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

[kuromiiiilove]

probably because 1165 and 1166 are the tow truck load and unload and this short distances.

i’ll have a look at the exhibit again tomorrow.

That’s fine, please do look. But again: if 1165 and 1166 are the tow load/unload, then which ignition cycle was Trooper Paul’s testing? You’re suggesting the car was moved, tested, and logged, all while skipping over an ignition cycle that Trooper Paul testified under oath was 1164. If they’re reassigning cycles, then they need to assign all of them. Not just the ones that support their theory.

 

[louvillian08]

Alessi will have a field day with cross. Even if you ignore all the absurd statements this witness made and everything he said he doesn’t know or can’t ever determine.

The car data has NO GPS component. The core of the CW’s argument is that because O’Keefe was in the car and we can (somewhat? Kinda, but with plenty of variance) tie the 3 point turn in the car data to his phone GPS locations, a similar reversing trigger event 8+ minutes later is her hitting him. There is nothing showing where the car was when this event (similar to a 3 point turn that she just did, for the 1st time ever since owning this car) happened. There is nothing showing when KR left 34 Fairview. The only time stamp we have is her arrival home at 12:36am.

1162-2 is much more likely to be KR missing a turn when driving to John’s house (like she just did on the way to 34 Fairview) and slamming into reverse to go back and make the turn, like she just did on the way to 34 Fairview. Creating 2 similar trigger events with the same mileage that would perfectly match the time it would take for her to drive home

ETA: forgot to add, 1162-2 that is NOT a collision or impact, not a pre-collision system event, and shows no typical indications of a collision like steering change, speed change, shifting gears, etc.

 

[bobbymkii]

Well I don't know what I was expecting to see today but it certainly wasn't this!

Karen Read trial recap: Crash reconstruction expert testifies

The Karen Read murder trial enters its sixth week on Tuesday after a long holiday break, with the prosecution expected to call its final witness.

www.nbcboston.com

 

[jepop]

CW can’t keep all their various stories straight - what a farce.

That kind of thing can happen pretty easily when you're trying to convert lies into truth. Jmo

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Well I don't know what I was expecting to see today but it certainly wasn't this!

Karen Read trial recap: Crash reconstruction expert testifies

The Karen Read murder trial enters its sixth week on Tuesday after a long holiday break, with the prosecution expected to call its final witness.

www.nbcboston.com

View attachment 589246

And yet some are mad about ARCCA’s reconstruction methods… MOO

 

[missy1974]

Ok, so if you believe she is guilty.. you probably liked his testimony. If you don't believe she is guilty... you probably liked his testimony lol

But if you are unsure... there is nothing he said, that was convincing, that the vehicle hit him.

Why didn't we hear about what kind of force that would be on his arm? or his knee? or his hip? And at that speed? What about how much force for his arm to break that taillight?

What about the no braking? if she wasn't braking at the point that the trigger ended, where did the car end up? and how do you determine that?



Omg, was Troooper Paul better then Welscher?

 

[Angelwatch]

Alessi will have a field day with cross. Even if you ignore all the absurd statements this witness made and everything he said he doesn’t know or can’t ever determine.

The car data has NO GPS component. The core of the CW’s argument is that because O’Keefe was in the car and we can (somewhat? Kinda, but with plenty of variance) tie the 3 point turn in the car data to his phone GPS locations, a similar reversing trigger event 8+ minutes later is her hitting him. There is nothing showing where the car was when this event (similar to a 3 point turn that she just did, for the 1st time ever since owning this car) happened. There is nothing showing when KR left 34 Fairview. The only time stamp we have is her arrival home at 12:36am.

1162-2 is much more likely to be KR missing a turn when driving to John’s house (like she just did on the way to 34 Fairview) and slamming into reverse to go back and make the turn, like she just did on the way to 34 Fairview. Creating 2 similar trigger events with the same mileage that would perfectly match the time it would take for her to drive home

You explained that perfectly.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1927451190104617013

 

[missy1974]

That’s fine, please do look. But again: if 1165 and 1166 are the tow load/unload, then which ignition cycle was Trooper Paul’s testing? You’re suggesting the car was moved, tested, and logged, all while skipping over an ignition cycle that Trooper Paul testified under oath was 1164. If they’re reassigning cycles, then they need to assign all of them. Not just the ones that support their theory.

awww don't make me go listen to Trooper Paul! When did he take the techstream data? This should be really easy to figure out. If he took the data, ran his tests, took the new data from his tests, this should be simpler then all of this. JMO

 

[Angelwatch]

Ok, so if you believe she is guilty.. you probably liked his testimony. If you don't believe she is guilty... you probably liked his testimony lol

But if you are unsure... there is nothing he said, that was convincing, that the vehicle hit him.

Why didn't we hear about what kind of force that would be on his arm? or his knee? or his hip? And at that speed? What about how much force for his arm to break that taillight?

What about the no braking? if she wasn't braking at the point that the trigger ended, where did the car end up? and how do you determine that?



Omg, was Troooper Paul better then Welscher?

He read from his report that the laceration patterns were consistent with a vehicle impact but didn't explain why that was. Hopefully, Alessi will get into how he came about his opinion because at this point, I don't see how a supposed side swipe could create a downward laceration pattern.

 

[louvillian08]

Ok, so if you believe she is guilty.. you probably liked his testimony. If you don't believe she is guilty... you probably liked his testimony lol

But if you are unsure... there is nothing he said, that was convincing, that the vehicle hit him.

Why didn't we hear about what kind of force that would be on his arm? or his knee? or his hip? And at that speed? What about how much force for his arm to break that taillight?

What about the no braking? if she wasn't braking at the point that the trigger ended, where did the car end up? and how do you determine that?



Omg, was Troooper Paul better then Welscher?

I don’t see how you could determine where the car ended up, at least from this data. Mathematically speaking, if you assume she slammed on the brake in the first second after the car stops recording, I’m sure you could calculate a minimum amount of additional distance the car would travel. But we don’t know how much longer she went in reverse, at what speed, etc.

The 87 feet he’s testifying about is just the distance covered in the car data. It’s physically impossible for that to be to total distance she travelled in reverse

 

[bobbymkii]

And yet some are mad about ARCCA’s reconstruction methods… MOO

I mean, ARCCA's glass cannon was a bit silly, but what the hell was this? Is he trying to join the blue man group? or the smurfs? or is he trying to prove a taillight bit a man up the full length of his arm and killed him to death?

JMO

 

[waldojabba]

I don’t see how you could determine where the car ended up, at least from this data. Mathematically speaking, if you assume she slammed on the brake in the first second after the car stops recording, I’m sure you could calculate a minimum amount of additional distance the car would travel. But we don’t know how much longer she went in reverse, at what speed, etc.

The 87 feet he’s testifying about is just the distance covered in the car data. It’s physically impossible for that to be to total distance she travelled in reverse

Acc to the Dr it was 34 ft forward and then 53 ft in reverse -so 87 in total
JMOI

 

[missy1974]

Acc to the Dr it was 34 ft forward and then 53 ft in reverse -so 87 in total
JMOI

And that is just what was recorded.. at the point the trigger stopped recording data, there was still no pressure on the brakes. Crazy.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

I know many of us here follow the trial closely and love diving into the weeds: key cycles, timestamps, witness behavior, all of it. But I keep wondering how deep the jury will actually go. Most jurors don’t have an excel sheet at home to track key cycles and tech stream events, you know?

If I were a juror, the Medical Examiner’s ruling alone would give me serious pause before convicting Karen. The fact that it was ruled “not consistent with a pedestrian strike by a car” isn’t nothing. That’s the Commonwealth’s own ME. Add to that: almost every CW witness has ended up scoring points for the defense during cross. The prosecution experts (especially on crash reconstruction) gave opinions that directly contradicted the defense’s, and vice versa. Jurors literally came forward after the trial and said they didn’t know who to believe and set much of the crash reconstruction data aside.

So here’s where I land: What in this trial has clearly and simply proven that John was struck by a car? That’s the foundation everything else depends on. And after all this time, that core fact still hasn’t been nailed down. Not for me, anyway. MOO

 

[louvillian08]

Acc to the Dr it was 34 ft forward and then 53 ft in reverse -so 87 in total
JMOI

He said it both ways throughout his testimony: 34 feet forward, reverse back to zero (34 feet) and then 53 feet reversing so 87 feet in reverse, AND the same way you just described it. It was very confusing.

Brennan said in his opening statement the Lexus traveled more than 70 feet in reverse so I’m leaning towards his testimony about 87 feet in reverse being the correct one. But who knows!

 

[missy1974]

I found when Trooper Paul got the techstream data.

February 2nd, 2023.

1 year and 1 day after he did his testing. I will listen to more of it later, but he describes all the tests he did, they seem to coincide with the 1164, and has the correct mileage. I am curious to know if the Defense has him on their witness list?

 

[justwannahelp]

I’ve never watched and am not familiar with what is “customary” in trials maybe or maybe not involving collisions. But one collision we DO know occurred is Karen’s vehicle hitting John’s. No one has SHOWN however whether or not that collision could have broken the tailight. The last witness SAID that it didn’t, but he didn’t PROVE that.

Would it be uncustomary to recreate that collision with the same vehicles? I truly believe (based on seeing wrecks and the aftermath of wrecks in my town ) that her tail light was cracked during the impact with John’s car.

Can’t they demonstrate this? Or is that not reasonable? I mean if he can paint his arm blue by rolling around the car then couldn’t they recreate a collision — an ACTUAL one that we KNOW occurred?

 

[kuromiiiilove]

So this is all in Dr. Welcher’s DIRECT exam. Wonder what will come up on cross.

“We don’t know exactly how JO was hit”

“We don’t know where in the techstream he was hit”

“We don’t have a point of impact”

“We don’t know impact speeds”

 

[Maat99]

So this is all in Dr. Welcher’s DIRECT exam. Wonder what will come up on cross.

“We don’t know exactly how JO was hit”

“We don’t know where in the techstream he was hit”

“We don’t have a point of impact”

“We don’t know impact speeds”

Instead of the weird blue paint thing (look! when something with blue paint touches my arm, it leaves blue paint!), maybe use that Lexus to show how running down a 215 object in reverse doesn’t register as anything in the vehicle computer.