MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #31 Retrial

Status
Not open for further replies.
If he was knocked unconscious by either the injury to his face or the one to the back of his head and Chloe went after him when he was in this state, it would have taken a couple of seconds for Brian or whoever to pull Chloe off JOk, therefore, no further wounds.
What injury to his face? I heard testimony that described his face as being in a fight with Mike Tyson- to me this is a misinterpretation of what was seen. His eyes were swollen- the skin wasn’t broken, the nose wasn’t broken. A blunt force trauma on the back of the skull has enough force to cause the front of the face to suffer trauma. The back of the head injury explains the swollen eyes.
The only other face injuries I saw was a small cut on nose and small cut above right eye.
Not evidence of any fist hits by anyone to his face

Agree, if he wasn’t defending himself a dog could bite him on his arm. Still the dog would have latched on and not munched tiny bites up and down the arm. A latch bite would bruise. I saw zero bruises- and he wasn’t pronounced dead at the hospital until around 8AM. That is enough time for bruising if his face was able to swell around his eyes- and while laying in the snow! We use ice to prevent bruising and swelling- the snow and temps were not enough or were too late.

I look forward to hearing what the defense experts say, but I think they backed themselves in a corner by claiming dog bites

IMO
 
Absolutely- but cops trying to make a solid case is tampering with evidence.
Since it seems they did tamper- some assume they must be covering up a crime that cops were involved in doing. That does not have to be the case, I’m not convinced.

Cops could be just acting as the blue wall acts- to seem to come to the aid of a cop and protect the family of a former cop.
It is possible what happened was simply an accident. The cops and DA made it more- and they did not expect KR to call their bluff and fight it.
I think the DA and ADA are stretching their charges- just to be right it seems.
Trust of LE in this area near Boston isn’t high, but LE and DA can’t seem to help but insert egos here. So now this case is a national circus opening a can of worms of macho egos with badges who think they can do whatever they want. Not a good look

It it likely that if this hadn’t been a dead cop in the yard of a powerful former cop- the case would not have come to trial. It’s a cop thing

IMO

I wasn't speaking to motive of LE. Just the existence of pieces of taillight that were not part of the Lexus taillight. Motive not being a necessary element in this trial. JMOO
 
BBM

Motive? Most times, the right answer is just plain and simple the easy one.

Watch Waterfall again...

One can see how bad Jen and Higgins wanted JO to go to Fairview that night through texts. You can clearly see there was a issue Higgins had with John right at the Waterfall.

In M00 Higgins felt he got disrespected by KR and then next by John, who at the bar, put his hands up kind of intagonizing him. And we can clearly see Brian grab/hold Higgins arm and tell him to wait.

Yes, there's a whole "wait to see if he shows up" to the house party. And when he does, they were going to make sure to teach him a lesson.

At the house was nothing but drunk testerone fueled shmucks. It probably started out in a verbal altercation (maybe about Higgins and Karen), and quickly someone threw a punch and it got out of hand resulting in John getting a beating, hitting his head on something hard and suffering a severe traumatic brain injury.

In M00 in the brawl Chloe attacked and John defended himself by holding up his arm.

There was no conspiracy to kill him.

The only thing that made it worse for them was they were so drunk so they most likely didn’t realize they would’ve ended up killing him.

After that, immediately the cover up began....

The story is plausible, I’ll go back and watch the Waterfall footage.
Still I don’t see evidence on JO of being beat up, or that he fought anyone using his own fists.
If Higgins has a history of being a hot head- you would think that would come out.

What injuries on JO do you think support that he was in a fight?

IMO
 
I’m praying the judge doesn’t allow Proctor’s friends to read his texts. If the defense wants state of mind - let them call Proctor.
The defense can’t call him.
Why?
Proctor read Karen Reads text messages. They can’t open that can of worms

IMO

I don’t know that I see the reason the Def or Pros would use the texts, but I’m not the kind of juror that would be swayed by such evidence.
Some jurors would connection with the story evidence more than the science evidence- maybe this is for those jurors?
Motive to kill is missing here, imo, but you mix male egos, alcohol, cops, and accidents are going to happen.

What are you seeing in the Proctor texts that I’m missing?
 
What injury to his face? I heard testimony that described his face as being in a fight with Mike Tyson- to me this is a misinterpretation of what was seen. His eyes were swollen- the skin wasn’t broken, the nose wasn’t broken. A blunt force trauma on the back of the skull has enough force to cause the front of the face to suffer trauma. The back of the head injury explains the swollen eyes.
The only other face injuries I saw was a small cut on nose and small cut above right eye.
Not evidence of any fist hits by anyone to his face

Agree, if he wasn’t defending himself a dog could bite him on his arm. Still the dog would have latched on and not munched tiny bites up and down the arm. A latch bite would bruise. I saw zero bruises- and he wasn’t pronounced dead at the hospital until around 8AM. That is enough time for bruising if his face was able to swell around his eyes- and while laying in the snow! We use ice to prevent bruising and swelling- the snow and temps were not enough or were too late.

I look forward to hearing what the defense experts say, but I think they backed themselves in a corner by claiming dog bites

IMO
He had a cut over his right eye.

Tiny bites???
 
The story is plausible, I’ll go back and watch the Waterfall footage.
Still I don’t see evidence on JO of being beat up, or that he fought anyone using his own fists.
If Higgins has a history of being a hot head- you would think that would come out.

What injuries on JO do you think support that he was in a fight?

IMO
In M00 if you don't see evidence of JO being beat up or that he fought anyone then rewatch both trials.

Who knows if Higgins has a history of being hot-headed. It not matters.

<modsnip>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My strong takeaway from the testimony so far is that he went in the house. From there, I only see inferences, and enough to make me think his demise must have happened in there. But all we know is he was found later on the lawn, dead.

But because none of that home or those people were given even the tiniest of investigation, I agree we don't have enough to pick a likely cause of his demise, or who did it or why.

The fact he could NOT have been hit by a vehicle forces us to know there has to be another answer for what we do see (JOK on the lawn with tail light pieces appearing there at some point or points in time). Even if we don't have proof, we know someone did something.

There's no blood on the lawn or clothes to speak of, despite injuries that hint at a lot of bleeding. Where did it go, outer space? If we look at possibilities nearby, how about a basement floor that no investigator ever even tried to see, and a bulkhead door that opened not far from where he was found??

Long ago (T1 days) I was one of the first to suggest that MAYBE it was just a freak accident involving a walk down the stairs and an unplanned attack by the dog and a fall backwards that cracked his head open and he died, with no one intending it. Or maybe there was an argument over KR with swings taken, and the dog jumped in to defend its master and uh-oh JOK is dead and now what? From which the others in the house panicked over the possibility of a major wrongful-death lawsuit and decided to put him on the lawn and try to explain it away. One thing led to another. Or maybe a less innocent scenario, in which that angry interaction over KR led someone to drunkenly, stupidly pick up a small dumbbell and whack JOK in the back of the head, and he fell dead, and now what do we do?

So the "motive" could be no thought-out motive at all. A dog that got out of control, or a drunk who did something very very stupid. Not planned. But led people to do all they could to make it look like something else.

Note that the only expert testimony we've had about the arm injuries themselves and what caused them is that it was from a dog. Those are still ahead in T2, but these are experienced people who are qualified to speak ...and cw witnesses do NOT dispute that it could have been caused by a dog.

Are those resulting narratives largely speculative? Sure. But EVERY possibility is largely speculative - tying together just a few facts here and there that give a hint of uninvestigated possibilities - once you have to eliminate KRs vehicle as the cause due to the science of how things move and the results of impact forces. And JOK could not have been hot by a vehicle to cause his injuries, that is a fact.

I agree that the taillight breaking due to hitting his arm is fictional.
I don’t agree that the taillight evidence is necessary to him being clipped by a car, possibly KR’s car, then falling backward hitting his head. But you do, why?

Do I buy the expert that says those arm injuries are from a dog- No. She is a retired ER doctor, but was quick to conclude without explanation. If she comes up again- I think the prosecution will tear her apart.
Notice what questions were not asked-
The ME was not asked about dog bite or fight fight injuries on cross. Why? If the ME said they were dog bites facial and that he had injuries from fist fights- that is more reasonable doubt.
But, those questions were not asked of the ME.
If we think strategy- Why would the defense not ask those questions of the ME? I think it is because they didn’t expect her testimony to support dog bites and facial injuries from being beat up. So- they found an expert that would say what they want.

IMO
 
<modsnip> ... I see her as an angry girlfriend (as evidenced by her own voicemails) who hit him and left him in the cold (as evidenced by her own documentary videos) to die. I don't think she hit him intentionally but I do think she knew she did and left him there. I also don't think she knew just how hurt he was, but she still left him there. Which is why she rallied the troops to go look for him. She is the reason he is dead. No one else.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
<modsnip> ... I see her as an angry girlfriend (as evidenced by her own voicemails) who hit him and left him in the cold (as evidenced by her own documentary videos) to die. I don't think she hit him intentionally but I do think she knew she did and left him there. I also don't think she knew just how hurt he was, but she still left him there. Which is why she rallied the troops to go look for him. She is the reason he is dead. No one else.
<modsnip: Quoted post was modsnipped> ... I went into the first trial convinced by the media that she was an evil person who ran him down. Then I saw the actual lack of evidence that he was hit by a car. The ME won't even say it. I keep coming back to how a human arm breaks a taillight into 47 pieces.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He had a cut over his right eye.

Tiny bites???

Yea he had one shallow laceration that was an inch or so over his right eye- and one on his nose as per the ME.
No deep gash- no split eye open or broken nose or cuts around eyes like you would see if someone beat up someone else.
No damage to his hands or knuckles like a fist fight, no defense wounds on the inside of his arms to show he put them up to fend off attacks.

Yes, those are small scrapes and pokes up and down his arm- like scrapes against small sharp rocks or class shards.
None of his arm wounds look like the deep puncture wounds of the 1 inch canines of a German Shepard- and there are four canines. I’m not seeing any bite with a pattern of four punctures. You would also expect bruises, their jaws are strong.

IMO
 
<modsnip> ... I see her as an angry girlfriend (as evidenced by her own voicemails) who hit him and left him in the cold (as evidenced by her own documentary videos) to die. I don't think she hit him intentionally but I do think she knew she did and left him there. I also don't think she knew just how hurt he was, but she still left him there. Which is why she rallied the troops to go look for him. She is the reason he is dead. No one else.

I have been watching this case since the beginning and have seen nothing to prove KR's guilt. Angry voicemails do not equal her killing JO. Evidence of the Lexus hitting JO and JO having injuries consistent with a collision is the only thing that would prove her guilt to me, and that has not happened. JMOO and ARCCA's.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In M00 if you don't see evidence of JO being beat up or that he fought anyone then rewatch both trials.

Who knows if Higgins has a history of being hot-headed. It not matters.

<modsnip>

Why would I need to see the both trials to know that those facial injuries and arm injuries are not from dog bites or a fight. <modsnip> My background is in biology and physical sciences. That is why this trial has come to my radar- it has a lot of evidence that is biophysical in nature. And I have no pony in the race here at all, I’ve not made a conclusion that I need to defend, I’m trying to work through the evidence. Evidence in science and what is presented in a trial are not the same thing.

We do know what the ME says depends on the questions asked. You can’t conclude based on questions that were not asked. What she doesn’t say is that the wounds look like dog bites/ scratches or that he suffered blunt force trauma of the face from a fist fight.

The ME would be the testimony that is based in science, we will see what the defense does here to make the dog bites more solid. All the defense has to do is add doubt- and they have, but that doesn't’ mean he was bitten by a dog.

IMO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In M00 it's obvious that the CW is trying to force the defense to call Proctor so they can lead him through a prepped cross examination. This trial has been anything BUT fair to Karen and her team. I dont know how these people sleep at night...
 
<modsnip> ...I see her as an angry girlfriend (as evidenced by her own voicemails) who hit him and left him in the cold (as evidenced by her own documentary videos) to die. I don't think she hit him intentionally but I do think she knew she did and left him there. I also don't think she knew just how hurt he was, but she still left him there. Which is why she rallied the troops to go look for him. She is the reason he is dead. No one else.

<modsnip: Quoted post was modsnipped>

It is still possible and plausible that KR clipped him with her car and he fell back and hit his head and was incapacitated and died as a result. But, there is enough mud in the water to provide reasonable doubt- so I expect she will likely be found Not Guilty. Does this mean she is innocent- No. Does her clipping him mean she intended to kill him, or knew she hurt him and left the scene? No. The timeline alone is hard to dispute- she was either there or nearby when no one else was around. If we add alcohol, emotion, and the weather- accidents happen. So it is no stretch.

Why is this an issue? Because she may have done it and because the DA chose to up the charges she had no choice but to defend herself in this way. The DA had to up the charges to bluff- because it looks like LE tampered with evidence.
No one was willing to take a deep breath and calm the crap down, do honest good police work, and honest good charges from the DA. Common sense is absent- so now it is a battle with flimsy crappy evidence being presented on both sides out of desperation for trial purposes.

IMO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In M00 it's obvious that the CW is trying to force the defense to call Proctor so they can lead him through a prepped cross examination. This trial has been anything BUT fair to Karen and her team. I dont know how these people sleep at night...

.....and will the judge 'grant' the CW the win?
Tune in Monday am
 
<modsnip: Quoted post was modsnipped> ... I went into the first trial convinced by the media that she was an evil person who ran him down. Then I saw the actual lack of evidence that he was hit by a car. The ME won't even say it. I keep coming back to how a human arm breaks a taillight into 47 pieces.

I suppose there isn’t evidence of being struck by a car without the taillight evidence. He could have simply tripped and fallen down.
Or- she bumped him and he tripped and fell down. I suppose without evidence she would have to have known and confess.

Does it follow then that he went into the house and was beat up? No, there is no evidence for that scenario any more than there is for the taillight breaking on his arm.
The cases on both side are pretty flimsy and lacking in solid evidence either way, which will result in plenty of reasonable doubt.

I think once this is over we won’t be any closer to finding out what actually happened, no matter the verdict. It is the family of JO that will feel let down.
But, sending KR to prison for what likely was an accident of some kind doesn’t make sense. I don’t see any way the Prosecution can prove without a reasonable doubt that she bumped him, knew she bumped him, and then knowingly left the scene.

IMO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
172
Guests online
561
Total visitors
733

Forum statistics

Threads
625,604
Messages
18,506,894
Members
240,821
Latest member
MMurphy
Back
Top