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

[windrower]

Strategically, it would have been a mistake for Alessi to admit to anything with this guy.

The witness is at best a control freak. Alessi has more manners than anyone in that courthouse with most witnesses. Welcher's behavior was so far out of bounds even the Judge was sharp with him.
It took constant reframing for Alessi to get any answers out of him.
So much for no dog in the fight.
I am sure Welcher's behavior and attitude wasn't lost on the jury.
Whats all the fuss ? You are an expert witness -science - just answer the questions.
Very foolish manchild.
JMO

So, what is he afraid someone is going to find out about him?

That Burgess Effect and now the Welcher Factor?

 

[bobbymkii]

One, because I think the prosecution has got a lot to knock them with, especially with the recovered car data, and two because I think Alessi might be using them to get in all the points they would make in his cross of Welcher, to avoid the prosecution hammering them.

I think the defence might just choose to focus on Proctor and dog bite lady.

Particularly IMO Welcher has proven she did not break her taillight by nudging John's car.

Well I'll try and be as polite about this as I can - but there is no way the defense is leaving ARCCA in the bullpen for the final stretch.

Their expert evidence is the sort of thing most defendants could only dream of. Welcher was significantly better for the CW than Trooper Paul was, but that really isn't saying a lot.

JMO

 

[Leilei]

Re Dr Welcher, I saw an expert who is very well qualified and confident in his work. I don't think Alessi made any headway with him all day. What a waste of a day of cross.

I can see the defence not calling ARCCA at this rate.

IMO

Oh, they'll call them.
IMO.

 

[PamCake]

So they should be upset at how much this cost the CW. I would be. I'm upset and I'm not even in the same country!!!!

When Alessi first said 44k... I was 'meh, that isn't horrible, more then I'd have paid, but okay' ... thennnnn the rest came out, shocking!

I wonder how much the defense has paid ARCCA at this point, will be interesting to compare.

I know things cost more nowadays but geesh, blue paint cannot be that MUCH!

I am from Mass and I am really pissed off about it. I’ll just add that to all the other things in my state that irk me, lol.

 

[Warwick7]

Welcher keeps changing his stuff, going on his laptop….even when the judge has told him to stop

I didn't catch that she did that.

 

[shotgun09]

Season 1 : CW has Trooper Paul, who says " It just did" to explain how, why and when. Epic Fail
Enter Defense, who has ARCCA wipe the floor with the CW's theory

Season2 : Enter Brennan, who will show them all! He will get ARCAA off the case, just watch..... Oh....Epic Fail again....
CW now brings in the Aperture Boys.....who say, 'It just did' in so many words, like.." We didn't have that information", or "We don't know how or when or exactly where" it happened. But, they did have blue paint...so there's that.

Such a miscarriage of Justice ! What a farce! What a waste !
MOO

 

[Izzylizzy]

 

[missy1974]

Well I'll try and be as polite about this as I can - but there is no way the defense is leaving ARCCA in the bullpen for the final stretch.

Their expert evidence is the sort of thing most defendants could only dream of. Welcher was significantly better for the CW than Trooper Paul was, but that really isn't saying a lot.

JMO

Right, and why would they leave them out?
They have actually done some of the testing that Alessi asked about, and the reason why Alessi asked him certain questions. They were not worried about doing a test and having to defend it in a court of law like Welcher admitted today.

And sure, they have paid ARCCA to do additional testing, but I will be shocked if the amount is even close to the 400K Aperture was paid. And not like the defense already employs an accident reconstructionist, like the CW does. They (ARCCA) had the least biased experts I have ever witnessed testifying. They really did have no dog in the fight when they got involved. They were asked to prove or disprove a scenario and that is what they did.

Alessi said he was only half way through his cross

I want to hear more about key cycles...
I want to hear more about the bump in the driveway...

I'm confident that Welcher will talk in circles, but it will give us an idea of what the defense will be arguing when it's their turn

 

[jepop]

Well I'll try and be as polite about this as I can - but there is no way the defense is leaving ARCCA in the bullpen for the final stretch.

Their expert evidence is the sort of thing most defendants could only dream of. Welcher was significantly better for the CW than Trooper Paul was, but that really isn't saying a lot.

JMO

I think Welcher's a fraud and just gave the cw what they wanted, objective methodology be damned. It's not complicated. He needed to talk over Alessi continuously to try and avoid exposure on cross. Imo.

But the point will be made crystal clear once ARCCA testifies, so that's ok. Welcher's come down will keep for later.

So, yes, of course ARCCA will be called; to conclude that the defense would not call them because of Welcher simply makes no sense. Nonetheless, I can well imagine some on the jury have already written off Welcher. Imo he is far less trustworthy than Burgess and that is saying something. To me he has no credibility because he looked and sounded like a liar and is arrogantly refusing to be transparent under cross examination.Moo

 

[Soulmagent]

One, because I think the prosecution has got a lot to knock them with, especially with the recovered car data, and two because I think Alessi might be using them to get in all the points they would make in his cross of Welcher, to avoid the prosecution hammering them.

I think the defence might just choose to focus on Proctor and dog bite lady.

Particularly IMO Welcher has proven she did not break her taillight by nudging John's car.

He actually proved to me it was not broken like that when she hit his truck. Had it been pieces would have fell off. The light was alleged to have been a full intact light by the CW and KR says it was cracked after 5 am.
Also photos of the broken tail light do have rub marks from where it rubbed the bumper. Christina Hanley's photos show it. You can see the lens stayed on the truck as the equal pressure marks across the lens, in pieces that were broken later and then matched together again.

 

[mzmarymac]

OK throwing this out again, maybe in a different way to get some kind of response?

I know a lot of people here started out thinking she was guilty and then as the trial(s) went on, we determined she was innocent. (Or at the very least NGBARD.)

I know there are some people who thought she was guilty from the getgo and that their opinion has not changed throughout the trial(s.)

Is there ANYONE who thought she was not guilty and the trial(s) have changed your opinion to guilty?

 

[Angelwatch]

Re Dr Welcher, I saw an expert who is very well qualified and confident in his work. I don't think Alessi made any headway with him all day. What a waste of a day of cross.

I can see the defence not calling ARCCA at this rate.

IMO

I’d like to understand your point better—mind unpacking that a bit? It’s a little too out there for me to wrap my mind around.

 

[Soulmagent]

If he wasn’t going to hit himself at 20MPH, maybe he should have come up with an alternate method to prove his theory. MOO

He had a brand new Lexus and blue an yellow paint. What do you want from the guy? Plus he had so many other peoples opinion to fraudulently adopt as his own opinion.

 

[Izzylizzy]

Apr 29, 2025 MASSACHUSETTS
"Daniel Wolfe works for then engineering and crash reconstruction firm ARCCA, and he testified in an evidentiary hearing on Monday (April 28, day 5), in Karen Read's murder case in Massachusetts. The jury was not present for his testimony.
Karen Read's lawyer Robert "Bob" Alessi of the law firm DLA Piper questioned Wolfe in cross-exam. He's questions are softer on cross than prosecutors' questions in direct because prosecutors are the ones trying to persuade Judge Beverly Cannone that the ARCCA testimony is so tainted it shouldn't be presented to the jury.'

 

[ShadyLady]

Right, and why would they leave them out?
They have actually done some of the testing that Alessi asked about, and the reason why Alessi asked him certain questions. They were not worried about doing a test and having to defend it in a court of law like Welcher admitted today.

And sure, they have paid ARCCA to do additional testing, but I will be shocked if the amount is even close to the 400K Aperture was paid. And not like the defense already employs an accident reconstructionist, like the CW does. They (ARCCA) had the least biased experts I have ever witnessed testifying. They really did have no dog in the fight when they got involved. They were asked to prove or disprove a scenario and that is what they did.

Alessi said he was only half way through his cross

I want to hear more about key cycles...
I want to hear more about the bump in the driveway...

I'm confident that Welcher will talk in circles, but it will give us an idea of what the defense will be arguing when it's their turn

I want to hear again how John's HAND hit the CENTER of the tail lights and splintered them, with no blood anywhere on the suv and no broken bones....hands of steel.

Yes, good Dr said that. "Hand hit the center of the lights".

 

[Angelwatch]

I want to hear again how John's HAND hit the CENTER of the tail lights and splintered them, with no blood anywhere on the suv and no broken bones....hands of steel.

Yes, good Dr hand that. "Hit the center of the lights".

I thought I misunderstood him when he said that. And then he made it seem like maybe there were broken bones that weren’t caught by the ME.

 

[ShadyLady]

I thought I misunderstood him when he said that. And then he made it seem like maybe there were broken bones that weren’t caught by the ME.

I bet he will regret saying that.....

 

[OldCop]

If he wasn’t going to hit himself at 20MPH, maybe he should have come up with an alternate method to prove his theory. MOO

Of course he could have used a crash test dummy like most crash reconstruction experts would. Did anyone catch it when he said it might damage the Lexus? Did he mess up by saying this? Doesn’t that mean that JOK was not hit by this vehicle? It wasn’t damaged.
He is implying that his 2mph experiment, er, I mean test, would match JOK’s injuries if he was hit with a vehicle going 20mph.
I sure hope his superior attitude, (I’m smart. You all are dumb.), and constant mumbo jumbo does not fool our jurors.

 

[OldCop]

Season 1 : CW has Trooper Paul, who says " It just did" to explain how, why and when. Epic Fail
Enter Defense, who has ARCCA wipe the floor with the CW's theory

Season2 : Enter Brennan, who will show them all! He will get ARCAA off the case, just watch..... Oh....Epic Fail again....
CW now brings in the Aperture Boys.....who say, 'It just did' in so many words, like.." We didn't have that information", or "We don't know how or when or exactly where" it happened. But, they did have blue paint...so there's that.

Such a miscarriage of Justice ! What a farce! What a waste !
MOO

Right. They don’t know who, what, when, where, or why, but they can do a dog and pony show and make up a story that fits their ending.

 

[Forest_Wood]

I'm just getting to watch today's proceedings now. Looking at the blue paint, has anyone noticed that the paint goes nowhere near the elbow, where JOK had what looked like bite marks.