MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #26 Retrial

[mzmarymac]

Does anyone know of a specific example of when the Manner of Death was undetermined and a person was charged for murder?

 

[kuromiiiilove]

ME is describing the arm wounds as scrapes or scratches. She made no note on depth of wounds. Has no opinion to a reasonable degree of medical certainty how they occurred.

ETA

*the size of the abrasion/bruise on the lateral right knee is a half centimetre, which is even smaller than I remembered. Less than a dime in diameter?

* Rib injuries near sternum, ribs 4 and 5. These fractures due to resuscitation to a reasonable degree of medical certainty.

The ME can’t even say how the wounds happened. That alone should make people pause IMO.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Does anyone know of a specific example of when the Manner of Death was undetermined and a person was charged for murder?

No. I can’t find one. I was thinking of Chad and Tammy Daybell, but Tammy’s COD was later updated from undetermined to homicide.

 

[jepop]

The ME can’t even say how the wounds happened. That alone should make people pause IMO.

She's not qualified but the dog attack experts are. Nonetheless, I found her lack of curiosity/research odd. Jmo

 

[Derph]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1923016446172373182

 

[kuromiiiilove]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1923016446172373182

Now as a juror, would you trust or regard anything she had to say? She did say it was on cross, so that may narrow things down…

 

[Soulmagent]

I struggle to find a non ‘nefarious’ reason, as Jen McCabe would put it…

Were they moving it in an out of the area? Remember the video with the guy pushing the broom ? Could that have been to sweep up the snow falling in an off the truck as it may have been being moved?
I might even have even more questions than I did before. Everytime.

 

[KSwizzle]

I feel bad for her, she seems like a decent person who does their job well and who just made a mistake and didn't see it, I think we've all done that, and now everyone can go online and see her flub. She doesn't seem like she is a part of the "Canton Crew" moo

 

[kuromiiiilove]

I’ve never seen a murder trial where autopsy photos aren’t shown during testimony. Judge Cannone says she’s putting the photos in an envelope for the jury to review during deliberations, if they even decide to look. That feels…bogus. Especially when we now know at least one juror from Trial 1 (the one that recently did the TV interview) said several members of the jury didn’t believe John’s injuries aligned with being hit by a car. Withholding that kind of evidence from open court testimony seems incredibly prejudicial, IMO.
ETA: I misunderstood. The photos are being shown on screen, but Judge Cannone said that the jury does not have to look at them until during deliberations. My point still stands - kind of weird.

 

[missy1974]

Now as a juror, would you trust or regard anything she had to say? She did say it was on cross, so that may narrow things down…

I would. She was still straight forward, didn't try to answer questions she was not qualified to answer, seemed to answer honestly (even the glass pic, she couldn't see what she couldn't see in the moment, she was just being honest)

Ultimately, the picture of the glass didn't "double" the amount of glass collected, she collected what she did.

It did show a lack of preparation, and that the CW didn't even know that it was a reflection, what else didn't they notice or have they missed? It IS important for things like collection of evidence to be documented correctly, for the next person to be able to understand where it was found, etc. It just highlights the issues with other things in this investigation. Allessi was able to make that point yesterday. JMO

 

[Soulmagent]

So thankful they are not showing us these autopsy photos.

I am not. I mean. How do I know he got hit by a car or not?

 

[Amber29]

I’ve never seen a murder trial where autopsy photos aren’t shown during testimony. Judge Cannone says she’s putting the photos in an envelope for the jury to review during deliberations, if they even decide to look. That feels…bogus. Especially when we now know at least one juror from Trial 1 (the one that recently did the TV interview) said several members of the jury didn’t believe John’s injuries aligned with being hit by a car. Withholding that kind of evidence from open court testimony seems incredibly prejudicial, IMO.

I agree it’s very odd. This is a murder trial, I realize the family is sensitive to seeing them but the jurors have to see them.

 

[themonk]

Re: the autopsy photos.

What a farce.

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

I would. She was still straight forward, didn't try to answer questions she was not qualified to answer, seemed to answer honestly (even the glass pic, she couldn't see what she couldn't see in the moment, she was just being honest)

Ultimately, the picture of the glass didn't "double" the amount of glass collected, she collected what she did.

It did show a lack of preparation, and that the CW didn't even know that it was a reflection, what else didn't they notice or have they missed? It IS important for things like collection of evidence to be documented correctly, for the next person to be able to understand where it was found, etc. It just highlights the issues with other things in this investigation. Allessi was able to make that point yesterday. JMO

RBBM -- It's embarrassing. They've now tried this woman twice for murder and they still show this lack of preparation? Play stupid games you win stupid prizes. JMO

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

I am not. I mean. How do I know he got hit by a car or not?

You just take their word for it.

 

[Soulmagent]

I’ve never seen a murder trial where autopsy photos aren’t shown during testimony. Judge Cannone says she’s putting the photos in an envelope for the jury to review during deliberations, if they even decide to look. That feels…bogus. Especially when we now know at least one juror from Trial 1 (the one that recently did the TV interview) said several members of the jury didn’t believe John’s injuries aligned with being hit by a car. Withholding that kind of evidence from open court testimony seems incredibly prejudicial, IMO.

Does it raise to the level of violating her right to face her accusers? Just wondering.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

I would. She was still straight forward, didn't try to answer questions she was not qualified to answer, seemed to answer honestly (even the glass pic, she couldn't see what she couldn't see in the moment, she was just being honest)

Ultimately, the picture of the glass didn't "double" the amount of glass collected, she collected what she did.

It did show a lack of preparation, and that the CW didn't even know that it was a reflection, what else didn't they notice or have they missed? It IS important for things like collection of evidence to be documented correctly, for the next person to be able to understand where it was found, etc. It just highlights the issues with other things in this investigation. Allessi was able to make that point yesterday. JMO

Totally agree. I don’t think Hartnett came off as untrustworthy - she seemed genuine and careful not to speak outside her scope. But if I were a juror, I’d definitely be left wondering what part of her testimony she felt needed correcting. MOO

 

[Soulmagent]

Totally agree. I don’t think Hartnett came off as untrustworthy - she seemed genuine and careful not to speak outside her scope. But if I were a juror, I’d definitely be left wondering what part of her testimony she felt needed correcting. MOO

Why was the cup frozen when get got it? was that explained?

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Does it raise to the level of violating her right to face her accusers? Just wondering.

Hmm, I doubt it. The ME is here to testify in person and is available for cross, which IMO satisfies the confrontation clause. It definitely feels highly unusual though.

 

[imstilla.grandma]

“You can see some of the swelling and some of the bleeding over his eyelids,” Scordi-Bello said. “And that’s pretty much all I can see, as it’s a side view.”

“You can see some discoloration that’s bleeding under his eyelid,” she said. “There was bleeding, or hemorrhage as we call it, on the eyelids as well as swelling.”

She said she also observed “multiple abrasions” to his right arm, two bruises on the back of his right hand, a “faint scratch” on the back of his left hand, and a “small scrape” on the side of his right knee.

Brennan asked if she’d opined on a cause of those injuries.

“No, I did not.” “Well, I take that back, I’m sorry.” She said smaller bruising is sometimes caused by paramedics trying to access a blood vessel. “I did not measure their depth.”

She said she does not have a medical opinion on how the scratches got on his arm, how the bruising on his hand occurred, or how his right eye got a scrape.

She said she noted O’Keefe also had “rib fractures” on the front of his fourth and fifth ribs, on “both the right and the left, and it would be the part of the rib that is closer to the sternum.” “Very often, yes,. “I believe those rib fractures were due to [medical] resuscitation.”

‘It was a severe injury.’ Doctor testifies about trauma to John O’Keefe’s head in Karen Read retrial. Here’s how the day unfolded. - The Boston Globe

Dr. Irini Scordi-Bello said the laceration to O’Keefe’s right eyelid couldn’t be caused by falling backwards and hitting his head. She added that the injury was consistent with a punch.

www.bostonglobe.com