MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #29 Retrial

[justwannahelp]

It's my contention that John may have heard men's voices in the yard and he went toward them. The gate in the fence is directly adjacent to where Karen had parked the car, so it would've been easy to hear voices there. They probably didn't call for help if the juvenile with them was somehow complicit in the injury,

But Karen saw him in the threshold of the door, so i think someone answered the door. Maybe whoever answered the door said there all out back. Go through the gate. But i doubt it because it was so cold. They likely would have walked him through the house.

 

[Seni]

Just as an aside whilst things are quiet. Alessi is the youngest of the 3 defence attorneys, right?

Is there a site where we can see the professional profiles of Yanetti, Jackson and Alessi?

Just curiosity. Have they also been attorneys for prosecution or does the State work with designated attorneys? Can that go both ways?

Equally is Judge Cannone the only judge for Canton?

 

[Malleeboy]

So where on the body does the prosecution believe John was hit by the car?
With the black eyes now caused by rear of head injury, it removes a possible impact site.
ME has

-Back of head impact (leading to black eyes), which appears to from hitting ground from fall
-facial lacerations
-arm lacerations
-Scratch on right knee

Getting hit by a SUV @ 25 mph causes bruising and broken bones.
Are Prosecution saying the head was the impact? So he was bent over, with his head sticking out, and turned away from the reversing car. But that would have causes traumatic and noticeable neck injuries and bruising. It would also have spun the body into the car, causing bruising on the body.

Impact on the arm? Only lacerations, no bruising.
Facial lacerations? But again no bruising.
Knee scratch? But yet again no bruising.

Or is prosecution case:
So she clipped him with the car, with enough force to brake the rear taillight but not enough force to leave a bruise. Which then lacerated his arm and face but didn't bruise the skin. This caused him to fall over a few steps from the impact spot, which caused head injury, which then lead to hypothermia.

However John was drunk as, the ground was wet and greasy cause it had just started snowing.

 

[Malleeboy]

Just as an aside whilst things are quiet. Alessi is the youngest of the 3 defence attorneys, right?

Is there a site where we can see the professional profiles of Yanetti, Jackson and Alessi?

Just curiosity. Have they also been attorneys for prosecution or does the State work with designated attorneys? Can that go both ways?

Equally is Judge Cannone the only judge for Canton?

Brennan was a Defence lawyer who was brought on as special prosecutor the case. Prosecutor generally work for the DA but Defence lawyers can be drafted. I think many lawyer start as prosecutors and then move to Defence.

 

[missy1974]

So where on the body does the prosecution believe John was hit by the car?
With the black eyes now caused by rear of hear injury, it removes a possible impact sight.
ME has

-Back of head impact (leading to black eyes), which appears to from hitting ground from fall
-facial lacerations
-arm lacerations

Getting hit by a SUV @ 25 mph causes bruising and broken bones.
Are Prosecution saying the head was the impact? So he was bent over, with his head sticking out, and turned away from the reversing car. But that would have causes traumatic and noticeable neck injuries and bruising. It would also have spun the body into the car, causing bruising on the body.

Impact on the arm? Only lacerations, no bruising.
Facial lacerations? But again no bruising.

Or is prosecution case:
So she clipped him with the car, with enough force to brake the rear taillight but not enough force to leave a bruise. Which then lacerated his arm and face but didn't bruise the skin. This caused him to fall over a few steps from the impact spot, which caused head injury, which then lead to hypothermia.

However John was drunk as, the ground was wet and greasy cause it had just started snowing.

I saw this on X yesterday... but it doesn't make sense to me either... it comes from a "reporter" that I believe is from CourtTV? I'm not even sure but he seems to push anything and everything for the CW, and has the opposite view of almost every other reporter in the courtroom all the time, so I usually ignore it haha

ETA: remember when they went to the scene with the jurors, Brennan told them or pointed it out to them while there to look at it. IIRC

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925346567751381095

 

[DropthePuck]

Just as an aside whilst things are quiet. Alessi is the youngest of the 3 defence attorneys, right?

Is there a site where we can see the professional profiles of Yanetti, Jackson and Alessi?

Just curiosity. Have they also been attorneys for prosecution or does the State work with designated attorneys? Can that go both ways?

Equally is Judge Cannone the only judge for Canton?

I've only found the professional profiles by going to the websites of the law firms they work for/own.

David Yannetti: Why Choose David Yannetti, Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer?

Robert Alessi: Robert Alessi | DLA Piper

Alan Jackson: Alan Jackson | Werksman Jackson & Quinn LLP

AJ was a prosecutor in LA for years (he secured a conviction in the Phil Specter case) before becoming a defense atty.

TIL that Alessi is 67 y.o. and I almost fell out of my chair. I thought he was late 40's, early 50's.

 

[Warwick7]

Sweeeeet!!

This requires a BAM!!!!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925586678065836449

 

[Leilei]

I saw this on X yesterday... but it doesn't make sense to me either... it comes from a "reporter" that I believe is from CourtTV? I'm not even sure but he seems to push anything and everything for the CW, and has the opposite view of almost every other reporter in the courtroom all the time, so I usually ignore it haha

ETA: remember when they went to the scene with the jurors, Brennan told them or pointed it out to them while there to look at it. IIRC

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925346567751381095

No DNA/blood/etc... found.
I don't trust DePetro. He's been extremely biased and actually posted the juror's educational history on his X account, after SB's testimony.
He later deleted it because he was called out for doxxing.
Among other things.
IMO.

 

[geevee]

I saw this on X yesterday... but it doesn't make sense to me either... it comes from a "reporter" that I believe is from CourtTV? I'm not even sure but he seems to push anything and everything for the CW, and has the opposite view of almost every other reporter in the courtroom all the time, so I usually ignore it haha

ETA: remember when they went to the scene with the jurors, Brennan told them or pointed it out to them while there to look at it. IIRC

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925346567751381095

Her tail light hit him in the eye?! That is just ludicrous, he really doesn't intend to be taken seriously with critical thinking like that, does he?

 

[Soulmagent]

Sweeeeet!!

This requires a BAM!!!!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925586678065836449

Bombastic ,isn't fantastic... ahh hevva hevva

 

[shotgun09]

Sweeeeet!!

This requires a BAM!!!!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925586678065836449

A really big part of me thinks that Brennan had gone to JBC last week, crying " Tell them to stop laughing at meeeeee " And, " Tell them to stop rolling their eyes at meeeeee". Especially when Judge C said in her admonishment to the jurors, " The lawyers have worked very hard ".
It's pretty evident to most what's going on. IMO

 

[Malleeboy]

A really big part of me thinks that Brennan had gone to JBC last week, crying " Tell them to stop laughing at meeeeee " And, " Tell them to stop rolling their eyes at meeeeee". Especially when Judge C said in her admonishment to the jurors, " The lawyers have worked very hard ".
It's pretty evident to most what's going on. IMO

Defence may have done it, they don't want people removed from the jury pool, especially those who are finding Prosecution evidence and witnesses comically funny. You are very unlikely to convict, if you find the prosecution case, evidence or witnesses as humorous.

 

[Bernie54]

Crucially, he never said the words “car,” “vehicle,” “sideswipe,” or “collision.” A backward fall could come from a push, a slip, a dog knockdown, any number of scenarios.

And THAT, to me, is reasonable doubt: multiple plausible causes for the same injury. Dr. Wolf didn’t rule anything out.

Exactly. In my mind, the only irrefutable fact that we have come across is that he fell backwards and sustained his injury. Whether he fell because somebody punched him or threw the glass at his face, whether the dog jumped on him and he lost balance, or whether karen hit him with the car, or whatever, we will never know what really happened IMO. Each scenario can be refuted in some way. It might be a combination of things happening. This case screams reasonable doubt.

If karen hit him, I doubt she even remembers it. What was it that she pulled out of his face, a piece of the glass or a piece of the plastic tail light?? How did it get embedded in his nose?

If he was involved in an altercation, did anyone else have injuries? Was he dragged to that location or put in the Jeep and driven and dump there? If so, how did they know to place him where karen‘s car dropped him off? Is that why, in Jen McCabe’s testimony, she kept repeating how many times she went to the door and kept looking out and karen’s car was there… Is that where the idea came from? There is too much lying and shady stuff going on with these people. I can see all the men who were in the house getting together and sticking to a story… And of course, their wives.

Unfortunately for the family, there is no way to definitively prove one way or the other what happened because there were so many mistakes made, not to mention the fact that every person involved was completely drunk. I wonder if anybody involved has a clear recollection of what actually transpired. All MO only.

 

[missy1974]

No DNA/blood/etc... found.
I don't trust DePetro. He's been extremely biased and actually posted the juror's educational history on his X account, after SB's testimony.
He later deleted it because he was called out for doxxing.
Among other things.
IMO.

Yep, but the thought crossed my mind that he is being "fed" info from the CW

Her tail light hit him in the eye?! That is just ludicrous, he really doesn't intend to be taken seriously with critical thinking like that, does he?

No, he is saying the spoiler up top hit him above the eye... arm into taillight.. brushing his knee.



I don't see this happening unless JOK was able to stand there like a brick but we all know that he was highly intoxicated, I just don't know how that works. I was just sharing what the CW theory may be at this point.

 

[waldojabba]

No back door. (real estate photos) And the back yard is completely fenced and gated so naughty Chloe girl couldn't get out and roam around the neighborhood. She was a biter and there are leash laws in the town.

https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/34-Fairview-Rd_Canton_MA_02021_M39682-88235

BBM
I think I am seeing a back door just to the right of the bulkhead doors as you face the house
jmo

 

[TDoc72]

Why do you imagine one of those three would not call an ambulance for John?

IMO b/c it was a fight. They were all drunk and didn’t want to get in trouble. I think if had truly been an accident, they would’ve called 911.

It's my contention that John may have heard men's voices in the yard and he went toward them. The gate in the fence is directly adjacent to where Karen had parked the car, so it would've been easy to hear voices there. They probably didn't call for help if the juvenile with them was somehow complicit in the injury,

I find this reasonable. I have those doors; we call them Bilco doors but I’m not sure if that’s a company or what. They are heavy and we haven’t used them in years. Also my stairs are steep, creepy, and spider-y.

I saw this on X yesterday... but it doesn't make sense to me either... it comes from a "reporter" that I believe is from CourtTV? I'm not even sure but he seems to push anything and everything for the CW, and has the opposite view of almost every other reporter in the courtroom all the time, so I usually ignore it haha

ETA: remember when they went to the scene with the jurors, Brennan told them or pointed it out to them while there to look at it. IIRC

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925346567751381095

This doesn’t make sense to me either. If it hit his eye, I’d expect to see broken bones around the eyes and nose. I don’t think a car could hit an eye and nothing else.

 

[cocomod]

welcome to our discussion @Bernie54 !

 

[Izzylizzy]

I saw this on X yesterday... but it doesn't make sense to me either... it comes from a "reporter" that I believe is from CourtTV? I'm not even sure but he seems to push anything and everything for the CW, and has the opposite view of almost every other reporter in the courtroom all the time, so I usually ignore it haha

ETA: remember when they went to the scene with the jurors, Brennan told them or pointed it out to them while there to look at it. IIRC

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925346567751381095

IMO:
John DePetro is a bloviating buffoon and Vinnie Politan should hang his head in shame for giving him a platform.
Then again since VP isn't anywhere near the best and brightest attorneys we have access to for their analyzing of trials it's not surprising JD is on his show.

 

[MerlinFalcon]

I saw this on X yesterday... but it doesn't make sense to me either... it comes from a "reporter" that I believe is from CourtTV? I'm not even sure but he seems to push anything and everything for the CW, and has the opposite view of almost every other reporter in the courtroom all the time, so I usually ignore it haha

ETA: remember when they went to the scene with the jurors, Brennan told them or pointed it out to them while there to look at it. IIRC

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925346567751381095

Ignoring him is your best bet. He is an attention seeker and for some reason he gets into the courtroom more than other reporters.

 

[lohrtabitha]

No clothing was missing from John. The clothing apparently was not attended to properly, having been left for weeks unprocessed.

No , I meant the clothing of whoever was the dragger . Perhaps BA or BH. The dufflebag was seen with Higgins that night when he said he went to move cars but didn't. I hope the defense can get him on the stand and talk about his lies.