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

[waldojabba]

I'm still trying to figure out how a 4000 pound SUV sideswipes someone so hard the taillight breaks into 47 pieces but just leaves strange markings on his arm that don't match, he's supposed to have laid there for 5 hours in the freezing weather but no frostbite and high body temp.

And the reason you will never figure that out @tara83 is because obviously it never happened.
(which I know you know)
If it did the Commonwealth would have shown you how.
Their "expert "would have modeled that.
Instead he dressed up as the victim and got blue paint on himself. He then proceeded to talk about the volume of slides -130 of them ( like a kid who wants extra credit ) but those slides told a story about Aperture not a story of how John died.
I'll say it again his opinion is not science based - it's based off the LE reports and tailored to Brennan and Tully's narrative.
If the CW wanted a science based report they had one sent to them for free from ARCCA. But they knew better than science. And they then buried it in a 3000 page discovery dump to the D. I question whether they even read it. We all know how LE loves it when the FBI gets involved in their turf.
And that's where we are today.
They thought she would take a plea. Proctor et al, the people involved, know how to work the system, they control the system. They did not expect push back.
It's a bad arrest and my bet is if they could they would take it back at this point they would.
But they cannot - they absolutely cannot lose face and open them selves up. So they double down.
They add the slippery mob lawyer and hire a jack### expert, who says what you need him to say and he can duck questions all day long if the price is right.
As a taxpayer I find it really is a bad look, a total waste and it infuriates me.

SHAME ON THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

jmo

 

[arielilane]

Ive been wondering if Alessi is being used as the fall guy. He’s not a trial lawyer. Apparently, he is leading attorney at this time. The other attorneys are sitting at defense table on their cellphones and laptops. Time will tell.

During cross he yelled a lot, rambles on and on about nothing, many times made no sense, appeared confused at times, and today he lost his composure… got paranoid? Refer to video.


On cross Alessi could not handle Dr. Welcher; and he didnt need to do almost two days. An engineer no matter if software, mechanical, chemical or whatever doesnt matter they are thorough when explaining how things are/how things work; they are clear, concise, and detailed. There is no way around it. They are meticulous and like accuracy. I supposed Alessi doesnt understand how many engineers are.

Another opinion of mine.




The prosecution has rested its case against Karen Read. Here’s what else happened in and outside of the courtroom this morning.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1928163746574131568

 

[jepop]

Ive been wondering if Alessi is being used as the fall guy. He’s not a trial lawyer. Apparently, he is leading attorney at this time. The other attorneys are sitting at defense table on their cellphones and laptops. Time will tell.

During cross he yelled a lot, rambles on and on about nothing, many times made no sense, appeared confused at times, and today he lost his composure… got paranoid? Refer to video.


On cross Alessi could not handle Dr. Welcher; and he didnt need to do almost two days. An engineer no matter if software, mechanical, chemical or whatever doesnt matter they are thorough when explaining how things are/how things work; they are clear, concise, and detailed. There is no way around it. They are meticulous and like accuracy. I supposed Alessi doesnt understand how many engineers are.

Another opinion of mine.




The prosecution has rested its case against Karen Read. Here’s what else happened in and outside of the courtroom this morning.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1928163746574131568

"An engineer no matter if software, mechanical, chemical or whatever doesnt matter they are thorough when explaining how things are/how things work; they are clear, concise, and detailed. There is no way around it. They are meticulous and like accuracy. "

Quoting from your post above.

And Welcher was none of that ironically. IMO

 

[shotgun09]

Welcher performed pretzel logic masterfully. The jurors were entertained with the theory and "proof" of the CW by way of magically looking over here at the blue paint test/experiment/show masterfully by an engineer, while simultaneously he was claiming " We just don't know" what happened to John O'Keefe. I hope the jurors saw through all of it.

 

[MerlinFalcon]

.. 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

Those two people are so cold. Heartless.

 

[bobbymkii]

Welcher performed pretzel logic masterfully. The jurors were entertained with the theory and "proof" of the CW by way of magically looking over here at the blue paint test/experiment/show masterfully by an engineer, while simultaneously he was claiming " We just don't know" what happened to John O'Keefe. I hope the jurors saw through all of it.

If Welcher had been called to testify on behalf of a defendant, any defendant, I guarantee that all of us would be talking only about how nuts he was, not how wonderfully qualified he is.

Talking about cars flying off into space, banging the side of the witness box while answering a question, covering himself in blue grease paint and dressing in the victim's exact clothes for his experiment. Utter clown behavior!

It'll never fail to amaze me how people give massive benefit of the doubt to prosecution expert witnesses rather than judging if they've actually proven anything beyond a reasonable doubt.

MOO

 

[MerlinFalcon]

If Welcher had been called to testify on behalf of a defendant, any defendant, I guarantee that all of us would be talking only about how nuts he was, not how wonderfully qualified he is.

Talking about cars flying off into space, banging the side of the witness box while answering a question, covering himself in blue grease paint and dressing in the victim's exact clothes for his experiment. Utter clown behavior!

It'll never fail to amaze me how people give massive benefit of the doubt to prosecution expert witnesses rather than judging if they've actually proven anything beyond a reasonable doubt.

MOO

And his comparison to a pen hitting his hand or how his weight would be distributed if he fell back on a mattress. What an embarrassment.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1928211257779229114

Interesting clip from LYK on how social media seems to be being observed by the defense!

 

[shotgun09]

And his comparison to a pen hitting his hand or how his weight would be distributed if he fell back on a mattress. What an embarrassment.

That was the pretzel logic I was speaking of. Alot of mumbo jumbo, look at me speak, three card monte-like moves....all while saying nothing.

The moment he asked if he could 'wear his hat...I brought it !" Dude.....WHAT ????

Que the circus music....bring in the clowns

 

[Soulmagent]

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 ,I was trying just to watch the trial .
I have clicked on most links posted on this thread to keep up. The math is keeping me up at night. I just have this haunting feeling someone counted wrong somewhere.
Missy1974 dont skip out on Mircodots. short quick to the point minutes long video's worth it.

 

[justwannahelp]

Most actual lawyers I have heard from seem to disagree with you.

Yes. My husband is an attorney and doesn’t know much about the case. I showed him Welcher’s testimony for the CW (the blue paint “episode”) and he was flabbergasted that it was allowed in court. I asked why. He said it was ALL speculation. NONE of the “exercise” was based on actual evidence or facts or Science.

My husband “has no dog in this fight” and isn’t paying attention to it all, but the FIRST thing he asked was “is there video evidence she hit something? Where is this reenactment coming from?”

I said no. No video evidence. we don’t even know he was hit by a car. ME says injuries don’t add up. There’s just a body on the road no witnesses and no evidence. He said then he’s just making that up for dramatic affect and it shouldn’t have been allowed in court.

 

[Seni]

Seems to me that Alessi has a very sharp grip on technicalities, timings and details and can come back with ease, rephrase his questions. When he can't its because the facts and methods from the expert witnesses are irrelevant or inadequate. I'm sure thats not lost on the jury. Alessi is doing the brain work, showing how things fit or dont. With energy and politeness.

Whilst, IMO, Brennan seems bored with his own witnesses and has not prepared them adequately.

 

[wackyw]

I think the use of this indistinct, vague "side-swiping" terminology is simply a device to transfer the responsibility of envisaging how the injuries were caused, and damage/lack of damage to the vehicle, from the prosecution to the jury.

However a possible scenario that doesn't appear to have been suggested is that whilst reversing from an unknown starting point, accelerating to 24 mph it hit a never seen again ramp on the road causing the car to leap up 6ft in the air, the exhaust pipe hits the back of JOK's head causing the rounded gash, and lands on its feet. KR being a little under the influence just wonders what happened and drives back to The Meadows. You might think this is absurd .... and so do I. Not sure it's any worse than what's been offered so for by the CW. Maybe they'll try it in Trial 3.

I don't like KR, but I see her statements as possibly coming from a still drunk, confused, but honest person trying to be helpful just as likely as a "confession".

Add in a one target/scenario investigation, with all the investigation ... err ... irregulaties.

Beyond all reasonable doubt? Not for me, not even beyond the balance of probabilities.

 

[Seni]

If Welcher had been called to testify on behalf of a defendant, any defendant, I guarantee that all of us would be talking only about how nuts he was, not how wonderfully qualified he is.

Talking about cars flying off into space, banging the side of the witness box while answering a question, covering himself in blue grease paint and dressing in the victim's exact clothes for his experiment. Utter clown behavior!

It'll never fail to amaze me how people give massive benefit of the doubt to prosecution expert witnesses rather than judging if they've actually proven anything beyond a reasonable doubt.

MOO

Good one. Had forgotten that he said the Lexus flying into space "was a possibility"!!

 

[justwannahelp]

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.

Same. I felt like she reacted like anyone would if they found their loved one in the snow dead (nearly dead). She tried to make sense of the information she had. She didn’t know a fight took place and that’s not where your mind goes when someone is dead on the side of the road. It goes to “he was hit by a car”

She was also previously perplexed as to why he didn’t text her to go in and/or didn’t come out. So now that she sees him lying in the snow. She’s trying to make sense of that. She was WILLING to consider hitting him to get him the help he needed and make sense of the situation with the info she had.

I don’t think people realize how traumatic something like this is. It’s like an out of body experience and all you want to do is help save your loved one and make sense of what happened with whatever info you have at the time.

 

[twhel]

Of note to me:

On direct, the CW had JW do the arithmetic on the average MPH required to cover the distance between 34 Fairview and One Meadows in 4 minutes 15 seconds, by the shortest and longest of what JW termed the three plausible routes ( the calculated figures: 32.47 MPH and 39.5 MPH).

The defense neither objected to this testimony nor addressed it on cross examination.

At Trial One, the CW never directly addressed the drive time issue. The defense also did not directly address the issue during the presentation of evidence at Trial One, but in AJ's closing argument he made the assertion that it was "undisputed" that the drive would take 6 minutes.

Will be interested to see what the defense does or does not do with this issue in the presentation of its case.

JW's testimony is at 5:24:00 of the Court TV Day 21 video.

 

[geevee]

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 the docu/interviews, I'd rather base my opinion on the evidence presented in trial than whatever producers think will make a program interesting/dramatic/etc.

 

[bobbymkii]

Good one. Had forgotten that he said the Lexus flying into space "was a possibility"!!

But the tap on John's Chevy being a cause of the taillight breaking?

Absolutely not!

 

[justwannahelp]

If Welcher had been called to testify on behalf of a defendant, any defendant, I guarantee that all of us would be talking only about how nuts he was, not how wonderfully qualified he is.

Talking about cars flying off into space, banging the side of the witness box while answering a question, covering himself in blue grease paint and dressing in the victim's exact clothes for his experiment. Utter clown behavior!

It'll never fail to amaze me how people give massive benefit of the doubt to prosecution expert witnesses rather than judging if they've actually proven anything beyond a reasonable doubt.

MOO

AND He got all dressed in the same brand name clothing then TOOK THE SWEATSHIRT OFF, which we all know OJO was wearing when he died. That irritates me. I think he did this because he wanted the jury to just think of raw arm/flesh coming into contact with cracked lights, even though we know it WAS NOT raw arm/ flesh. The one thing we DO know - OJO was wearing a sweatshirt covered in blood - welcher omitted from his little theoretical dress up act.

 

[sunshineray]

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

They have, IMO, and will probably continue to in rebuttal.