MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #30 Retrial

[missy1974]

The "Fun Fact" is interesting... I have been half listening to a podcast that he has done in the past year or so, mostly about heavy trucks. He makes a really good point in the podcast which I will also link, that accident reconstructionists can't do it all, and pulling data from vehicles can be tricky, this is all he does so he is good at it, if I understood right.

Just heard him say this... on paper it seems like more data = more answers, and in practice, it equals more questions, and you need someone who can provide those answers....... the more data, the more modules... ... means there is more work for us as the investigators to understand and explain them because it's already at a point where, we do this and feel behind, so someone that doesn't do it at all isn't going to be able to suddenly pick through it... @ the 1:41:30ish mark of the podcast.

I can see where he will be useful for the defense. JMO

podcast:

Our Team - DELTA |v|

The DELTA |V| promises a commitment to excellence and cutting-edge innovation in the accident reconstruction field.

www.deltavinc.com

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Help me remeber who he is???

DiSogra, who has a Masters of Science in Mechanical Engineering, is a licensed Professional Engineer and Director of Engineering at DeltaV, an accident reconstruction and biomechanics firm. In my opinion, he is on the stand to walk the jury through how Shanon Burgess attempted to shape the narrative by manipulating data, specifically related to clock variances. DiSogra’s role will be to break that down and explain how that kind of “adjustment” isn’t supported by objective reconstruction methodology. The defense is clearly setting the stage to show that Burgess wasn’t following the science, he was fitting the science to the story. (IMO)

ETA: link and screenshot of his professional bio from a 2023 course he taught with the Society of American Engineers: https://www.sae.org/learn/content/c...MI_-Wim8XJjQMVWO3jBx2yvQgaEAAYASAAEgJltPD_BwE

 

[missy1974]

Do you think the prosecution are planning to show that evidence to the court any time soon?

Apparently not lol They rested today.

 

[lohrtabitha]

Did her lawyers tell her it was ok or was it her decision? Regardless, I agree with you, there is no evidence of a car strike but her words are the Commonwealth’s best “evidence”.

From what I have seen in this trial, it's the only evidence that CW has. Geez, what a waste of taxpayer money.

 

[keek]

Actually it does. Think about his injuries... There weren't many. The main and worst injury is the back of his head. There isn't a ton of blood in the snow... I can see her thinking he fell, but isn't terribly injured.

Yes, his mortal wound was on the back of his head. A visual to a person who has never seen such a thing or the depth and damage inside his brain, spine, may also think it was a gash. A simple gash. No stabbings, no gunshots.. obvious signs of mortally being wounded. The damage was not visible at that time. I sounds from initial reports, he was just laying there on his back, with some blood drops. Seeing the blood she may of had the initial response of being in a fist fight, not killed during it. IMO

 

[keek]

Apparently not lol They rested today.

We do know that for sure.

 

[missy1974]

I think I've had my fill of online youtubing or podcasting lawyers with some previous cases. I rather like to form my own opinions, like the jurors do, day by day, just listening to the trial. Just my preference.

I think a lot of us are here for that reason, we like to watch the testimony ourselves. However, you keep referencing the documentary/interviews, and the trial so far has had some clips from them, but a very small percentage of the actual shows. I have not watched them, so can't comment on them, I don't even know how long the shows are.

I am here watching the trial, and trying to base my opinions on what is being presented to the jury. I usually skip over any posts related to the interviews because unless the whole show is admitted as evidence, right now, I just don't care about them lol

Am I the only one that has not watched these shows? LOL

 

[missy1974]

I form my own opinions on on a defendant's guilt or innocence by reviewing the facts and testimony and weighing the evidence of the case being tried. I also admit to being encouraged when a respected youtube attorney also shares my viewpoint. JMOO

I like LYK.. he points out things that are good and bad for both sides! He knows he gets hate for some of the things he says, but he still says them haha

 

[keek]

I think a lot of us are here for that reason, we like to watch the testimony ourselves. However, you keep referencing the documentary/interviews, and the trial so far has had some clips from them, but a very small percentage of the actual shows. I have not watched them, so can't comment on them, I don't even know how long the shows are.

I am here watching the trial, and trying to base my opinions on what is being presented to the jury. I usually skip over any posts related to the interviews because unless the whole show is admitted as evidence, right now, I just don't care about them lol

Am I the only one that has not watched these shows? LOL

No you are not. We watched the actual trials with testimony from all called from the CW and Defense. Not the shows, the moneymakers, most are there for the shock value and exploitation, not truth and justice for the victim. You can tell easily by comments IMO

 

[kuromiiiilove]

I think a lot of us are here for that reason, we like to watch the testimony ourselves. However, you keep referencing the documentary/interviews, and the trial so far has had some clips from them, but a very small percentage of the actual shows. I have not watched them, so can't comment on them, I don't even know how long the shows are.

I am here watching the trial, and trying to base my opinions on what is being presented to the jury. I usually skip over any posts related to the interviews because unless the whole show is admitted as evidence, right now, I just don't care about them lol

Am I the only one that has not watched these shows? LOL

I haven’t watched any of them except the Dateline episode. I’m only really interested in the trial proceedings. I find the ‘documentary’ style interviews and episodes kind of.. how to put this.. edited for theatrics? MOO

 

[lohrtabitha]

Snipped by me for focus...

"It wasn't until later that Karen realized she had blood on her. Jen McCabe in her 911 call... a man in the snow... not omg he looks beat up or is bleeding, etc."

And there was KR having already stated,
John's dead.

I hit him.

Oh my God, did I hit him?

and also a few more things to JO's niece.

A lot of things to overlook, IMO

.. a man in the snow... not omg he looks beat up or is bleeding, etc. Here we go: the infamous a man in the snow line. Not her friend. Not John Okeefe but a man (a stranger in the snow) Just like her husband's description: " tell them that the man never came into the house." Not John, not our friend John but that man.Two impersonal statements from one lovely couple(Not!)that to me, have third party guilt written all over them. Mo

 

[keek]

.. a man in the snow... not omg he looks beat up or is bleeding, etc. Here we go: the infamous a man in the snow line. Not her friend. Not John Okeefe but a man (a stranger in the snow) Just like her husband's description: " tell them that the man never came into the house." Not John, not our friend John but that man.Two impersonal statements from one lovely couple(Not!)that to me, have third party guilt written all over them. Mo

Pretty disgusting headline of course. IMO Says it ALL about that kind of 'show'. IMO

 

[Anniesflowers]

Right yeh I’ve watched it. Either way filmed during, it shouldn’t have aired between the trials. Again I don’t know what her lawyers were thinking.

I actually found the docuseries to support my decision of NG. I found her refreshingly honest, even when some of her statements wouldn’t necessarily benefit her. All of her wondering if she hit him, clipped him, etc., point to someone running through scenarios in their head and not admissions of guilt. Karen was surprised when she woke up and didn’t find OJO home. She knew he wouldn’t leave his niece home alone, which is why she didn’t jump to the conclusion that he slept at the Albert’s. IMO.

 

[Maat99]

I like LYK.. he points out things that are good and bad for both sides! He knows he gets hate for some of the things he says, but he still says them haha

I do too. I watched the first trial with an open mind but when they got to Trooper Paul, I started feeling like I was crazy - how on earth was that supposed to be expert testimony? I didn’t want a pro KR take - I legitimately wanted to know if what I was watching was normal or completely out of pocket. I found LYK and thought he provided some really good context around normal expert witness testimony.

 

[missy1974]

I haven’t watched any of them except the Dateline episode. I’m only really interested in the trial proceedings. I find the ‘documentary’ style interviews and episodes kind of.. how to put this.. edited for theatrics? MOO

That is exactly why I have avoided them. I have followed some cases from the time a person went missing or killed to the end of trials and everything in between. I have not done that with this case, I have gone back to Trial 1 testimony sometimes, but then it all gets a bit muddled with what was in what trial. I try not to click on news stories... they rarely tell the whole story too lol We have actual trial testimony, it's easy to link if it was said or done in the trial

Glad I am not the only one that hasn't watched them lol

 

[jepop]

I think a lot of us are here for that reason, we like to watch the testimony ourselves. However, you keep referencing the documentary/interviews, and the trial so far has had some clips from them, but a very small percentage of the actual shows. I have not watched them, so can't comment on them, I don't even know how long the shows are.

I am here watching the trial, and trying to base my opinions on what is being presented to the jury. I usually skip over any posts related to the interviews because unless the whole show is admitted as evidence, right now, I just don't care about them lol

Am I the only one that has not watched these shows? LOL

I've never watched them. I am not interested in 1) non evidence, 2) out context clips, and 3) the misinterpretation of a partial interview transcript that Imo itself amounts to a confirmation bias.

This has been gone through already in prior threads and I assume the same people will continue to believe what they like in regard to this specific partial transcript.

Moo the various docos as a whole are not admissible evidence for the jury's consideration in this trial.

 

[keek]

I actually found the docuseries to support my decision of NG. I found her refreshingly honest, even when some of her statements wouldn’t necessarily benefit her. All of her wondering if she hit him, clipped him, etc., point to someone running through scenarios in their head and not admissions of guilt. Karen was surprised when she woke up and didn’t find OJO home. She knew he wouldn’t leave his niece home alone, which is why she didn’t jump to the conclusion that he slept at the Albert’s. IMO.

Oh I def do not mean KR'S thoughts, they are real and of herself. Those interviews with her have value, but TAKEN with witness testimonies, which we have seen hostile like, defensive from the CW and intelligent and researched ones from true experts from the defense. Just worked out that way. IMO

 

[Anniesflowers]

Oh I def do not mean KR'S thoughts, they are real and of herself. Those interviews with her have value, but TAKEN with witness testimonies, which we have seen hostile like, defensive from the CW and intelligent and researched ones from true experts from the defense. Just worked out that way. IMO

Totally agree!

 

[missy1974]

I actually found the docuseries to support my decision of NG. I found her refreshingly honest, even when some of her statements wouldn’t necessarily benefit her. All of her wondering if she hit him, clipped him, etc., point to someone running through scenarios in their head and not admissions of guilt. Karen was surprised when she woke up and didn’t find OJO home. She knew he wouldn’t leave his niece home alone, which is why she didn’t jump to the conclusion that he slept at the Albert’s. IMO.

BBM See.. this.. I didn't know that, but would sway me to more of the 'of course she was freaking out' train of thought.

On the same topic .. sorta ...

Do we not all have some sort of intuition? A mother's intuition... a woman's intuition...
It has always bugged my kids that I seemed to know things just because I did... lol Or sometimes I have this overwheling feeling that something is going to happen .. and then it does...

I can tell you what my husband is going to do or say before he says or does it... is that intuition or knowing someone so well that I just know?

Her saying he wouldn't leave the niece alone... is this from past behaviour that she knows well? is it from discussions they have had in the past? Or did she just know that?

It's all very interesting.

 

[jepop]

I actually found the docuseries to support my decision of NG. I found her refreshingly honest, even when some of her statements wouldn’t necessarily benefit her. All of her wondering if she hit him, clipped him, etc., point to someone running through scenarios in their head and not admissions of guilt. Karen was surprised when she woke up and didn’t find OJO home. She knew he wouldn’t leave his niece home alone, which is why she didn’t jump to the conclusion that he slept at the Albert’s. IMO.

I have found similar in relation to the admitted clips, out of context as they are. I believe the defense in closing will in some manner reference the attempted emotional manipulation of the jury by the prosecution, pointing out how that is the best they have when the real evidence is so inadequate. The jury will get the message that attempted character assassination and appeals to potential bias and prejudice is not evidence of guilt. Jmo.

ETA or IOW, contrary to the CW's strategy, this is meant to be a prosecution not a persecution.