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

[PamCake]

Is it possible that it can be turned off?

I have wondered if 1162 is actually her backing up and if it was actually as fast as the CW is saying... why didn't slamming on the brakes also record as a trigger? If she doesn't slam on the brakes, she runs him over ... which we know that didn't happen in any theory put forth so far

Yes. What is most interesting to me, is this defence, which front runs so much of the narrative, is studiously silent on all this.

For instance Bederow, in the Tragos interview, talked about the trashing of Burgess's credibility, which means the jury can't believe him about the clock drift calculation. Yet Bederow never argued he can't be believed about the anchoring of 1162. He also talked multiple times about Proctor planting glass and tail light weeks later, but the conversation ignored the 5-6 pieces found that day, by SERT, when Proctor did not even have custody of the Lexus in the Sallyport before the search started.

I have wondered, if AJ would blame Jen for this, but now I think he'll just accuse Proctor of it and ignore that the sally port theory can't work.

So it's interesting, that even in the best out of court arguments the defence has, these points were not addressed at all despite them having all the evidence and expert reports. IMO they would front run a theory for all this if they had it.

IMO

Those 5-6 pieces might be the ones that were not able to fit in the reconstruction of the taillight in the lab. In other words they might be from some random junkyard car...

 

[rescuemom]

The first jury didn’t go this deep with anything. It will be interesting to hear jury #2 take on the timestamps. IMO, the variances are too confusing to figure out. Every clock needs adjustments and it’s like Alice in Wonderland. I think they’ll focus on whether JOK’s body shows evidence he was hit by a car. ARCCA and the ME state his injuries were not consistent with car collision.

This trial is too technical, really into the weeds. Probably by design. I don't know the make up of this jury as to age, education, etc. I hope they have some common sense.

I heard an interview with just one juror...with the bow tie from T1. After he spoke, I wondered if he listened to the same trial I did. The things he remembered or spoke about were so different than what I took away from it. Still there were 2 NGs until Bev hijacked it. If it comes down to her some how railroading this trial, there is just no justuce.

 

[PamCake]

I think I'm going to take a 'wait and see' approach. I don't see the defense saying that at all right now.

Gaffney didn't botch anything, that was clarified in the cross. She did a chip off, which can unfortunately damage the board (it was brought up in a pretrial hearing too that I just happened to listen to on the weekend lol) The SD card, she didn't take it off because there was no way to read it at the time she did the chip off. That is in testimony too.

This is my understanding as of right now from Burgess' testimony:

He did a report in Jan 2025 in this report, he never mentions techstream at all.

DiSogra did a report responding to and disputing Burgess' Jan 25 report, submitted March 2025.

Burgess said that DiSogra's report prompted him to supplement his report.

Burgess does this supplement and sends to the CW on May 8th. But in new report he references "techstream" now and also mentions collision, both of which were not in his original report.

Burgess says from the SD card, he was able to get time on/time off times for the Lexus. But those times are still not connected to key cycles and trigger events also do not have timestamps. He does try to use known times of the car starting/shutting off to trace back the key cycles IMO But most of this info is what we already knew, it's just confirming it with timestamps from the Lexus now. I did notice that they did not do any timestamps after the 29th of January, I suspect those will come in later through a witness that actually analyzed that data.

So let me try to do a quick backwards key cycle with what we know... and what we learned that the CW is saying right now...

1067 - CW is saying this is Trooper Pauls testing now (I think)
1066 - Parking car in sallyport at Canton
1065 - Loading on tow truck
1064 - trip to Deighton
1063 - 5amish trip out to look for JOK and to JM's.
1062 - Waterfall to 34F to 1Meadows

Do you know what they didn't account for? At some point on the 30th of January, the car was turned around in the sallyport. Jackson specifically showed this video to YB and made him read the timestamp, it was the 30th and the car was turned around. Trooper Paul didn't do his testing until the 1st.

I think if the defense was going to dispute that 1162 key cycle, this wasn't the witness to do it because Burgess was relying solely on Whiffin and Welscher's reports and information he received from LE officers (not Trooper Paul's report though) and was disputing DiSogra saying he was wrong on his times. He did not look at the data himself IIRC.

All JMO and I look forward to more testimony because it is still not 100% clear.

Great catch Missy!!

 

[Warwick7]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1927071955376656433

 

[missy1974]

Great catch Missy!!

haha I don't know if it is... my mind gets bogged down with this stuff, and like someone else posted today... for the jurors, this stuff may not even matter! On big breaks like this, 5 dang days... we tend to go over and over stuff. I know some of you probably want to vomit seeing the same topics come up again .. (sorry lol).

In every scenario I can think of, even including her backing up, maybe hitting him, maybe side swiping him, whatever scenario you can think of... I always end up with more questions then answers. I really do hope the "experts" will be able to explain their theories clearly. Do I think they will have it figured out? NOPE! I think they will all come up with their own version of what happened and it will come down to credibility, likeability, etc. It is kind of sad that no one will actually know what happened IMO

I have even considered that no one did anything to him and he did it to himself, his alcohol level was so high that night and Dr. Wolf throwing in the tidbit of "drunks falling over and hitting their head" really stuck out to me. (I know.. there are questions even with that scenario lol)

Anyway, all JMO

 

[Warwick7]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1927074053644222542

 

[missy1974]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1927071955376656433

hmmm this seems kinda random... do you know what he is referring to?

ARCCA isn't out... so not sure why he would make that comment?

 

[ShadyLady]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1927074053644222542

Exactly what I was thinking this morning. Where is that car now?

 

[Warwick7]

hmmm this seems kinda random... do you know what he is referring to?

ARCCA isn't out... so not sure why he would make that comment?

Reading the comments gives good insight.

 

[Warwick7]

Exactly what I was thinking this morning. Where is that car now?

Ikr?!!!

 

[Angelwatch]

This trial is too technical, really into the weeds. Probably by design. I don't know the make up of this jury as to age, education, etc. I hope they have some common sense.

I heard an interview with just one juror...with the bow tie from T1. After he spoke, I wondered if he listened to the same trial I did. The things he remembered or spoke about were so different than what I took away from it. Still there were 2 NGs until Bev hijacked it. If it comes down to her some how railroading this trial, there is just no justuce.

I agree it’s too technical. A jury could take days trying to piece the time stamps and key cycles together. Some of them are reported to not even take notes. I guess we’ll have to wait and see what the CW reconstructionist says. I do know what ARCCA has stated, and I agree with them that the science and physics is hard to overcome. He wasn’t hit by a vehicle.

 

[Izzylizzy]

AJ's Opening.
Right out of the gate he said "the evidence in this case will establish above everything else, 3 points"

 

[Izzylizzy]

@ 2:20 AJ addresses Trooper Proctor during opening statement.
How can the defense not call Proctor after this?

 

[Forest_Wood]

In preparation for Welcher's testimony tomorrow, here is Dr Wolfe's testimony.

Two things that stand out so far are:

At about 14:15: He noticed that the photographs taken by LE didn't allow for a global perspective or for "stepping into" the evidence. Instead the pics were close-ups so he couldn't tell where the evidence was in relation to all the other evidence.

Also, at about 16:30, he talks about the damage to the vehicle, which was primarily to the rear right taillight. He talks about seeing very little damage otherwise. He would expect to see damage to the bumper because of the force of the collision would cause the bumper to become unmounted or unclipped, especially at higher speeds over 15mph.

He found the damage was not consistent with a pedestrian strike because it was so isolated to the taillight.

ETA: Around 43:30, Dr Wolfe stated that he would not expect a shoe to come off if it's a side swipe with just an arm, but if his entire body was involved, then yes, he could see a shoe coming off.

 

[Luna20]

I went back to re-watch the testimony of the neurosurgeon. While Alessi gave him the utmost respect, he gave him no time on that stand at all. In M00 I think Brennan was shocked.

Instead of Alessi going on and on with cross it was one simple question, "...you’re not a forensic pathologist. You deal with live brains not dead ones. And oh this injury could have been from a fall in a basement, right? ..."

And that's it. Alessi completely dismisses him like I have no time for you. Your opinion is irrelevant to this case. It was brilliant.

More genius lawyering. That neurosurgeon thought he would be on the stand boasting all day long. But, instead, he got to take an early flight home. It was epic. The defense tossed him out like they have no time for it. M00

That was brilliant! So far, this is in the top five of the courtroom’s best moments.

The neurosurgeon reminded me of a Mafia boss. A little on the slick side-silver white hair. “I make my wife an expresso at eight-o-seven every morning” (guessing on the exact time). An interesting tidbit tucked in there to end on.

 

[iusedtofloat]

That was brilliant! So far, this is in the top five of the courtroom’s best moments.

The neurosurgeon reminded me of a Mafia boss. A little on the slick side-silver white hair. “I make my wife an expresso at eight-o-seven every morning” (guessing on the exact time). An interesting tidbit tucked in there to end on.

agreed, absolutely genius on alessi's part. i'd pay a hefty amount of money (if i had any) to experience what one day in that man's super-brain is like. he assesses and analyzes situations like THAT and manages to be ultra-logical while polite and kind. really appreciate his addition to this team

 

[iusedtofloat]

Beginning at 33:40 to 35:45 sums up that a vehicle did not hit Mr John O'Keefe and what may have come into contact with his head.

cough cough, "a BAT could cause it..."
my addition: gym equipment could cause it...

it will never cease to shock me the amount of dancing around the facts people will do. absolutely 100% john wasn't hit by a car, there is no way his body could've ended up there unless he did "pirouettes" (still remember spitting my drink out at that from trial 1) and these would've had to have been quite the miraculous, magical, specific pirouettes to end up where he ended up.

 

[SteveS]

The pirouette (or similar) ideas of JOK becoming off-balance by being bumped slightly, or side-swiped -- while the cw speaks of those in passing with witnesses, and tries to include those in their theory to the jury of what might have happened, none of those really support the cw's case at all, but rather create major issues in the validity of their case.

If it's minor (or no) contact with a car, where he staggers and swerves, then ...
1 How do they BARD distinguish he was even hit (vs a slip and fall on his own due to drunkenness),
2 How do you get BARD "intent" by KR to hit him, or even BARD that she knew what happened and drove away, or BARD that hers was the car involved, in any of those scenarios?
3 And most of all, how do they account for all those tail light pieces, since none of those scenarios would break a tail light at all, much less into many pieces?

 

[SteveS]

The question of how a single human body, unsupported, could break and shatter a tail light by bumping into it, that's the huge smoking gun AGAINST the cw's case. And there's no way to get past this reality.

We don't need experts to help us understand this.

The problem is that a free-standing 250-lb body doesn't have enough force (mass and resistance) on its own to do damage to a hardened tail light. It would need to be MUCH MUCH heavier, or it would need to be rooted (or backed by something solid), to create MUCH more resistance force.

There's a very easy way to envision the science of that, that we all can easily understand. Instead of proposing that the car goes 24 mph with the human being still, what if we had the human go 24 mph with the car being still? It's the same collision force on the car itself.

24 mph? That's about the speed of a very fast runner in the Olympics or football receiver breaking free for a TD. We see them on TV.

So in your mind's eye, envision that a sprinter runs a sprint to the finish line. But there's a car waiting at the finish line, unavoidable, and they run full speed into its taillight. What will happen to the taillight? Nothing. The human bounces off, hurt, but the car and its tail light will just sit there. The soft and smaller human body won't generate enough force to impact the bigger, more solid, harder, even if the runner tries his hardest to somehow make the collision more forceful. Even if we don't know the science, we generally know how those forces of mass, speed, and resistance tend to work, because we see illustrations happen in other ways all the time. We have even bumped into cars at times, or seen people do so. We generally get it.

So once we understand JOK could not have broken the tail light, because he wasn't that big and he wasn't rooted in place, then how did those tail light pieces get there? They really don't fit at all. Those pieces are not only a huge problem with this case for the cw, but also the smoking gun that something nefarious is in play in all this. LE is corrupt in this jurisdiction, and it all needs to be investigated so that JOK can get real justice.

 

[Lilibet]

Asking for information please. I haven’t followed this case with much attention except to know that this is the second trial. It’s very confusing to pop in to. I’m curious to know why some think she is not guilty and some think she is.
It seems that her car couldn’t have killed him and yet she was worried she had hit him. So can both sides give me brief explanations of why you think she is guilty or not guilty. I’d really appreciate a list of points on either side, so I can follow the rest of the trial without going nuts. Thank you in advance.