MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #25 Retrial

[rescuemom]

I don't know what people want. If she was smiling all the time there'd be a problem with that. If she has a frown all the time there'd be a problem with that. If she was "unemotional" that would be twisted into an issue. JMO

IMO, she got the shock of her life. When she found out she was accused of killing a man she loved and who she had been with for two years. She got no support from anyone but her family and friends. She got no support from John’s friends or family. She then found support from the public local national and international. At this point, she could probably give a rats rump what anyone else thinks.

 

[keek]

The take away is motive that there may have been an altercation between JOK and another person; likely BH.

All it would of taken was a snide, 'telling' remark from BH to start. IMO

 

[arielilane]

@CourtTV


WATCH: Did #KarenRead throw the "finger" as Sgt. Yuri Bukhenik read texts between her and Brian Higgins to the jury?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1920940998844100693

Is Karen Read Giving The Middle Finger In Court?

In court during Sgt. Yuri Bukhenik's cross-examination on Friday, Karen Read appeared to display her middle finger.

www.courttv.com

Is Karen Read Giving The Middle Finger In Court?​

In court during Sgt. Yuri Bukhenik's cross-examination on Friday, Karen Read appeared to display her middle finger. (5/9/25) MORE

 

[bobbymkii]

So in the first trial, it was Lally and the CW who introduced the texts between Higgins and Read in order to suggest that Karen was being a right Tuesday (upon which one might see you next) who didn't love John at all and was actively trying to cheat on him. The sort of disregard one might have towards someone they would deliberately reverse their SUV into and drive away from.

Now it seems that KR's defense are choosing to introduce them to show Higgins may have had a motive of jealousy towards JO'K, and this should have been investigated as a lead, but wasn't. At all.

JMO

 

[tara83]

What does karen's feelings about liking children or not have to do with anything? More proof to me that some just hate her and want her convicted because they don't like her personally. JMO.

 

[rescuemom]

AJ got YB to acknowledge in front of the jury that investigators never requested the phone records of Brian Albert or Brian Higgins, and that he wasn’t aware of any calls made at 1:35 AM or 2:22 AM (The famous butt dials). He even admitted he relied on Higgins telling him, and didn’t check for himself.

That raises a big question: how did the defense end up with those call logs if law enforcement never pulled them? I feel like AJ has much more to come on Monday. MOO.

Why does it feel like we’re in the defense case. Hank seems defeated already. Truly something feels off for some reason

 

[waldojabba]

The point of those texts wasn’t about Karen at all. It was about Higgins IMO.

They were clearly all about HIggins altho I am not sure that got across as well as it did when they actually had Higgins in the witness chair during the first trial. I dont think the judge is prob big on visual aids but it would be helpful for the jurors to have a poster board of all the players and their role. For instance who was at the party/who was at the bar etc

Karen I assume was feeling neglected and needed some attention so she reached out to HIggins.
He is anxious to hook up with her but a bit reluctant to get played. He told her he was attracted to her the minute he met her. They flirted back and forth and then she trailed off - Clearly upseetting Higgins as he nw is feeling played. He texts her at the bar - kind of a Sooo whats going on John or me type thing
The fact that HIggins texted John about coming to the party fits right in with it.
Lots of drinking ( another prime example of when booze is not your friend) and I think Higgins was going to blow things up
The telling part is Karen getting no answer when she texts Higgins that John is dead.... Higgins goes silent
I think if someone in LE offered HIggins a good enough deal ( assuming he has sobered up)we would know exactly what happened that night.
JMO

JMO

 

[HarmonyE.]

Re: Jackson's cross

Dont know how the text messages between KR and BH help his client.

Ive noticed; and not only today, that Jackson loses his train of thought at times. Not focused at times.

Asking a witness to view a grainy video (Waterfall bar) and point out people and ask them what they are thinking and doing is not productive. Thought it was leading the witness. Jackson trying to establish hostilely is a fail. There is absolutely no evidence of a conspiracy in this case.

The jurors should have been required to be mind readers to help them out with the bar footage.

ADA Brennan is masterful at utilizing video footage. Jackson not so much

About those Text Messages...

-- She's begging to hook-up with BH.
-- She couldn’t wait to text BH and text “John died” (Saturday, 1/29/2022, 11:54 am)

(observation: She has no issue with announcing "John’s dead” or "John died”

-- She likes to drink and talk about drinking way more than what is normal
-- She is so upset w/John so has no problem inviting BH to stay at her house, apparently begged him at times
-- She does not like children
-- She had not let go of the NYE incident
-- She is overly concerned about other women - insecure personality

What would you propose would be Read's motive to murder O'Keefe?

The relationship was clearly going to be over soon. She was tired of being used to take care of the kids while he partied. They weren't married. She wasn't going to gain any life insurance money or avoid a messy, expensive divorce in the event of his death. She's hardly the first person to explore other options with relationships while one fades and she didn't need John dead to do this.

Read may not come across as likeable (any more than any of the other parties here) but she certainly doesn't come across as murderous or crazy in those texts. What the defense is trying to establish (and there will be more to come) is that something was going on with Higgins and John that lead to an altercation which lead to John being struck over the head by someone in that house.

And the "investigation" was laughably bad. And there were no injuries on JO's body supporting the claim he was hit by a car. Zilch.

 

[shotgun09]

Why does it feel like we’re in the defense case. Hank seems defeated already. Truly something feels off for some reason

Hank's big plan ( Putting YB up on the stand to take the blunt off the Proctor-factor) back-fired. He's toast. Game set match
IMO

 

[themonk]

*googles 'is habeas corpus for a dog a thing?*

 

[sunshineray]

Sigh. The conclusions were made after the FBI had them do this and before either side was contacted. How could they not be objective?

If the witness collaborated with others, especially with anyone on the defense team, about their testimony, that testimony may not have been objectively their own. MO

 

[tara83]

If the witness collaborated with others, especially with anyone on the defense team, about their testimony, that testimony may not have been objectively their own. MO

Sigh. It's obvious you don't want to hear actual facts so I am done with this conversation.

 

[Soulmagent]

You have to remember the bumpers of both vehicles stick out much further than they tail lights. I think the bumpers matched up when she bumped him. Then when she pulled away, there were no red pieces of her tail light on the ground in the video as she pulls away, and you can see the red tail light is missing.

It is not missing you can see it ,the white you see is her back up lights,when she leaves the drive way the lens is there , Someone posted a screen grab up thread. Hope that helps!

 

[sunshineray]

Now what exactly is this knowledge you are privy to? You think the US Attorney Public Corruption unit hired the FBI, and then the FBI made false conclusions, sent them to both the prosecution and defense, in the hopes that they might get some expenses paid for 3 years later?

I've explained it now many times and that it's MO. I'm allowed to have an opinion and to form it using my logic. If that differs from yours, that's fine.

 

[hooziewhutz]

[I haven't caught up on here yet. Apologies if redundant.]

At this point, even before the CW closes, I feel like this now comes down to the jury instructions for deliberation.

 

[sunshineray]

http://

Thank you! The violation of the sequestriation order occured between the DOJ and ARCCA, which has nothing to do with the defense. If Judge Cannone was truly bothered by it, she would have forbade them from testifying. ARCCA did communicate with the defense during T1. How else could they coordinate travel and times needed? In addition, why wouldn’t the defense review their conclusions with ARCCA prior to them testifying? I recall several CW witnesses talking about how they prepped with Brennan. Based on other trials I’ve watched, conferring with witnesses isn’t illegal or unethical.
The CW had an opportunity to do the same thing, but they didn’t like ARCCA’S results.

IF a witness communicated with the defense and other witnesses prior to their testimony, IMO and JUST MO, that would matter in evaluation of that person's testimony.

 

[sunshineray]

Sigh. It's obvious you don't want to hear actual facts so I am done with this conversation.

I have heard many actual facts with evidence and much nonsense also with no evidence to support it, in this trial. It's very hard not to form a strong opinion at this stage of the proceedings. AJMO

 

[HarmonyE.]

IF a witness communicated with the defense and other witnesses prior to their testimony, IMO and JUST MO, that would matter in evaluation of that person's testimony.

Why? The experts were hired by the FBI and their work was done before the defense even knew they existed.

 

[jepop]

Dbm

 

[rescuemom]

[I haven't caught up on here yet. Apologies if redundant.]

At this point, even before the CW closes, I feel like this now comes down to the jury instructions for deliberation.

Oh, God help us.