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

[keek]

Absolutely, but I’m watching Law&Crime channel and they have DiSogra labeled on the screen ans Accident Reconstruction Expert.
Of course he didn’t testify about accident reconstruction at all.

I don’t have a pony in the race, I watched Welcher testify. He comes across as an all knowing joke. I look forward to hearing experts that come across more professionally to hear what they have to say.

IMO

OH, you were watching a video show. Different. Pretty much for entertainment purposes as well. Court it matters as most saw with Burgess, his company instantly branded his bio online as a staff member as not an expert etc.. right across his page, along with Welcher I believe yesterday or before. Going dowwwn on their staff due to not qualified as they showed court they were.. court is the key word. IMO

 

[AngTxGal]

"Biomedical engineering (BME) or medical engineering is the application of engineering principles and design concepts to medicine and biology for healthcare applications (e.g., diagnostic or therapeutic purposes). BME is also traditionally logical sciences to advance health care treatment, including diagnosis, monitoring, and therapy.<a href="Biomedical engineering - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>1<span>]</span></a><a href="Biomedical engineering - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>2<span>]</span></a> Also included under the scope of a biomedical engineer is the management of current medical equipment in hospitals while adhering to relevant industry standards. This involves procurement, routine testing, preventive maintenance, and making equipment recommendations, a role also known as a Biomedical Equipment Technician (BMET) or as a clinical engineer."

Biomedical engineering - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not sure how this would help this case. He did NOT do a dummie or cadaver to simulate the damage to John's arm. Nor force needed to splinter very hard tail lights. imo

Yes, this is significant to anyone who has followed true crime. He should have done more tests.

I can’t see how a car going backwards could break a tail light on his arm and then scrape his arm. I would have to be convinced and the blue paint didn’t do that. He added to reasonable doubt, as it may be possible but he didn’t show that in my opinion.

IMO

 

[AngTxGal]

OH, you were watching a video show. Different. Pretty much for entertainment purposes as well. Court it matters as most saw with Burgess, his company instantly branded his bio online as a staff member as not an expert etc.. right across his page, along with Welcher I believe yesterday or before. Going dowwwn on their staff due to not qualified as they showed court they were.. court is the key word. IMO

No I’m watching the trial live on that channel and they have him labeled wrong. You would think Law and Crime would take the time to label the witnesses correctly.

IMO

 

[Maat99]

Absolutely, but I’m watching Law&Crime channel and they have DiSogra labeled on the screen ans Accident Reconstruction Expert.
Of course he didn’t testify about accident reconstruction at all.

I don’t have a pony in the race, I watched Welcher testify. He comes across as an all knowing joke. I look forward to hearing experts that come across more professionally to hear what they have to say.

IMO

DiSogra is a certified expert in multiple disciplines - event data recording/digital forensics and accident reconstruction, I’m sure that gives him a huge advantage in understanding event data in the context of an accident. That was a huge issue with Burgess - cherry picking data with no real justification or connection to the actual accident.

 

[ShadyLady]

Yes, this is significant to anyone who has followed true crime. He should have done more tests.

I can’t see how a car going backwards could break a tail light on his arm and then scrape his arm. I would have to be convinced and the blue paint didn’t do that. He added to reasonable doubt, as it may be possible but he didn’t show that in my opinion.

IMO

Also as if his real expertise was not used intentionally. But tried to give credibility to Burgess with all his academic degrees, imo.

 

[PamCake]

Yes, this is significant to anyone who has followed true crime. He should have done more tests.

I can’t see how a car going backwards could break a tail light on his arm and then scrape his arm. I would have to be convinced and the blue paint didn’t do that. He added to reasonable doubt, as it may be possible but he didn’t show that in my opinion.

IMO

I also don't see this scenario happening at all, especially when we saw an actual collision in the driveway of 1 Meadows that Welcher said was not enough to crack a taillight, but a hypothetical collision to a human arm can???? Puleese....

 

[rkjester]

Agree, but the discussion was about shoddy work. To me shoddy means, took shortcuts, did a half ars job, was lazy. Maybe that isn’t what was meant?
I’m not sure having a degree means a person does good work, just that they have more education in the work they are supposed to be good at doing.
It is clear here that there is a bias- if a poster is for KR then all that the prosecution does is crap.
If a poster is not for KR then all the defense does is crap.
I’m still making up my mind, and despite all the shenanigans from the Canton PD, I think it is likely KR hit him with the car.
So far I haven’t seen anything that prevents this from being possible.
Yeah, the defense has done a great job presenting reasonable doubt to the jury. And the last jury had voted Not Guilty on 1 and 3, they were just debating 2. So, she will likely get off- on 1 and 3.
It is Count Two- manslaughter that is the question.

I think she may be guilty of manslaughter

JMO

Yes, I have a strong instinct she hit him, given her contradictory statements during those foolish interviews she participated in. However, the completely bungled "investigation" and subsequent "expert analysis" absolutely raises so many questions that her guilt, BARD, becomes a very difficult thing to prove. I believe she will not be convicted.

 

[louvillian08]

JO's phone clock was synced to the Lexus clock, as far as time and placement. It did not put him inside the house. MO from watching the testimony.

When he was using Waze for the drive to Fairview. Which we know he closed at 12:24:26, severing the tie between the Lexus and his phone.

His phone location never moved from that general location, yet the Lexus went back to Meadows Ave. surely you’re not arguing that it was synced to the Lexus all night?

 

[louvillian08]

Didn’t Welcher’s testimony pin down 1162-2 to be 8 min and 5 sec after the 3 pt turn?

IMO

He did. Would you mind pointing me to the location data in that statement?

 

[AngTxGal]

He did. Would you mind pointing me to the location data in that statement?

I read an article online and watched a clip from the testimony where he presented the evidence, not sure I can post that article and clip here.
They were supposed to have argued in the car, so to me that accounted for the 8 min, and JM also said she saw KR’s car in front of the house for a while- and JO didn’t come in.

IMO

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Adding that Aperture began adding those watermarks the afternoon that Burgess first testified, then started adding them to other employees, including Welcher, but not ALL of their employees.
Curious timing, indeed.
IMO.

Yes, and so very true @Leilei ….. and IMO that also begs the question….. were those designations added before or after the CW paid the bill for their services? SMH. And one also has to wonder whether they have been paid either in part or in full for what they ‘provided’. MOO

 

[missy1974]

omg LOL Brennan.. the car starts... then 3 seconds later the infotainment unit turns on LOL

This is not that hard, is it?

 

[louvillian08]

I read an article online and watched a clip from the testimony where he presented the evidence, not sure I can post that article and clip here.
They were supposed to have argued in the car, so to me that accounted for the 8 min, and JM also said she saw KR’s car in front of the house for a while- and JO didn’t come in.

IMO

That is one of the CW’s theories. As my original comment said, there is no GPS or car data, nor witness testimony to back up that theory.

The only data point for the Lexus location we have is her arrival at Meadows Ave at 12:36am. It’s at least a 6 minute drive. So the only data we can reference points to her leaving 34 Fairview at least 2 minutes before 1162-2. Meaning it occurred away from O’Keefe

 

[rescuemom]

I’m not sure I would call their expertise shoddy, this young guy Disogra has been a testifying expert on exactly ONE time in court and not on this topic.
I can’t see how what he did helped the defense.
Maybe it confused the jury and adds some complexity- which could to some be doubt?
I don’t see how he actually helped, yet…

IMO

So in your words "this young guy Disogra" is, IMO, NOT a paid hack. He, again IMO, helped the jury who has been through the dog and pony show of the CW, possibly understand

 

[AppleTreeGreen]

"Horrid" behavior, IMO, is subjective in the scheme of what he said. Was it crass language used, yes absolutely. Does that then mean everything the officer did was to frame an innocent woman, not in my view.

According to the trial board, MP’s behavior was unacceptable not because he was suspected of being a crooked officer that framed KR but because he failed to uphold the ethical and professional standards of which he was expected to uphold and abide by as an law enforcer whose position bestowed trust, privileges and power by his fellow community members.

He violated policy by drinking while operating a department vehicle while on the job, jeopardized the integrity of the case by sharing sensitive and confidential information about JOK’s case, including his suspect KR, with friends, family and coworkers, he jeopardized justice for JOK and his loved ones by allowing his biasness to make him short-sighted and perform subpar investigative work and the gathering of evidence and exploited and then allowed his hostility and focus on KR to overshadow his responsibilities to the law, to his team members, JOK, the court of law and her property and privacy.

If not JOK, than at least for the integrity of the uniform he wore he should have done a much better job of storing and marking all the evidence collected to keep it safe from contamination until it could be fully assessed by the lab or forensics. He should have had the respect and the knowledge to know that the ME was not being ‘stupid’ when she refused to change JOK’s cause of death to MVA but rather adhering to the professional and scientific standards for which she trained and educated for. He should have evaluated everyone who was at the house that night back in the his office, one at a time and recorded and he should have kept an open-mind and made sure he investigated and ruled out all other possibilities besides settling on JOK got hit by a car before setting down that path to arrest KR.

Even he said he was under the impression that JOK got into a fight when he learned of his injuries from the EMT. Not to mention his friend asked him via text if JOK was attacked by another police officer when he first told him what he suspected. Why was he so quick to believe JMc? And how could he draw the conclusion that KR waffled JOK with her car? Such deadly maneuvers killed Freddie Grey and usually involve the victims sitting unrestrained in a fast moving car before it comes to a stop multiple so that their bodies or heads shame against the frame or dashboards. How did he propose KR did that to JOK from outside the vehicle? Even his friend said something stunk about the proposed scenario because told to them but PR either lacked the care, brain-span or integrity to notice or engage further on it. Why did PR think he was worthy of the job, let alone be the one to investigate and get answers for JOK and his loved ones? He anlready implied to his friends that the property owner where JO was found was a fellow cop and thus would not experience type of trouble or bother because a fellow officer died on his lawn? Meaning PR was willing to deprioritize getting answers and justice for one cop just to protect the one he knew better and yet somehow he the audacity to demean, villainize and dehumanize everybody else who oppose or stand against him.

IIRC, he or his family say his termination was not fair. But no, what’s not fair is that he was ever a officer of the law in the first place when the people of Canton and MA deserve better and there have been men and women who gave their lives, blood, sweat and tears as officers of the law and performed their job with dignity, kindness and respect. He like other officers who have abused the job rewarded to them are not worthy to inherit the same shield as them.

MOO/speculation of course

Michael Proctor fired by Massachusetts State Police for actions in Karen Read investigation

Michael Proctor was fired by Massachusetts State Police Wednesday for his actions in the Karen Read investigation.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[missy1974]

Seriously... this data is ALL from Burgess or Welcher, he didn't pull the data.

 

[AngTxGal]

I also don't see this scenario happening at all, especially when we saw an actual collision in the driveway of 1 Meadows that Welcher said was not enough to crack a taillight, but a hypothetical collision to a human arm can???? Puleese....

Hypothetically I can imagine a scenario that makes sense to me

He was behind the car, about to walk around to her door.
He dropped the glass and reached down to pick it up.
She backed up while he was bent over, and his head caught the bumper as she backed up.
He raised up and hit the tail light as she was still backing up.
He staggered back and fell down hitting his head on the curb and scrapping his arm on the rocks in the asphalt.

There should be asphalt or rocks in the back of his head and on his arm- haven’t heard this.
Tail light should be on his clothing- supposedly it is
Glass should be on him- what he picked up would be smashed between him and the car, KR says she picked a piece of glass out of his nose.

I know this- a hard blunt force trauma to the back of the head that causes a skull fracture can cause both eyes to become black and swollen, as the shock around the skull fractures the face. He would look like he had been beaten up- but not have broken skin on the eyes. That is what the autopsy describes- skull fractures and swollen eye lids, one abrasion above right eye, one abrasion on nose. That few number of face abrasions do not = a fist fight and being hit in the face and eyes.

IMO

 

[geevee]

omg LOL Brennan.. the car starts... then 3 seconds later the infotainment unit turns on LOL

This is not that hard, is it?

I just love how DiSogra is handling Brennen's interrogation, so professional and knowledgeable. Hope Brennen takes notes when he finally sits down.

 

[BUF]

I like how DiSogra asks for clarity of a question so he can answer properly

 

[justbeachy]

One thing I've learned from looking at the experts' PowerPoints is that they desperately need to hire graphic designers. What a gobbledygook mess of images, charts, text, and bullets! LOL! And don't get me started on the fonts and color choices. Reading 8 pt red text on a black background is not ideal. DiSogra's slides were much better but sheesh...those other ones! IMO