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

[keek]

Wouldn't it be awesome if we could hear from the doctors and nurses at the E.R. on their take of what happened to John. I realize it's the coroner's job to rule on matter of death, but in my opinion I would have loved to hear them.s

It would but probably not free to be public about their observations on anything. They are talking amongst themselves I am sure. They also most likely live in the area of the towns, Brockton, Stoughton, Canton...the hospital is in Stoughton, Canton next town, and employ much staff in all departments. . IMO

 

[lohrtabitha]

RSBM

I think the jury will infer, whatever happened to John, happened at approx 12.32 when his phone stopped moving forever, he ceased answered any messages/calls, and his phone remained in pocket state for 1000s of events.

The BITS version itself presupposes this i.e John goes inside immediately he arrives at 12.24 - then his phone goes dead just 8 mins later. Karens version implies that the reason he did not come out, is because he'd been attacked.

So I do think the D is, in practical terms, also committed to 12.32.

MOO

I beg to differ, I feel atleast a couple of them will think maybe it fell out of his pocket on his 80 steps to the house.

 

[jepop]

Could have is not definitive. This case is full of could haves which creates a serious amount of reasonable doubts! Mo

The abrasion/ bruise was a half centimetre in diameter, lol.

 

[lohrtabitha]

I missed part of Vallier’s testimony yesterday. How many pieces of taillight didn’t match KR’s Lexus? Was Vallier saying she couldn’t puzzle piece the extra pieces back but they still belonged to the Lexus? Or that the pieces are from another vehicle?

Or like John's vehicle?

 

[lohrtabitha]

He was the victim of those that knew exactly what to make sure was NOT looked for or at. Career hard core LE positions. They both knew, heads upped, to realllllly get rid of their phones before knowing they were finally going to be asked to turn them in one way or another. Both, LE, bad stuff guys turns out. IMO

100% Keek! Cover-ups, planting evidence, and lying are just a few of LE specialties in Canton. Mo

 

[Angelwatch]

Around 20 or so IIRC. I recall the non-matches included items in lab evidence number 7 dash 8 (7-8) and items included in another lab evidence number. Stressing ICBW about the exact number. I need to check on what the second lab evidence number was and how many items were listed under that number. Jmo

Thanks. I’ll go back and rewatch. I was behind in my stream and everyone started reacting to the end of day rulings of Cannone and I skipped ahead.

 

[Izzylizzy]

So, an attorney may represent a person in court, while a lawyer may not?

That's what it says.

 

[lohrtabitha]

Yes, many astute criminal attorneys say there was. From nbcboston.con
Peter Elikann, criminal defense attorney: I say there’s probable cause to the 10th power. I mean, somebody’ s expected at a party at that house, the next morning they see his body in front of the house on a lawn. That’s enough. Was there anything going on in the house? How about the people inside? And if there was any question in the police officer’s mind, he could’ve gone and gotten a search warrant and been back in 45 mins. That is absolutely probable cause.

I said .con but should have been com. Not enough coffee for the day yet and fat fingers.

Your questions about the Karen Read trial, answered

The highly-publicized Karen Read murder trial has drawn attention across the globe. Read is accused of striking her Boston police officer boyfriend, John O’Keefe, with her SUV and leaving him for dead in a snowbank. O’Keefe died in Canton, Massachusetts, on Jan. 29, 2022. Prosecutors say Read...

www.nbcboston.com

 

[tara83]

Peter just started addressing Cannone's order.

Wow. The jury had a note about not wanting so many sustained objections so witness could answer questions from the defense.

 

[Warwick7]

That's an excellent compilation of MPs biased conduct!

Some things that stand out, aside from the obvious bias and misogyny:

MP telling his sister to not tell anyone about a homicide on a cop's lawn, yet he's freely chatting to his friends about it.
Later on, Proctor's sister asked if the Canton situation involved a homicide, to which Proctor responded, "Don't say a word to anyone."
"Of course not," his sister replied.

MP going through KR's phone ... was he even allowed to do that? Wouldn't it have been evidence for a police IT inspector to go through?
In a different thread, Proctor made a comment about Yannetti, writing, after having to stop processing Read's phone upon finding protected communication between her and her attorney, that he was going through "his r------- client's phone. No nudes so far. I hate that man, I truly hate him." The comment was "a distasteful joke," Proctor explained, adding later that he was not looking for nude pictures but "location data text communications … more evidence contained within the phone."

Why was MP not charged with accepting bribes?
Lally brought up a text message that his sister sent later on, after talking to Julie Albert: "When this is all over, she wants to get you a thank you gift." Proctor replied, "Get Elizabeth one," referring to his wife.

Are you kidding me?!!!

 

[Izzylizzy]

Starting around 3:45:15

Cannone found that the defense has not persuaded her of unfair prejudice or undue surprise of this information and she didn't find there was late disclosure. Even though there will be no voir dire, Cannone has made it clear that she will allow the defense "ample game for cross examination" of Mr Burgess (what he knew, what he looked at, why he looked at it, when he looked at it, why he changed his report, violation of the sequestration order). She has every confidence that Mr Alessi can perform a fulsome cross examination, but after the direct examination, if Alessi demonstrates he needs further time, she will hear him on that. If Alessi feels that the testimony of JMc and others is critical to re-examine, she will also hear him on that.

We're seeing brilliant minds at work here. I have every confidence in the defense team being able to illustrate what they need to for the jury to fully comprehend what has occurred here due to the CW changing the timing to fit its case. The cross examination will lay it out in the open for the jury to dissect. I think this will even benefit the defense to further show what a mess the CW has made of this case.

JMO

God only knows what Judge Cannone's definition of "ample game" will be.
imo

"Cannone has made it clear that she will allow the defense "ample game for cross examination" of Mr Burgess"

 

[rescuemom]

Wow. The jury had a note about not wanting so many sustained objections so witness could answer questions from the defense.

How dare they?? Wanna bet the jury pool will be adressed next?? Anyone know who the foreperson is this time???

 

[Warwick7]

Wow. The jury had a note about not wanting so many sustained objections so witness could answer questions from the defense.

Wow, I had heard about this but didn't have any msm to back it up.
Wow!

 

[missy1974]

I don’t understand why the MSP didn’t take swab samples of other folks to try and match to the other 4-5 traces of DNA on the sneaker…..or, more importantly, why that couldn’t be done now. Re: last week’s new accident reconstruction report from the cw, could Alessia have said, “Judge, we’ll allow a new report in the middle of trial if you order DNA samples be taken from BH and BA”?

I don't understand why they took swabs at all if they actually believed she hit him with the car? Cars don't bleed.

JMO

 

[jepop]

Thanks. I’ll go back and rewatch. I was behind in my stream and everyone started reacting to the end of day rulings of Cannone and I skipped ahead.

It got a little complicated for me at various points but that's the conclusion I came to after my first watching.

Yeah, I was also distracted from the testimony a few times by cannone's late arvo ruling. Especially her decision to allow Brennan's expert to rebut ARCCA after the defense's case in chief. Then she denied the defense a voir dire of the CW's expert, which would have helped the D prep for the 'vigorous' cross she will (apparently) allow in all her magniminity. Jmo

I fear the many wtaf moments I experienced yesterday may have ruined my focus. These decisions are hard to digest but they must be swallowed and the trial will move on.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

https://www.wpri.com/new-england/massachusetts/boston-officers-niece-testifies-in-karen-read-trial/

 

[missy1974]

Yes I think that's right, those items re -labeled seven dash ..X (7-X) by the lab were apparently submitted by Proctor. They included tail light pieces and the clothing. During earlier testimony for this trial by Hartnett (?), Yanetti went through the LE evidence bags the various tail light pieces arrived in at the lab (date of collection from the scene, name of officer who located them, description of the items in bag - this last was often pretty vague or not specific as to the number of pieces).

The lab then took the items from LE evidence bags and repacked them with their own numbering system. The lab system specified the number of tail light pieces from each LE evidence bag and included detailed photos of the pieces next to a ruler to show the various sizes of each piece.

The first lab number for tail light pieces was 7-5 and the last one was about 7-16. But I really need to re-watch that testimony ( Hartnett I believe) and then Vallier's from yesterday. I'm going to abandon trial X 1 testimony now that both these witnesses have testified and try to start fresh to avoid confusion and a brain melt down, lol. Jmo

I need to get some gardening done today... I was going to go back and listen more carefully today too... please report back! haha I would like to know which bag contained the pieces that were found the first day!

Thanks for taking one for the team.. don't let your brain melt down

 

[missy1974]

Wow. The jury had a note about not wanting so many sustained objections so witness could answer questions from the defense.

ohhhh I missed that! going to go listen now! thanks!

 

[jepop]

How dare they?? Wanna bet the jury pool will be adressed next?? Anyone know who the foreperson is this time???

Not sure whether this actually happened or not. I think it was just in a comment sent in to LYK during his take on day 17. So moo it's far from confirmed.

 

[Izzylizzy]

Wow. The jury had a note about not wanting so many sustained objections so witness could answer questions from the defense.

I can't find a link.
All that comes up is A1 which agrees with the jurors sending BC a note but their confirmation is useless.