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

[nodamselindistress]

We are rocking the sidebah today!

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Peter/Lawyer You Know just tweeted that he is confused on why the defense would not be allowed to cross on the issue of credibility of Ms. Hyde’s MD testimony. He says preclusion is too severe for a late notice.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Ms. Hyde now says with ‘reasonable certainty’ the ‘hos long’ search happened at 6:24.

 

[katykat]

JMO, none of us want to hear this prattle. Do we have a choice??

The CW absolutely have to refute that "hos long" issue though. And they have.

 

[RatFace]

The CW absolutely have to refute that "hos long" issue though. And they have.

I agree. But now they need to move along...we got it. the search occurred at 6:24am Stop talking about pizza and waffles please.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Oh no, Ms. Hyde, this Waffle House allegory is not it. MOO.

 

[shotgun09]

OK. Just got lost at the diner.
Que Tom's Diner in your play list...


ETA: Jurors are probly hungry....just sayin...

 

[Curiousobserver]

Good morning! While this case is fascinating, I'd like to say a few words that are MY opinion and I've stated this in the past, but here me out.

There are 3 charges in this case and here is my take on the 3:

2nd Degree Murder - seriously? I don't even think many of the G's believe this theory. Even if she did hit him with her car, it is apparent that in the immediate aftermath, she had no idea. The voice mails left were raw and real and NOT something anyone would do immediately after killing someone in order to hide it. Not only that, you would also need to believe that she absolutely KNEW he was dead and not going to get up at some point and call the cops on her and have her arrested.
Leaving the Scene - see above
Vehicular Manslaughter - I think this is the one charge that people may get hung up on and it depends upon if you feel the evidence shows she DID in fact hit JOK with her car. From what I have read, there is a minimum sentence of 3 years in prison if convicted. I believe this is what she faces. It can go up to 10 years, but only with priors, etc...although who knows with this judge.

So let's talk about this, assuming she DID hit him and kill him with the car. While I realize that JOK is a police officer and the state wants to pursue charges, he did not die in the line of duty. So WHY such a heavy push to spend so much money on not one but two trials? Why push for Murder 2 when you already know the first jury voted that down 12-0 and none of them believe she KNEW she hit him. Why not just retry the manslaughter case?

<modsnip - not victim friendly>

I am NOT victim bashing. I am only stating that I believe that there a lot of people in this situation that are without issues. JMO

I like this post-

I agree completely that she did not at first realize she hit him, nor do I think she intended to hit him. She did act recklessly as a drunk driver however.

I think there is ample evidence she hit him, less so the frame by frame of how it happened and led to those specific injuries. There are tail light pieces from her car at the scene, a broken drinking glass, him knocked out of his shoe, tail light pieces on his shirt, his DNA on her car, GPS data showing he never moved after she left, and her admitting to multiple people she might have hit him.

I agree that personally, they both share responsibility- he knew she was drunk and as a police officer allowed her to drive as did multiple other people who interacted with them at the bar. Legally, responsibility is a different story.

Neither one of these two (JO for KR) is a saint.

I also agree that this should never have been re-tried. No matter which side prevails the other side will cry foul and the divisiveness isn't worth her spending at best a few months in jail. It doesn't bring closure to anyone really.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

IMO, the issue with Ms. Hyde is that she cannot clearly and simply articulate how her steps follow accepted methodologies. Which is exactly why her expert testimony was excluded from that MD case.

 

[Derph]

I guess I'm bored but a couple questions. At this point and in the grand scheme of things known, does it matter or does anyone care anymore about the "2:27" call?????? AND does Brennans voice remind anyone of Anthony Hopkins voice in Silence of the Lamb????

If the search was one of the only things the Defense had to go on I would say it's a major point. But there is soooo much other evidence that causes reasonable doubt you could take the Google search and any 20 other things that are questionable and throw them away. You'd still have another 80 other things to work with.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

IMO, the issue with Ms. Hyde is that she cannot clearly and simply articulate how her steps follow accepted methodologies. Which is exactly why her expert testimony was excluded from that MD case.

Even the way she explained the searches with food, sounded like ‘JM ordered a burger at 2:27 AM. She said she didn’t like it, but then asked for it again at 6:24 AM’… which would imply that JM searched ‘hos long’ at 2:27, then re-opened the tab at 6:24.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Ok this is on my mind. Just spitballing.

‘Hos long to die in cold’ was searched at 2:27AM
‘How long ti die in cikd’ searched at 6:23 AM
‘Hos long to die in cold’ searched at 6:24 AM.

So in order for Ms. Hyde to be correct, the 2nd search with alternate spelling shouldn’t exist, right? Because how did the timestamp and search occur with a different spelling, and still be attributed to the 2:27 search?

 

[waldojabba]

Even the way she explained the searches with food, sounded like ‘JM ordered a burger at 2:27 AM. She said she didn’t like it, but then asked for it again at 6:24 AM’… which would imply that JM searched ‘hos long’ at 2:27, then re-opened the tab at 6:24.

Yes she was all over the place. She may know her stuff but she does not present well.
Confusing to me that past phone calls delete themselves as its never happened to me and I never clear them out.

JMO

 

[arielilane]

@JHall7news


Brennan is now laying some foundation with the witness before J Cannone will allow Hyde to come to her conclusion.


12:18 PM · May 7, 2025



Brennan asks again for Hyde's opinion on whether the McCabe search was done at 2:27. Alessi objects again. and asks for a sidebar. Cannone says this is the last time Mr Alessi. He seems to be arguing (fairly loudly) Hyde should not be allowed to give her opinion.


12:21 PM · May 7, 2025



15 minutes plus of trial time has now been spent trying to get to this witness giving her opinion for the CW on the time stamp veracity.


12:22 PM · May 7, 2025



Hyde can finally give her opinion over defense objection (again) "what I can state is that search occurred at 6:24 am and was the last search in the tab that had been opened at 2:27"


12:25 PM · May 7, 2025




Jury sees Hyde's table showing info on her research. 6:23:49 "how long ti die in cikd" search was done. (McCabe testified her fingers don't have the proper sensation in the cold due to her MS, thus the typos.)





HYDE is testifying data comes to your phone like food to a table - burger, chicken and pizza. She's going on and on about food. Now waffles and pancakes. Might be making the jurors hungry - they haven't had lunch! I saw the food being delivered 15 minutes ago downstairs


12:36 PM · May 7, 2025


Hyde says McCabe did not delete a google search because it is not possible to delete tabs, only clear the cache,
She says McCabe did not delete calls either, system auto deletes them after many build up. Brennan completes his questioning.


12:50 PM · May 7, 2025

 

[sunshineray]

JMO, none of us want to hear this prattle. Do we have a choice??

It's not prattle, it's testimony. The defense couldn't make it more obvious that they fear this expert opinion from Ms. Hyde, when she's asked for her opinion they call yet another sidebar. Maybe that's because their expert Mr. Green was shown to be in error with his opinion from the first trial? That would seem about right. JMO

 

[waldojabba]

Ok this is on my mind. Just spitballing.

‘Hos long to die in cold’ was searched at 2:27AM
‘How long ti die in cikd’ searched at 6:23 AM
‘Hos long to die in cold’ searched at 6:24 AM.

So in order for Ms. Hyde to be correct, the 2nd search with alternate spelling shouldn’t exist, right? Because how did the timestamp and search occur with a different spelling, and still be attributed to the 2:27 search?

maybe bc it was opened in the same tab...? but its all voodoo to me JMO

 

[tara83]

It's not prattle, it's testimony. The defense couldn't make it more obvious that they fear this expert opinion from Ms. Hyde, when she's asked for her opinion they call yet another sidebar. Maybe that's because their expert Mr. Green was shown to be in error with his opinion from the first trial? That would seem about right. JMO

The expert who had her testimony thrown out in another case?

 

[sunshineray]

Didn’t Judge Cannone just say during that break regarding the defense’s cross of Ms. Hyde that the defense will have Mr Green to ask about the search? I think she already ruled against this motion.

The motion itself does have some valuable info on Mr. Green's testimony in the first trial though. Worth reading for perspective, MO.

 

[Snoop Sister]

Peter/Lawyer You Know just tweeted that he is confused on why the defense would not be allowed to cross on the issue of credibility of Ms. Hyde’s MD testimony. He says preclusion is too severe for a late notice.



Exactly! Last minute attempt at preclusion is basically unheard of. Sneaky!!

 

[sunshineray]

Yes she was all over the place. She may know her stuff but she does not present well.
Confusing to me that past phone calls delete themselves as its never happened to me and I never clear them out.

JMO

She presented it very well. The tab was opened at 2:27am, then she utilized it at 6:23am for the "hos" search...and the data is clearly there to prove it, unlike Mr Green's incorrect work at the first trial, MO.