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

[K9T2L]

Law enforcement also did their best to poison the well very early on. A local news station reported in a broadcast that LE told them they had Ring video of Read hitting O'Keefe. And the venerated old Boston Globe repeated it.

The news station later retracted the statement, but I think anyone who saw the broadcast or read it in the Globe, assumed she was 100% guilty. I know I did.

Now why would law enforcement (Proctor?) tell that sort of blatent lie to the media?

This “Blue Wall” that’s been brought up and claimed by the defense is a bit exaggerated, I will say….maybe in Massachusetts it’s a “thing” not in Ga that I’ve ever heard of or seen…:that said, is public safety a “ brotherhood/sisterhood” close knit group, yes! Policing is not a “clock in/ clock out, go home and forget about day type of career. You can’t just “clock out” of dealing with child molestaions, rapes, murders etc etc… you can’t leave that at the office so to speak…only those who deal with these and many other inhumane crazy, plain ol psychos can understand. As with ALL human beings, no matter their title, career , race or religion…WE ALL share some form of bias in our lives..intentionally or subconsciously..:however this case has shown a whole new level of obvious cover ups to say the least…:is there “ professional courtesy” known in law enforcement, absolutely! What do I mean by “professional courtesy “? Meaning we all know someone or have done it ourselves…get pulled over and get a speeding ticket, call your cousin or ex classmate who’s an officer or related too and ask for help getting it taken care of….officers or CONSTANTLY called for “favors” when someone needs it if able, or hear “name drops” all the time ….is all if this RIGHT? Maybe, maybe not! But don’t think it doesn’t happen in medical offices, airlines , construction work etc etc…happens everywhere and all the time!

 

[K9T2L]

This “Blue Wall” that’s been brought up and claimed by the defense is a bit exaggerated, I will say….maybe in Massachusetts it’s a “thing” not in Ga that I’ve ever heard of or seen…:that said, is public safety a “ brotherhood/sisterhood” close knit group, yes! Policing is not a “clock in/ clock out, go home and forget about day type of career. You can’t just “clock out” of dealing with child molestaions, rapes, murders etc etc… you can’t leave that at the office so to speak…only those who deal with these and many other inhumane crazy, plain ol psychos can understand. As with ALL human beings, no matter their title, career , race or religion…WE ALL share some form of bias in our lives..intentionally or subconsciously..:however this case has shown a whole new level of obvious cover ups to say the least…:is there “ professional courtesy” known in law enforcement, absolutely! What do I mean by “professional courtesy “? Meaning we all know someone or have done it ourselves…get pulled over and get a speeding ticket, call your cousin or ex classmate who’s an officer or related too and ask for help getting it taken care of….officers or CONSTANTLY called for “favors” when someone needs it if able, or hear “name drops” all the time ….is all if this RIGHT? Maybe, maybe not! But don’t think it doesn’t happen in medical offices, airlines , construction work etc etc…happens everywhere and all the time!

In THIS CASE HOWVER, it’s blatantly inexcusable, intentional acts of covering for the man on the blue wall and pinning it somewhere else …so they thought anyway…..Karen may be guilty, who knows and maybe something new will come up that unequivocally shows evidence of her guilt….none of that matters in my eyes….there is ZERO CHANCE any reasonable, morally sound juror who’s taking their duty seriously can say “beyond any/all reasonable doubt within moral conciseness “ that Karen did in fact do what the state is alleging…reasonable doubt is EVERYWHERE in this case and even to the officers and state who responsible for charging can’t unequivocally say what happened ….SCARY !

 

[MerlinFalcon]

In THIS CASE HOWVER, it’s blatantly inexcusable, intentional acts of covering for the man on the blue wall and pinning it somewhere else …so they thought anyway…..Karen may be guilty, who knows and maybe something new will come up that unequivocally shows evidence of her guilt….none of that matters in my eyes….there is ZERO CHANCE any reasonable, morally sound juror who’s taking their duty seriously can say “beyond any/all reasonable doubt within moral conciseness “ that Karen did in fact do what the state is alleging…reasonable doubt is EVERYWHERE in this case and even to the officers and state who responsible for charging can’t unequivocally say what happened ….SCARY !

In the first trial they voted to acquit on 2 charges but not the third so the jury is still a wildcard. Scary.

 

[waldojabba]

I was also rewatching some of BH testimony from Trial 1 and he says he saw a tall, dark headed man in a sweat shirt come into 34 Fairview and then leave. Interesting huh? He said that he thought it was the brother of the girl who wanted to be picked up, but we know he didn't come in the house that night. So who was it?

imo it's John.
HIggins is covering his butt so not to be smacked with perjury charges - say enough but not all of it -

 

[HarmonyE.]

imo it's John.
HIggins is covering his butt so not to be smacked with perjury charges - say enough but not all of it -

Exactly. And we must remember the grand jury was all about Karen so he probably thought he was cleverly just covering his arse in the event someone else might later say they saw John head into the house.

 

[Warwick7]

This case is not about whether you're pro-LE (whatever that means), "dirty cops,” or the Sandra Birchmore case. This case as are all cases I decide about a case according to my research (deep dive (exclude all the fluff), court documents, facts, science, and digital forensic data. Deciding to throw a case to the wayside based on faulty police work then we must free a majority of convicted criminals right now. There is no perfect investigation. There is science and facts, which do not lie. The jury will decide.


Video shows that KR’s father, bro, and SIL were at John’s house after she was released from the hospital and she went up to her and John’s room (her words). Wonder why she did not go into her own room, as supposedly she did not share a room with John (her words via text messages).

I suspect theres an upcoming Ring expert to testify this week, based on filing last week. There were several missing/deleted Ring videos recordings. In KR’s own words via text messages (thank you, Jackson) she knew where the Ring cameras were in John's house.

Matter of opinion

Justice for John O'Keefe

She may have known their location, but she didn't have access to them. Didn't his nephew and niece testify that everything with cameras ran through their uncle John's cell phone?

 

[waldojabba]

In the first trial they voted to acquit on 2 charges but not the third so the jury is still a wildcard. Scary.

My sense from having been on a jury at that very same court house in Dedham MA:

-I am not sure that most people really understand what reasonable doubt is
-I am not sure that most people truly understand that the burden of proof is on the Prosecution - nor do they understand what burden of proof actually means
-I am not sure most people have an understanding of advanced math let alone physics

I could add more but my point is I believe there are those on the jury who probably have already made up their minds, and probably not based on any actual facts. There are others who will just go with the flow.
But all you need is one or two on the jury who understand the duty they are entrusted with and truly take their job seriously. They will want to stick to the facts, not logical fallacies and not reality tv drama. They will be the ones with the people/communication skills to get the info across.

We all know what we would do, but we are not on that jury and we are not privy to the backgrounds, life experience etc of these jurors -

There will be some who will dismiss the ARCCA guys as too slick, shady and purveyors of junk science - aka the guys with the dark hats who ride in from out of town. Mistrust of education is a relatively new phenom to me but for many it's just a way of life these days.

So while I see enough reasonable doubt to blow this case out of the water night now - I am still thinking we will end up with a hung jury on the murder charges again.

JMO

 

[waldojabba]

This “Blue Wall” that’s been brought up and claimed by the defense is a bit exaggerated, I will say….maybe in Massachusetts it’s a “thing” not in Ga that I’ve ever heard of or seen…:that said, is public safety a “ brotherhood/sisterhood” close knit group, yes! Policing is not a “clock in/ clock out, go home and forget about day type of career. You can’t just “clock out” of dealing with child molestaions, rapes, murders etc etc… you can’t leave that at the office so to speak…only those who deal with these and many other inhumane crazy, plain ol psychos can understand. As with ALL human beings, no matter their title, career , race or religion…WE ALL share some form of bias in our lives..intentionally or subconsciously..:however this case has shown a whole new level of obvious cover ups to say the least…:is there “ professional courtesy” known in law enforcement, absolutely! What do I mean by “professional courtesy “? Meaning we all know someone or have done it ourselves…get pulled over and get a speeding ticket, call your cousin or ex classmate who’s an officer or related too and ask for help getting it taken care of….officers or CONSTANTLY called for “favors” when someone needs it if able, or hear “name drops” all the time ….is all if this RIGHT? Maybe, maybe not! But don’t think it doesn’t happen in medical offices, airlines , construction work etc etc…happens everywhere and all the time!

In Massachusetts the "blue wall" is very much a thing IMO

 

[Izzylizzy]

I was also rewatching some of BH testimony from Trial 1 and he says he saw a tall, dark headed man in a sweat shirt come into 34 Fairview and then leave. Interesting huh? He said that he thought it was the brother of the girl who wanted to be picked up, but we know he didn't come in the house that night. So who was it?

According to Jackson BH claimed that he saw the dark haired tall guy the first time he spoke with LE which was the beginning of February 2022.
This was on the same timeline that BA & NA told LE that their daughter Caitlin left the house at 12:15 am.

CA's boyfriend Tristan Morris is tall with dark hair so maybe BH believed he was giving CA cover since it wasn't revealed yet that it was a lie that CA left at 12:15 am and as we found out when she testified that she was the last to leave 34 Fairview at 3:00 am.
IMO:

@ 3:59

 

[MerlinFalcon]

The 2 Brians left before John and Karen, right? Did they not go straight to the house? I might have forgotten something.

 

[jepop]

My sense from having been on a jury at that very same court house in Dedham MA:

-I am not sure that most people really understand what reasonable doubt is
-I am not sure that most people truly understand that the burden of proof is on the Prosecution - nor do they understand what burden of proof actually means
-I am not sure most people have an understanding of advanced math let alone physics

I could add more but my point is I believe there are those on the jury who probably have already made up their minds, and probably not based on any actual facts. There are others who will just go with the flow.
But all you need is one or two on the jury who understand the duty they are entrusted with and truly take their job seriously. They will want to stick to the facts, not logical fallacies and not reality tv drama. They will be the ones with the people/communication skills to get the info across.

We all know what we would do, but we are not on that jury and we are not privy to the backgrounds, life experience etc of these jurors -

There will be some who will dismiss the ARCCA guys as too slick, shady and purveyors of junk science - aka the guys with the dark hats who ride in from out of town. Mistrust of education is a relatively new phenom to me but for many it's just a way of life these days.

So while I see enough reasonable doubt to blow this case out of the water night now - I am still thinking we will end up with a hung jury on the murder charges again.

JMO

What you write makes sense to me, but I find it sad and quite disturbing that in reality perhaps only a minority can be expected to understand the concept of BARD, the prosecutor's burden and have the willingness to put aside bias and apply the faculty of reason to evidence. Or if not this, then perhaps choose to just ride with the more outspoken jurors and follow their lead. It's so cynical but perhaps it is just realistic, idk.

At trial x1 though, the info from the jurors who spoke out was that they were hung nine guilty, three not guilty on the manslaughter charge, not the murder charge. On the murder charge, the last jury had apparently understood the CW had not met their burden to prove intent. Imo.

But that doesn't change the fact nine out of twelve apparently believed a vehicle impact had occurred. That is worrisome. Jmo

ETA I wanted to add l don't think the jurors last time needed to understand physics or advanced math (I don't) to appreciate the scientific value of the expert testimony. I thought the evidence was presented in layperson language and unpacked to make it comprehensible for the average person. Jmo

 

[Wishbone]

The 2 Brians left before John and Karen, right? Did they not go straight to the house? I might have forgotten something.

Think higgins got there first as he said something about snowplowing the driveway when the a's got there after him.

 

[Spectrix]

Did anyone else notice during the testimony of Trooper Conner Keefe on day 11, JOKs shoe was shown both in photos at 34 Fairview, and also pulled out of the evidence bag and shown in court...
It's a different shoe! How does this happen?

Black sole when shown in photo - video cued at 6:00
White sole when shown in court - video cued at 8:33 (watch as it goes back into the bag)

"Oh we lost the evidence? Just buy another shoe! Aint no one gonna notice!"
Another fine job by the Canton PD. Well done, gentleman.

(All IMO)

 

[HarmonyE.]

Think higgins got there first as he said something about snowplowing the driveway when the a's got there after him.

Not sure what he would have plowed as the CW's own expert testified the snow accumulation was so little you could just make out cat tracks.

Of course, it fits with his lie that the snowbank he created would have blocked his view of John's body on the lawn when he left.

This nonsense would be hilarious if a woman's life wasn't on the line.

 

[ShadyLady]

My sense from having been on a jury at that very same court house in Dedham MA:

-I am not sure that most people really understand what reasonable doubt is
-I am not sure that most people truly understand that the burden of proof is on the Prosecution - nor do they understand what burden of proof actually means
-I am not sure most people have an understanding of advanced math let alone physics

I could add more but my point is I believe there are those on the jury who probably have already made up their minds, and probably not based on any actual facts. There are others who will just go with the flow.
But all you need is one or two on the jury who understand the duty they are entrusted with and truly take their job seriously. They will want to stick to the facts, not logical fallacies and not reality tv drama. They will be the ones with the people/communication skills to get the info across.

We all know what we would do, but we are not on that jury and we are not privy to the backgrounds, life experience etc of these jurors -

There will be some who will dismiss the ARCCA guys as too slick, shady and purveyors of junk science - aka the guys with the dark hats who ride in from out of town. Mistrust of education is a relatively new phenom to me but for many it's just a way of life these days.

So while I see enough reasonable doubt to blow this case out of the water night now - I am still thinking we will end up with a hung jury on the murder charges again.

JMO

When judges and LE can be compromised...so can jurors unfortunately.

 

[MerlinFalcon]

Not sure what he would have plowed as the CW's own expert testified the snow accumulation was so little you could just make out cat tracks.

Of course, it fits with his lie that the snowbank he created would have blocked his view of John's body on the lawn when he left.

This nonsense would be hilarious if a woman's life wasn't on the line.

This is a very good point. I don’t know about MA but in Toronto plows don’t start until there is a certain amount of accumulation. Salters go out earlier in preparation for snow storms.

 

[cocomod]

I spent time with an emergency room nurse this weekend. She has no knowledge of this case. I pullled up autopsy photos of OJO, with zero commentary from me, she immediately said the arm was dog bite injury.

She said something interesting to me about the head wound. She said most people that fall have a vertical cut, not horizontal. She said she didn’t know why, but that has been in her 15 years of emergency room experience. She said she would be more inclined to think the head injury is from a corner or a strike from behind.

Again, I told her absolutely nothing about the case. I just asked for her opinion based on her experience. I found it enlightening.

 

[HarmonyE.]

This is a very good point. I don’t know about MA but in Toronto plows don’t start until there is a certain amount of accumulation. Salters go out earlier in preparation for snow storms.

It's the same in MA. Which is why Lucky the plow guy was out before the snow had accumulated much; he was prepping the roads.

Higgins wasn't doing that. He just had a plow attached to his Jeep.

 

[cocomod]

WELCOME @K9T2L

I really appreciate your point of view, especially given your experience!

 

[Malleeboy]

I agree. I think the Waterfall video is a good indicator that Higgins was the likely catalyst for an altercation that happened soon after John entered the house. But John died from that head injury that likely came from being hit from behind. A backwards fall would be unlikely to cause a wound that deep.

Perhaps a drunken person who thought he'd break up said altercation? With Chloe/Cora (is that her new name?) getting involved in the mix and causing those lacerations up and down John's entire arm.

Not sure I buy any theory at this point but backing the idea that if an altercation happened it happened outside.

1) Jen Mccabe testimony included a line to the effect that people inside had nothing to do with what happened outside. It sounded odd when she said it.
2) John's shoe was undone. Cars don't untie shoes, they might take a shoe of, but they don't untie laces Prosecution has highlighted how fastidious John was about taking his shoes off in a house. It could be viewed that John's was in the process of entering house, and had untied one shoe, when the incident occurred.