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

[bobbymkii]

I'm still playing catchup after missing a few days from last week and the week before. Have they gone over the solo cups and the leafblower again yet?

 

[Leilei]

That’s admirable that they are trying to make the commute easier for the jury. However, Judge C, citing being ahead of schedule, has let the jury go early at least twice since trial began, in the last 2 weeks. Why not continue testimony and wait until the trial is coming to a close before cutting hours? She acts as if she cannot wait to get out of there. That and her audible sighing and blatant bias against the defense is becoming tiresome to watch.
And, I admit I enjoyed her in T1.

Wasn't one of the days cut early because the CW didn't have their witnesses there that day? They'd only scheduled for one or two, IIRC, so there wasn't anything else to do that day.
That was a big boo-boo.
IMO.

 

[Maat99]

I wasn't ignoring anything.

I was asking what is the theory? I wasn't sure what AJ is actually suggesting BH was up to.

I don’t think he is suggesting anything (yet) other than BH lied multiple times under oath during a murder trial. What is your theory for why BH would do that?

 

[jepop]

I'm still playing catchup after missing a few days from last week and the week before. Have they gone over the solo cups and the leafblower again yet?

I think that is done and dusted ( for now). Witness copper Gallagher? I've lost track myself.

 

[jepop]

I don’t think he is suggesting anything (yet) other than BH lied multiple times under oath during a murder trial. What is your theory for why BH would do that?

Because JO was not killed by a vehicle, he has to have died some other way. Imo this is what Jackson is suggesting and that is the umbrella theory of the defense aka the generation of a huge mass reasonable doubt. Moo

 

[Maat99]

IMO Brennan showed on redirect that AJs Sallyport theory can't work.

If no staging, then inevitable finding of vehicle involved.

So will AJ try to claim the staging happens earlier in the day?

IMO

ETA - AJ

Don’t you think the burden of proving that the taillight was broken as a result of KR killing JOK with her car is on the CW? They are failing to do that because the police inexplicably failed to take timely photos, the LE officers in charge lied about the whereabouts of the vehicle, and then mishandled what they claim is key evidence. AJ pointing all of this out does not change the rules for burden of proof.

 

[Sarg]

For the life of me I can't understand why the CW wanted another trial.

 

[mrjitty]

I don’t think he is suggesting anything (yet) other than BH lied multiple times under oath during a murder trial. What is your theory for why BH would do that?

I have no idea.

 

[mrjitty]

Don’t you think the burden of proving that the taillight was broken as a result of KR killing JOK with her car is on the CW? They are failing to do that because the police inexplicably failed to take timely photos, the LE officers in charge lied about the whereabouts of the vehicle, and then mishandled what they claim is key evidence. AJ pointing all of this out does not change the rules for burden of proof.

I think the way circumstantial evidence typically works is that the CW has proven that the tail light evidence was recovered at the scene at 34F, and by the evidence lab in John's shirt. The defence don't contest that those things were in fact found. So in the absence of anything else, the Jury will likely infer that the tail light was broken at the scene, in an accident involving John.

So evidentially, the D needs to establish as a real possibility, that actually the accident didn't happen and all the evidence was planted by someone. So they'll need to point to some evidence at trial to suggest that.

I think if AJ sticks to the Sallyport theory with a timeline that isn't plausible, then he'll struggle to establish it as a serious possibility.

IMO

 

[ShadyLady]

For the life of me I can't understand why the CW wanted another trial.

Because then they will have to start a real investigation to find the real killer??

 

[themonk]

I think the way circumstantial evidence typically works is that the CW has proven that the tail light evidence was recovered at the scene at 34F, and by the evidence lab in John's shirt. The defence don't contest that those things were in fact found. So in the absence of anything else, the Jury will likely infer that the tail light was broken at the scene, in an accident involving John.

So evidentially, the D needs to establish as a real possibility, that actually the accident didn't happen and all the evidence was planted by someone. So they'll need to point to some evidence at trial to suggest that.

I think if AJ sticks to the Sallyport theory with a timeline that isn't plausible, then he'll struggle to establish it as a serious possibility.

IMO

Would you recommend revisiting the testimony and cross in the first trial of Trooper Joseph Paul, a crash reconstructionist with the Massachusetts State Police?

 

[Malleeboy]

Because then they will have to start a real investigation to find the real killer??

Not happening, if Karen Read walks, if will forever be a mystery.

However I think the real reason for a second trial is political and sunk cost fallacy. If they can get a conviction it makes the stench of Canton PD and Mass State Troopers less odious.

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

Wasn't one of the days cut early because the CW didn't have their witnesses there that day? They'd only scheduled for one or two, IIRC, so there wasn't anything else to do that day.
That was a big boo-boo.
IMO.

If a defense witness wasn’t there you just know the judge would force them to continue. JMO

 

[bobbymkii]

For the life of me I can't understand why the CW wanted another trial.

I think we have to remember that the key aim and objective of a "cover up" or "frame job" is not neccessarily to convict an innocent person of a crime that the true perpetrator(s) did, although it would obviously be of benefit to the conspirators if they succeeded in this regard.

The key aim is for the true perpetrator(s) to remain unpunished for the crime. So long as Karen Read is merely indicted with the homicide of John O'Keefe then the Commonwealth of Massachussetts is under no obligation to investigate any other suspect(s).

Convicting Karen Read is merely a bonus objective. The true goal is that those who are truly responsible for John O'Keefe's homicide avoid criminal culpabilty.

The longer that Karen Read is indicted as the person who is criminally responsible for the homicide of John O'Keefe, the longer no-one else can be.

Just my opinion

Edits: minor grammar stuff

 

[barfy]

I think the way circumstantial evidence typically works is that the CW has proven that the tail light evidence was recovered at the scene at 34F, and by the evidence lab in John's shirt. The defence don't contest that those things were in fact found. So in the absence of anything else, the Jury will likely infer that the tail light was broken at the scene, in an accident involving John.

So evidentially, the D needs to establish as a real possibility, that actually the accident didn't happen and all the evidence was planted by someone. So they'll need to point to some evidence at trial to suggest that.

I think if AJ sticks to the Sallyport theory with a timeline that isn't plausible, then he'll struggle to establish it as a serious possibility.

IMO

The CW's entire argument hinges on a taillight they can’t prove was broken during the incident. No photos, no exact location, a broken chain of custody, and a month long crime lab evidence log delay? That’s not ‘circumstantial evidence it’s unreliable speculation. The defense doesn’t need to ‘prove’ evidence was planted, they only need to show the state’s case is built on a rotten foundation. The burden never shifts to the defense to disprove a claim the prosecution failed to substantiate in the first place. If the jury can’t trust how the evidence was handled, they can’t trust the evidence. IMOO

 

[bobbymkii]

This image came up again today during Bukhenik's testimony. The Commonweath of Massachussetts has to convince a jury of 12 people from the community to all unanimously conclude beyond a reasonable doubt, that the injuries in this image were caused by a Lexus SUV reversing into a fully grown man at 24 miles per hour.

If anyone thinks this is possible, go outside and find the nearest parked car in the street and put your arm up against the taillight. Tell me how the impact of that taillight could cause these injuries up the entire length of Mr O'Keefe's arm.

JMO

Redirect Notice

 

[Soulmagent]

His testimony. All drivers were called to be in at 2:30 to start prep work. Standard procedure when a major blizzard is expected.

TB also inteviewed him. BEFORE the state police did, more than a year after John's death. Their story is that they were told there were no plows on the road, so they didn't bother to find out if there had been plow passes.

I missed almost all of today, have not rewatched yet. I will though bet,
Was this bit from trial one? Asking because I dont want to rethink what some people have already worked out and fill the thread with the same tired stuff , the state of Mass is determined to put us though.

 

[keek]

I missed almost all of today, have not rewatched yet. I will though bet,
Was this bit from trial one? Asking because I dont want to rethink what some people have already worked out and fill the thread with the same tired stuff , the state of Mass is determined to put us though.

It was all proctor's 'supervisor' B. Defense atty at the end was treated HORRIFIC by judge. WANTED HIM gone and not continue to point things out to him. Jury NOTICED this. A good thing.

 

[ShadyLady]

View attachment 585531
This image came up again today during Bukhenik's testimony. The Commonweath of Massachussetts has to convince a jury of 12 people from the community to all unanimously conclude beyond a reasonable doubt, that the injuries in this image were caused by a Lexus SUV reversing into a fully grown man at 24 miles per hour.

If anyone thinks this is possible, go outside and find the nearest parked car in the street and put your arm up against the taillight. Tell me how the impact of that taillight could cause these injuries up the entire length of Mr O'Keefe's arm.

JMO

Redirect Notice

And no blood was found on any piece from Karen's SUV.

 

[Soulmagent]

It was all proctor's 'supervisor' B. Defense atty at the end was treated HORRIFIC by judge. WANTED HIM gone and not continue to point things out to him. Jury NOTICED this. A good thing.

Ty.
Being a person that follows on different platforms ,and finding out how other members view cases entirely different from one another and seeing how emotions overshadow fair and balanced often . I appreciate your prospective .