MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #24 Retrial

[Malleeboy]

Did anyone actually swab/check the fire hydrant? A drunk man falling on the damp/snowy grass, with his hands full.

 

[Lost mittens]

You know how John investigated sex crimes for the Boston PD? Part of me wonders if he was just beginning to suspect someone like BH or BA of something and was going to start an investigation (TOTALLY hypothetical). This would speak to motive.

I’ve wondered about this since trial 1 and haven’t seen anyone bring it up until now. The getting rid of the phones really made me wonder what the heck they had on there

 

[Izzylizzy]

Alan Jackson resumes his cross of now retired Canton Police Lt. Paul Gallagher:

AJ: You did not see a single piece of bright red plastic taillight material either, did you?
PG: No, sir. Not in that area.
AJ: As a matter of fact. You didn't see 46 pieces of tail light material, either clear or bright red plastic in any part of the area that you searched?
PG: No, the only thing we discovered was the blood sampling and the glass.

There is no way he didn't see the tail light but they found it hours later. It wasn't there . Bam!!!

Sgt. Goode was crossed in 1st trial on all the steps he/LE were taking with the leaf blower, feet etc looking for evidence and there was no clear/red plastic, hat or the missing black shoe.
He was filming the search for evidence.
He also testified to never hearing KR or of anyone saying that she said "I hit him" .
It wasn't entered in his report.

 

[PamCake]

In my area, LEOs shut down freeways for hours and inconvenience hundreds of people to investigate accidents involving deaths. It is wild that on a quiet street in the early morning hours with the defendant supposedly saying I hit him, very little was done. No measurements, no maps, no photos.

It just may be that the weather was seriously lousy, and the Canton cops did not really want to be out in that nastiness, so they simply “cut corners” to get it over with as soon as possible. They wanted to get outta the storm. MOO

 

[Malleeboy]

It just may be that the weather was seriously lousy, and the Canton cops did not really want to be out in that nastiness, so they simply “cut corners” to get it over with as soon as possible. They wanted to get outta the storm. MOO

Did they know JOK drunk too much? Did that lead them to presume accident due to drunken state?
Mind set was, lets not make too much of a drunk officer who died from accident by being too drunk, given so many of the station drunk too much, drinking was endemic, why make a big issue of. Maybe his drunk girlfriend caused it but she was at that stage within the blue wall.

 

[Forest_Wood]

The logical thought would be the taillight pieces were found in and under the snow bank. However! The CW has never indicated they were found in the snowbank AFAIK. Plus if I understand Kevin O'Hara, the snow banks were not plowed all the way to the curb so the snowbanks were still positioned in the street. But John was not found by the snowbank either since he was 8-10 feet approximately on the grass. So where were these pieces of taillight found?

 

[iQuill]

This statement implies that the ARCCA witnesses conducted their studies at the request of the defense team. This is NOT true.
ARCCA conducted a blind study requested by the FBI. It had nothing to do with this trial. It is a separate investigation. ARCCA was provided with the facts of a body with John’s height and weight and John’s injuries and also the vehicle information and were requested to try and determine if this body was hit by this vehicle. The determination was that JOK did not die from being hit by a, (any) vehicle.
The results of that study were provided to both the CW and the D team prior to T1. The CW elected not to use these test results. The defense team did. As a result, the defense team has paid ARCCA for trial preparation and the associated expenses.
It is disingenuous to repeatedly imply otherwise.
Again, for those that may have missed it:

ARCCA: Expert Forensic, Scientific and Engineering Solutions

Discover the ARCCA advantage with our forensic analysis & engineering, expert witness consulting services, and forensic accident reconstruction solutions.

arcca.com

Andrew Rentschler, Ph.D. | ARCCA Experts & Engineers

Dr. Rentschler is a biomechanist specializing in the study of the forces and mechanics associated with injuries to the human body with ARCCA.

arcca.com

Daniel M. Wolfe, Ph.D., ACTAR | ARCCA Experts & Engineers

Dr. Wolfe is a forensic scientist and accident reconstructionist specializing in the reconstruction of motor vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle collisions.

arcca.com

Thank you @OldCop
I so wish this issue/argument could be put to rest.
JOK was not hit by any vehicle ... so something else happened to cause his death.
This FACT needs to be accepted ... by everyone Moo

 

[Izzylizzy]

Earlier tonight.

 

[Soulmagent]

You know how John investigated sex crimes for the Boston PD? Part of me wonders if he was just beginning to suspect someone like BH or BA of something and was going to start an investigation (TOTALLY hypothetical). This would speak to motive.

Though I also could believe the motive of drunken hyper-aggressive cops who want to fight a man over Karen or the issues with Colin or what-have-you.

I have a hard time believing any of these officers gave an ounce about crime solving or helping the community.

 

[Malleeboy]

Thank you @OldCop
I so wish this issue/argument could be put to rest.
JOK was not hit by any vehicle ... so something else happened to cause his death.
This FACT needs to be accepted ... by everyone Mo

There is clearly not a consensus and many people seem emotionally tied to a side, not logically attached, so no matter data is presented that will slant it their existing opinion.
A formal release of the FBI report which highlights what their independent overall report was and specifically the reporting on body impact and car damage would go a long way to this.
The feedback seems to be the investigation is finished but the outcomes would be awesome to know.

 

[Malleeboy]

I didn't admit bias. I mentioned that I have relatives in law enforcement too in response to a post citing a step-brother who is a police officer and shares the poster's opinion.

Why does having siblings in law enforcement make me "blatantly biased" but the OP using a relative to support their opinion is not? I didn't claim special insight. I didn't use their opinions to bolster mine. In fact, I never stated what their opinions on this investigation are. Their opinions are not relevant.

I avoided the pre-trial coverage and online hoopla before the first trial so I could follow it objectively. I ignored misdirection in the first trial. The evidence presented by both sides convinced me that KR hit her boyfriend and drove away. Coming to a conclusion that's different than yours does not make me biased.

Bodhi,

What convinced you? Was that beyond any reasonable doubt? Did you have any doubts?
What impact did the ARCCA testimony have on your opinion?
Lucky the plow driver's failure to see a body, did that leave you with any doubt?
Failure of anyone leaving after the event to see a body?

For me the Lindy Chamberlain case left me with a great deal of suspicion of prosecution forensics as the clear seemingly unambiguous forensic science turned into clear pseudo science over the decade following her conviction, the forensic was largely driven largely by police malice seeking bias leaning scientists being paid by the prosecution. Much Like Karen Read, Lindy Chamberlain's persona and media appearances drove police and public malice.

 

[Bodhi]

I’m going to have to disagree on the now or never statement. Canton police could have sent an officer to the station to get appropriate evidence collection materials. It was only a mile away. They could have also radioed for someone at the station to arrive at the scene with collection materials. They could have had these materials on scene quickly.

I appreciate a respectful discussion, Angelwatch! My understanding from testimony in the first trial was that they did not have collection cups at the Canton police station because the state police do evidence collection for Canton and other towns. I heard Lt. Gallagher testify Monday that they do have swabs. Maybe they do buccal swabs for more mundane reasons, I don't know. The attorneys and Gallagher didn't discuss it at length like they did in the first trial. I think the swab containers could have been used to collect snow.

Gallagher testified to several factors that went into the decision, and his decision seemed reasonable to me. I don't think the method made a difference here. Evidence was preserved. If DNA showed someone's DNA other than John's, that would have been critical to rule suspects in or out.

 

[Bodhi]

No matter your rank, you damn well better write a report if you are out collecting evidence where a body was found

Is that standard in other police departments? Gallagher testified that was not the protocol or practice in the Canton PD at the time.

 

[mrjitty]

I appreciate a respectful discussion, Angelwatch! My understanding from testimony in the first trial was that they did not have collection cups at the Canton police station because the state police do evidence collection for Canton and other towns. I heard Lt. Gallagher testify Monday that they do have swabs. Maybe they do buccal swabs for more mundane reasons, I don't know. The attorneys and Gallagher didn't discuss it at length like they did in the first trial. I think the swab containers could have been used to collect snow.

Gallagher testified to several factors that went into the decision, and his decision seemed reasonable to me. I don't think the method made a difference here. Evidence was preserved. If DNA showed someone's DNA other than John's, that would have been critical to rule suspects in or out.

It’s all a distraction in my opinion. What matters was the collection of the tail light pieces by SERT which was all done by a different team and documented with photos and GPS positioning. These pieces were found close to John's shoe.

Against it the defence has an unsubstantiated conspiracy about how proctor somehow staged the pieces under SERTs nose.

IMO.

 

[Bodhi]

Bodhi,

What convinced you? Was that beyond any reasonable doubt? Did you have any doubts?
What impact did the ARCCA testimony have on your opinion?
Lucky the plow driver's failure to see a body, did that leave you with any doubt?
Failure of anyone leaving after the event to see a body?

For me the Lindy Chamberlain case left me with a great deal of suspicion of prosecution forensics as the clear seemingly unambiguous forensic science turned into clear pseudo science over the decade following her conviction, the forensic was largely driven largely by police malice seeking bias leaning scientists being paid by the prosecution. Much Like Karen Read, Lindy Chamberlain's persona and media appearances drove police and public malice.

Malleeboy,

I appreciate your questions. I'm not familiar with the Chamberlain case. I look forward to reading about it. I hope you'll understand if I delay answering til tomorrow. I find the trial fascinating. I get engrossed and lose track of time. I promised myself I would go to bed by midnight, and it's 2:15am.

Have a good night!

 

[mrjitty]

An important piece of testimony from from O'Hara yesterday. Brennan shows him a piece of tail light revealed from under the snow that was 'touching the ground'. The implication being it was fell there the night before in the accident and was not scattered there hours later. A closeup photo is shown where you can see it on the road surface.

The fallacy with the Proctor theory, is even if he can somehow get from the Sally Port with the pieces to the stage them with SERT searching right there, he doesn't know where the shoe is, and has no idea where is the correct place to stage them. And he'd have to get them down to ground level and recover them. And O'Hara testifies he searches fresh undisturbed snow.

There is of course no actual evidence Proctor staged the tail light recovered by SERT. It's just an unsubstantiated allegation. But in any event, it's not possible.

Timecode 6 hours 29 mins.

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

The other big piece of evidence yesterday - video evidence of the tail light completely broken out shortly after 8.23.10 am from the dashcam of the police cruiser.



The obvious and logical inference being that the missing pieces are the ones recovered later that day by SERT. This also corroborates testimony from Jen and Kerry that the pieces were also missing in the 5am hour.

IMO.

 

[Malleeboy]

Malleeboy,

I appreciate your questions. I'm not familiar with the Chamberlain case. I look forward to reading about it. I hope you'll understand if I delay answering til tomorrow. I find the trial fascinating. I get engrossed and lose track of time. I promised myself I would go to bed by midnight, and it's 2:15am.

Have a good night!

NP thanks

I'm from Melbourne, so other side of the world. Lindy Chamberlain i probably better known in the states for her phrase when it happened, "A dingo's got my baby". Agreed the case is the fascinating, lots of pieces that don't quite fit on both sides.

 

[mrjitty]

NP thanks

I'm from Melbourne, so other side of the world. Lindy Chamberlain i probably better known in the states but her phrase when it happened, "A dingo's got my baby". Agreed the case is the fascinating, lots of pieces that don't quite fit on both sides.

I grew up with that case. But seeing it is from 1980 i am not sure how relevant it is to this case?

 

[Malleeboy]

I grew up with that case. But seeing it is from 1980 i am not sure how relevant it is to this case?

An unlikeable women, polarized public, media appearances which was used against her.

A less-than-professional response from police, including one of them who moved the baby's clothing without first having it photographed, was followed by equally lackadaisical performances from other professionals. Professor James Cameron, the acclaimed British forensic pathologist, sternly proclaimed he could discern the print of the "bloodied" hand of a young adult on the jumpsuit. As it was later conceded, he had not tested whether the material was blood. It wasn't.

A "spray pattern" identified on the dashboard of the Chamberlains' Torana hatchback was asserted as evidence of arterial spurting from the baby as she was having her throat cut. That "spray" was not blood at all. It was bituminous sound-deadener inadvertently applied during manufacture of the vehicle. So far off were the scientific opinions that the core of the court battle was whether the "blood" contained foetal hemoglobin. Only towards the end of that trial, when a similar spray pattern was found in another Torana hatchback, did the thought arise there might not have been any blood at all, but by that time the argument had gone too far in the other direction.

I was mainly explaining my distrust of prosecution forensics and a incompetent police.