MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #27 Retrial

[BUF]

Maybe I have this wrong and apologize if I do…..but wasn’t part of Brennan’s argument to the judge to get this later report and Burgess on the stand was that Burgess had been watching trial testimony and updated his report.

When Alessi asked Burgess on cross if he had been watching testimony he said no.

 

[Tortoise]

So you are okay with a witness telling a lie under oath? Credentials are everything to an expert witness.

I don't believe he lied under oath. JMO

 

[KSwizzle]

You can’t take anything Burgess says or shows is true, which includes his reports, sorry his “protocol “ he’s very clearly ok about lying, no doubt the jury will come to the same conclusion moo

 

[Maat99]

I don't believe he lied under oath. JMO

I admire your tenacity

 

[HarmonyE.]

I don't believe he lied under oath. JMO

We're free to believe what we like.

But he was utterly and completely discredited today. And there is more to come tomorrow.

 

[tara83]

I don't believe he lied under oath. JMO

He lied about his degree. Did you even watch?

 

[Tortoise]

He lied about his degree. Did you even watch?

No he didn't, not under oath, as you stated. He said they were errors in documents he was shown. Yes I watched.

 

[Warwick7]

He showed the data and his methods. Two things that Mr Alessi hasn't shown a fault with, IMO.

Karen's reversing event has now been pinpointed by the uncovered data, on the missed SD card, timings calculated from the ignition on events, which are corroborated by the Waze data, and other independent Ring video evidence. Unfortunate for Karen Read, IMO. I don't see how defence experts are going to argue with it.

MOO

No.

Burgess lied about his credentials, this isn’t just data, methods or courtroom drama.

It’s potentially criminal, civil, and catastrophic for any cases he has ever touched.

 

[waldojabba]

Question from work - how is Court TV and the MSM handling this? Are they extolling the virtues of the CWs case still? The reason I ask is that every day after court my husband comes home and says "hey I heard things went really bad for Karen today in court!"

Court TV? So last century. I don't think they even watch the trials they comment on. They are alternate reality based JMO

 

[tara83]

No he didn't, not under oath, as you stated. He said they were errors in documents he was shown. Yes I watched.

He lied about his credentials. That was proven today so I have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[LaineyJ]

How come when I watch the trial it’s pretty boring, but every time I can’t watch, something happens?! I only caught a little bit of that testimony this afternoon. Luckily you guys have posted a lot here so I was able to catch up a little.

Absolutely insane. This almost seems like a joke.

 

[MerlinFalcon]

It feels like Brennan is trying to lose this case.

 

[Tortoise]

He lied about his credentials. That was proven today so I have no clue what you are talking about.

Lying under oath means lying in court after swearing to tell the truth. Point to a lie he told in court about his credentials.

 

[geevee]

I just said the same thing to my husband... insurance company, and if this guys testimony put me in jail, I'd be p ed!

As a long time trial watcher... this is just next level LOL We always want an attorney to rip apart certain experts (whether for the defense or prosecution), but it's never turned out like this.

LOL This was so epic, Alessi is quickly climbing the ladder to Clarence Darrow status, he is just so good at this.

 

[sunshineray]

Respectfully, the taillight lens cover on the Lexus of KR is IIUC a polycarbonate plastic. AFAIK it is not accurate to indicate it or describe it as a carbon fiber as they differ. And to my understanding the lens cover itself would not be constructed with laid up carbon fiber. The latter materials are typically obtained from polyacrylonitile (PAN) which are further process into carbon fiber. That differs from polycarbonate. To my knowledge carbon fiber materials are also not typically transparent or translucent such as desired in a taillight, or headlight lens covering.

<modsnip>

MOO

<modsnip: Not an approved source>

Thanks for posting that info, polycarbonate and other polymers are also known to become more brittle in cold weather.

 

[tara83]

Lying under oath means lying in court. Point to a lie he told in court about his credentials.

LOL so it's okay for expert witness and cops to lie.

 

[Tortoise]

LOL so it's okay for expert witness and cops to lie.

Can you point to a lie he told under oath? He's not a cop and I haven't spoken about cops.

 

[sunshineray]

Were bones broken? Was there damage to muscles? I missed that.

We were talking about an impact with a person causing the tail light cover composition to crack and break...especially in cold weather.

 

[SteveS]

Do you think Alessi had this CV info last week or even earlier? If he did, it was an epic set up for Bev and Brennan.

“Oh no please don’t let Burgess present this devastating restated evidence! Whatever will we do .. Wait, you want to call him twice.. ? Um….

Yes, I have thought that about a LOT of things that have happened in this trial (and it keeps looking like that's the case) -- where the def objects to the introduction of something, while KNOWING that they have the goods to shred it later in a way that embarrasses the cw.

Why object at all, then? IMO it's a tactic, to make the cw think the def has no answer, when instead the def has a major trap laid and ready to pounce.

As for the case the cw has "built" so far, if we went to summation now, it has given us MAJOR testimony that undermines the cw case completely, via the cw's so-called experts themselves. We've all seen it, if we choose to look.

But we're not done. I am very sure there are still MAJOR traps ahead that will completely decimate the cw case completely, as if this hasn't been enough. (For example, do I think the precise timing of cycle 1162 will be problematic? No, I think the def is playing possum on that, like they did on Burgess, and springing a different trap.) When it's the defense's turn to actually PRESENT evidence, it should be fun to watch (and an embarrassment for the people whose taxes have been wasted to pay for this travesty).

 

[Warwick7]

I don't believe he lied under oath. JMO

He submitted fake resumes. He submitted fake CVs.

And under oath, he sat in a chair, banking on these forgery qualifications and testified. That’s perjury.

It’s a felony. And it undermines every case where he gave “expert” testimony.
M00