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

[rescuemom]

Jury is being sent home for the day... if I heard the judge right.. back in 5 for voir dire? Not sure of who...

And if I heard correctly, an attorney was there for a witness but witness wasn't there... so postponed until Monday

 

[waldojabba]

I’m baffled that the defense didn’t have DiSorga the analysis as if he was an independent expert.
They didn’t- he simply analyzed data and charts created by someone else. Why?
Some may not see that as a big deal- I do. He does not look to me like the expert he is trying to appear to be- if they did not hire him to do an independent collection and analysis.

IMO

No worries you are late to the party.
Hank in attacking the D witness resorted to attacking where the witness got the data - which was Aperture - Hanks own witnesses.
So imo Aperture has been discredited and the D witness looks like a he came out without a blemish. At best a wash. But I give it to the D.
Wait for part two - ARCA’s testimony.
The D’s accident reconstruction people - orig hired by FBI /Dept of Justice - their report was made available to both the D and P.
They are giving the same report they gave in the first trial - John’s injuries are not consistent with being hit by a vehicle.
JMO

 

[missy1974]

And if I heard correctly, an attorney was there for a witness but witness wasn't there... so postponed until Monday

it was the guys attorney that testified in voir dire... sorry, I didn't catch his name at the beginning of voir dire.

 

[ShadyLady]

I would like to know if SUV would register a collusion if something hit the SUV HARD enough to shatter Lexus tail lights WHEN car was moving.

Probably would not register if SUV was turned off and parked I assume.

 

[Amber29]

so... DiSogra didn't do any of his own independent testing or analyzing.

He solely relied on Burgess and Welcher and their data, to show that they didn't apply it properly.

Brennan shot at him repeatedly about the data and if it is wrong... his opinion would be wrong... I do not know how it helps the CW for Brennan to trash the data that his experts had in their reports?

This was my thought, listening to cross, so ok Brennan was successful again in attempting to discredit his own expert witnesses.

 

[rescuemom]

Relying on the data, if it's Garbage in .. garbage out..

relying on Burgess' data and Welcher's data...

That was a pretty good ending to that testimony for Jackson IMO

Great way to end the week!!!!!

 

[missy1974]

No worries you are late to the party.
Hank in attacking the D witness resorted to attacking where the witness got the data - which was Aperture - Hanks own witnesses.
So imo Aperture has been discredited and the D witness looks like a he came out without a blemish. At best a wash. But I give it to the D.
Wait for part two - ARCA’s testimony.
The D’s accident reconstruction people - orig hired by FBI /Dept of Justice - their report was made available to both the D and P.
They are giving the same report they gave in the first trial - John’s injuries are not consistent with being hit by a vehicle.
JMO

And ARCCA will be disputing Welcher's report if I understand correctly. That was their additional report that was due on May 7th.

 

[rescuemom]

If it is my ars on the line- I hire an expert to redo all of the analysis and show clearly that what they did is incorrect.
Defense teams hire their own independent expert to debunk the prosecution all the time. They have to dismantle the evidence with their own evidence- he didn’t do that.
I work in science and statistics- I know the difference between redoing the work of someone else and doing it yourself. The defense took a short cut here- was it cheaper?
If I’m on the side of KR, I would be wondering why they took this out.

IMO

Do you know or have you heard of AARCA???? If not, stay tuned

 

[Warwick7]

Voir dire of an old high school friend of Proctor (who’s nick name is Chip) who was on a text chain of all these high school friends for some 30 years.

I think the defense is trying to get some of these texts in.

What does Voir dire mean?

 

[rescuemom]

I’m baffled at this. Is Brennan trying to lose this case?

He was hired to debunk the reports of Burgess and Welcher, to show their less than stellar work. He did that, IMO, professionally and with class.

 

[missy1974]

What does Voir dire mean?

It's just where the lawyers can ask questions of a witness.... the judge will rule whether they can testify or not, or about a certain topic.

Sometimes it is done to see if a witness can be considered an "expert" too.

 

[rescuemom]

Thanks for everyone updating! Every time I tune into the live it's just the ceiling fan.

That happens alot for side bars and for Brennen to throw his fits and for Bev to console him. Going forward it'll be alot of objestions and sustains.

 

[Linda7NJ]

If the defense wants Michael Proctors text to come in, they should call him,

IMO

 

[Leilei]

Kelly Dever ....
she has to come back on Monday...

She is a BPD officer.


Voir dire is of a friend of Proctor.

I think KD was either in the sallyport video or possibly working when BA came to the station to "move vehicles", IIRC.
IMO.

 

[missy1974]

Brennan... wants them to call Proctor.

I would come back at him and say.. he is free to call Proctor in rebutal haha

 

[Gerald12]

It does seem like Hank Brennan really wants the defence to call Michael Proctor.

 

[tara83]

If the defense wants Michael Proctors text to come in, they should call him,

IMO

It sure says a lot about the CW's case when they won't even call the lead investigator. JMO

 

[Leilei]

If the defense wants Michael Proctors text to come in, they should call him,

IMO

I'm sure they will.
IMO.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I'm sure they will.
IMO.

They’re going to have to

IMO

 

[missy1974]

the CW wants discovery for Kelly Dever... Jackson said they have no written communications, then the CW asked for oral communications, Jackson said, we have no obligation to do that and don't plan on it...

end of the day.. Judge will rule later. I think she said by 4:30.