (not sure how many seconds).

So it looks like the defendant has at least 4 mins, but maybe closer to 5 to get to close enough to the house to connect.

I make the drive to be 2.3 miles for an average speed of 34.5 miles p/h for a 4 min drive (or less if its closer to 5).

In the context of a drunk driver fleeing a pedestrian strike I think that is completely feasible, and certainly not impossible. On the straights one can easily manage 70 km p/h (around 43 miles per hour)

IMO

What collision?

 

[Mony Mony]

I watched the previous trial and currently watching. My gut tells me she hit him. Occam’s Razor. But I just can’t put my finger on why all the butt dials, destroyed phones etc.

I am thinking two things can be true at once:
KR hit him.
The McAlbert cabal is hiding something bigger than KR,

All IMO, MOO, etc

 

[nodamselindistress]

Jury being brought in. How many more lies will JM tell today? Stay tuned!

 

[Tortoise]

ETA: Towards the end they also discuss this judge's limiting of closing arguments last trial to one hour. This is something that bothered me a lot last time.

The points made in this video make complete sense moo. This judge interfered in the defendant's fundamental right to a fair defense by forcing her counsel to pick and chose what to include in closing. It doesn't matter that the CW was subject to the same time limit. Moo

Given the complexities of the trial, the uncompromised cutting off of closing time was another questionable action by this judge, one I hope is not repeated in trial x2. Jmo

<RSBM>

Rule 68. Arguments
(Applicable to criminal cases)

In trials of criminal cases the arguments of each party shall be limited to thirty minutes; but the court may reasonably reduce or extend the time.
https://www.mass.gov/doc/massachusetts-superior-court-rules-and-orders/download

https://www.mass.gov/rules-of-crimi...ing-statements-arguments-instructions-to-jury

https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6581942/commonwealth-v-mahar/
Counsel for the defendant had been addressing the jury in closing argument for approximately fifty-five minutes when the judge informed him that he had "exhausted” his time for argument and should "sum it up.” Counsel took an exception, argued further for approximately four minutes and concluded his summation. The defendant’s principal contention on appeal is that the judge’s action constituted "reversible error.” We conclude that in the circumstances there was no error. Cf. United States v. Stevenson, 554 F.2d 123, 126 (4th Cir. 1977). A trial judge has *876 broad discretion in limiting the time for closing argument. See Herring v. New York, 422 U.S. 853, 862 (1975). As the time consumed by defense counsel was substantial and exceeded the guideline established by Rule 68 of the Superior Court (1974), we cannot say, as matter of law, that the limitation imposed by the judge was unreasonable. Though the trial was long, the issues were not complex, and for all that appears, counsel was making uneconomical use of his time. See generally Commonwealth v. Haas, 373 Mass. 545, 557 n.11 (1977). Cases such as Commonwealth v. Bennett, ante 832 (1978), and United States v. DeLoach, 504 F.2d 185 (D.C. Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 909 (1976), are inapposite, as they concern limitations on the scope of argument, not on its length. Moreover, in those cases, the trial judge prevented the defense counsel from arguing a theory essential to the defense. There was no such showing in this case. To the contrary, the record reflects that defense counsel argued (during the additional time allotted) the defenses of consent and contrivance, notwithstanding the fact that neither had an adequate factual predicate in the record.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

I watched the previous trial and currently watching. My gut tells me she hit him. Occam’s Razor. But I just can’t put my finger on why all the butt dials, destroyed phones etc.

I am thinking two things can be true at once:
KR hit him.
The McAlbert cabal is hiding something bigger than KR,

All IMO, MOO, etc

But Occam’s razor also says that if there’s no evidence of a car strike, then a car strike did not occur…

 

[Soulmagent]

10 minutes in and she is already on my nerves.