MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #28 Retrial

[BUF]

I bet every future prosecution witness is questioning their own CVs and LinkedIn pages now!

The prosecution should be vetting their witnesses before putting them on the stand

 

[Derph]

Did work and family get in the way of being an honest human being, too?
IMO.

 

[Snoods]

Did she see any of that cross? Cause I’d be nervous too lol

They’d have to bring me in on a stretcher with a morphine drip!

 

[mzmarymac]

May I scream? Is that allowed? OK...well....trigger warning....I'm going to yell for just a second so everyone may hear....

NO ONE CARES ABOUT WHETHER HE GRADUATED OR NOT!!!!

The impeachment of the witness is his integrity, his honesty, his trustworthiness and his attention to detail, all of which are apparently very lacking. So we are to trust his analysis and testimony so much as to put a woman in prison for 20 years?

 

[Maat99]

He actually explained it yesterday during his direct testimony. The variables are just that variables. When analyzing data from different clocks they usually vary. That's why they state the variances and how they subsequently analyzed to try and synced them, sometimes using videos and then using the Lexus clock itself. I'm interested in whether there's testimony contradicting Mr. Burgess's data analysis. I'm thinking there's not, which is why the defense wants to hang him high on his misstated online credentials. AJMO

But who determines what the variables are and what the correct variance might be? Him? That sounds like a specialized skill where some relevant education might be necessary. Something he doesn’t have. The whole point here is that he:
1. Magically realized his analysis did not support the CW theory (not synced) as soon as the defense expert report pointing it out was filed.
2. He is unable to explain how and why he came up with the new variances that now magically sync up the data.
3. Are we really supposed to believe that he alone has some magic method that isn’t industry standard or practice (aka made up by him) not reviewed by a single other person and Oh! Looky here! Now the “data” (source unknown) is all synced up!
4. All of this is already impossible to believe. But to top it all off, he is a fraud. His professional integrity is zero. All of his “analysis” is based on his word alone which is meaningless because he is willing to lie to make a buck.
5. Let’s just say the defense does present contradictory analysis performed by a professional with an actual education on the topic. Someone has not lied or misrepresented himself. Someone who followed standard industry practice for how to analyze this data and can explain it, and the results are different. Is that going to change your mind?

 

[imstilla.grandma]

Burgess told jurors the “backing maneuver” Read’s SUV made ended between 12:32 a.m. and four seconds and 12:32 a.m. and 12 seconds, based on O’Keefe’s phone data. Another prosecution digital forensics expert, Ian Whiffin, previously testified O’Keefe’s phone logged its last movement at about 12:32 a.m. on the 29th.

Stepping up for cross-examination, defense attorney Robert Alessi called Burgess’s methodology and credentials into question, noting he lacks a bachelor’s degree despite conflicting information on his Aperture staff bio, some iterations of his curriculum vitae, and his personal LinkedIn page.

Alessi also reminded jurors Burgess mixed up bytes and bits in his initial protocol for additional testing of data from Read’s SUV, though Burgess testified he corrected his mistake early on in the process.

Burgess further disputed Alessi’s claim that he had “enlarged” the clock variance between Read’s SUV and O’Keefe’s cellphone, which Burgess said was between 21 to 29 seconds. He told jurors a supplemental report he issued on May 8 — well after Read’s retrial had started — included “clarifications” but did not change his original analysis

Livestream: Digital expert back on the stand in Karen Read trial after bruising cross-examination

Shanon Burgess said Karen Read's SUV made a “backing maneuver” that ended around the same time John O'Keefe's phone logged its last movement.

www.boston.com

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Did work and family get in the way of being an honest human being, too?
IMO.

Hey, that would be a great line for a defense lawyer!

‘Your honor, my client wanted to uphold the law… but work and family got in the way!’

‘Oh ok. Case dismissed!’

 

[mzmarymac]

Did she see any of that cross? Cause I’d be nervous too lol

She shouldn't have as they are not supposed to be watching other testimony correct?

 

[Snoods]

But who determines what the variables are and what the correct variance might be? Him? That sounds like a specialized skill where some relevant education might be necessary. Something he doesn’t have. The whole point here is that he:
1. Magically realized his analysis did not support the CW theory (not synced) as soon as the defense expert report pointing it out was filed.
2. He is unable to explain how and why he came up with the new variances that now magically sync up the data.
3. Are we really supposed to believe that he alone has some magic method that isn’t industry standard or practice (aka made up by him) not reviewed by a single other person and Oh! Looky here! Now the “data” (source unknown) is all synced up!
4. All of this is already impossible to believe. But to top it all off, he is a fraud. His professional integrity is zero. All of his “analysis” is based on his word alone which is meaningless because he is willing to lie to make a buck.
5. Let’s just say the defense does present contradictory analysis performed by a professional with an actual education on the topic. Someone has not lied or misrepresented himself. Someone who followed standard industry practice for how to analyze this data and can explain it, and the results are different. Is that going to change your mind?

Exactly! Honestly a lot of this “expert witness” stuff seems like witchcraft, no offense to witches.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

May I scream? Is that allowed? OK...well....trigger warning....I'm going to yell for just a second so everyone may hear....

NO ONE CARES ABOUT WHETHER HE GRADUATED OR NOT!!!!

The impeachment of the witness is his integrity, his honesty, his trustworthiness and his attention to detail, all of which are apparently very lacking. So we are to trust his analysis and testimony so much as to put a woman in prison for 20 years?

Exactly. And even if they are simply ‘mistakes’ as he claims - if you are making such important ‘mistakes’ in your professional life, why should you be trusted as an expert witness? MOO

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Exactly! Honestly a lot of this “expert witness” stuff seems like witchcraft, no offense to witches.

Same with Jessica Hyde. Their ‘evidence’ is completely self referencing and/or incomplete. That’s why it always falls apart on cross, IMO

 

[Leilei]

Question: Was Burgess acting as an Aperture employee in the Federal case?
TYIA.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Question: Was Burgess acting as an Aperture employee in the Federal case?
TYIA.

Yes. He said Aperture submitted the materials to the court on his behalf.

 

[arielilane]

Clip #24

5/20/2025 15:14:29

Brennan plays a video clip where Read says they believe O'Keefe died around 12:25am-12:30am -->

clip we think he died around 1225 1230 - David Bienick.mp4

drive.google.com

Clip #25

5/20/2025 15:12:40

Brennan plays an interview clip where Read describes returning to O'Keefe's house at 12:41am -->

clip read says she got home at 1241am - David Bienick.mp4

drive.google.com

Karen Read retrial: Expert defends analysis of SUV, phone data

Shanon Burgess, a digital forensics examiner for a national firm called Aperture, testified that he found a computer chip in the SUV that had not previously been examined.

www.wcvb.com

Clip 23 (audio) ?

 

[Linda7NJ]

May I scream? Is that allowed? OK...well....trigger warning....I'm going to yell for just a second so everyone may hear....

NO ONE CARES ABOUT WHETHER HE GRADUATED OR NOT!!!!

The impeachment of the witness is his integrity, his honesty, his trustworthiness and his attention to detail, all of which are apparently very lacking. So we are to trust his analysis and testimony so much as to put a woman in prison for 20 years?

Yes, I wasn’t swayed - The data & method stands IMO
Karen Read is the most devestating “witness” the CW has
Every single gain by the defense gets wiped away with her own words

ALL IMO

 

[PamCake]

After Burgess was let go, the first clip that Brennan played has Karen talking about when she and John were on the way to Fairview. She said that she missed the turn onto Fairview, and had to TURN AROUND using somebody's driveway. Could this be the 3-point turn that is the subject of Burgess' testimony?

 

[kuromiiiilove]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1924906403954884715

‘If Brennan had brought out on direct the issues related to his expert's academic issues (as any prosecutor even willing to call this expert would do), it would hav been over in cross examination. By not doing that and diving into in redirect, he caused a second round of this devastating subject (with new evidence not used on cross), all while exposing for the jury his intent to conceal the evidence. He also destroyed the hour he spent on redirect trying o emphasize the reliability of the data. The only thing the jury will be left with is that Burgess and Aperture appear to be frauds. This examination was an exercise in exactly how not handle the direct (and redirect) of a witness with serious credibility issues’

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Judge Cannone just asked counsel for a sidebar unprompted. Weird!

(11 sidebahs today)

 

[jepop]

The prosecution should be vetting their witnesses before putting them on the stand

Brennan didn't vet him properly. Didn't look at his linkedIn? Or looked at it but didn't cotton on,? It's unbelievable how Brennan, as the actual PA for this case, blew that so badly. How is that he is a bane to his own case,,,?

 

[Snoods]

Judge suddenly needs to see counsel for a sidebah.