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

[jepop]

<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.

Yep, a human arm doesn't do that without breaking and bruising itself. It certainly doesn't do at 8 miles an hour. That is truly ridiculous and will be torn apart by ARCCA. Moo

 

[AngTxGal]

IMO, it would be a big mistake to not call Brian Albert, Higgins, and Proctor. They are the centerpieces of the conspiracy/botched investigation with the butt dials, destroyed phones, etc. it will be game over for Karen if they aren’t called.

All MOO.

There may be many reasons those phones were destroyed that has nothing to do with this case.
It is possible their attempt to pin it all on KR is going to lead to a huge internal investigation that is out of their control.
There is no telling what all will come out if these guys have been operating as if they could do whatever they wanted to without consequences.

IMO

 

[cocomod]

She measured them, but not for depth. Otherwise yeah, not swabbed not researched. Jmo

ETA, it was up to Brennan in this trial to elicit from the ME the arm wounds were consistent with vehicle strike. Because of last trial he obviously skipped it.

Sorry! That is what I meant, she didn’t measure the depth! Thanks for the clarification! I edited my post to include

 

[Warwick7]

In MO0 KR wasn’t really friends with the people and wasn’t sure if she was truly invited or wanted to see what the crowd was like. So in M00 JO was supposed to go inside and check out the vibes or whatever and then text/call KR to come inside. That’s why she was parked outside for 10 minutes. And why she was so pissed in the infamous voicemails.

This part is just me inferring but it seems like the plan would have been for them both to stay OR both go home.

 

[lohrtabitha]

I have had dog bites- you do not always get the whole dental impression- sometimes one or a few teeth sink in and the others just scratch, and there can be claw marks- I was not ever bitten by police or trained attack dogs- some dogs who "bite" are not trying to take you down, they are just vicious or protective or "playful" and they back off when interrupted. I had dog bites running and biking - very often you get one deep tooth hole that could require a stitch or two and then gouges and scratches. my experience.

Right and me too. I think it was Old Cop on this forum that said German Shepherds and other police trained dogs, go for the arm. I experienced that at a friend's house when I tried to knock on her door. It took hold of my arm until she called him off. No broken skin but I hade a large bruise for one month. It hurt like hell.

 

[AngTxGal]

The hired, well paid “expert” admitted on the stand that he didn’t perform an actual test at the speed they insist she drove because he didn’t know what the outcome would be. The “experts” made a determination that there was a 3 second delay with pushing the key, but didn’t include that in their computations even though it was printed in their report. The “expert” used the last of the recording rather than the “event” to determine their findings. All of these things add up to MISCALCULATIONS. The “expert” used bits vs bytes - a very big error.

Dr Welcher does have a degree and is likely very smart. But, he was given a conclusion, and he worked backwards from there. A true scientific study would have been to prove that an arm would break a taillight. Explain how he ended up so far away from the road. Explain how taillight pieces didn’t drop on impact, but flew into outer space and landed way over on the lawn by the body.

Agree- it appears Welcher saw an opportunity to be involved in a huge case with free press and rather than turn it down because he could not support the scenario they had already created- he tried to do so and it isn't’ convincing.
It is infuriating when such experts reveal that they think the public on the jury are a bunch of idiots.
Maybe I’m wrong- but I would guess most people who have broken a taillight can figure out that it doesn’t easily break into 40+ pieces, and an arm can’t do that and not be damaged.

IMO

 

[cocomod]

If the defense wants to use those texts to show proctor’s state of mind they should come in through Proctor.
Otherwise it’s hearsay.

IMO

Not hearsay when the CW didn’t even contest their existence even in T1

 

[acutename]

In M00 a friendly reminder that from testimony, Michael Proctor deleted the location data from Karen Read’s phone in April 2022. It’s why Aperture was able to lie.

did he say why when he was on the stand?

 

[themonk]

In M00 a friendly reminder that from testimony, Michael Proctor deleted the location data from Karen Read’s phone in April 2022. It’s why Aperture was able to lie.

This fact alone is enough for me.

I cannot understand why anyone could not think this is a conspiracy.

 

[lohrtabitha]

There may be many reasons those phones were destroyed that has nothing to do with this case.
It is possible their attempt to pin it all on KR is going to lead to a huge internal investigation that is out of their control.
There is no telling what all will come out if these guys have been operating as if they could do whatever they wanted to without consequences.

IMO

What are the many reasons? Do share please.

 

[AngTxGal]

Right and me too. I think it was Old Cop on this forum that said German Shepherds and other police trained dogs, go for the arm. I experienced that at a friend's house when I tried to knock on her door. It took hold of my arm until she called him off. No broken skin but I hade a large bruise for one month. It hurt like hell.

Question for you

Did the dog bite only on one side of your arm? Or did the top teeth catch one side while the bottom teeth catch the other side of the arm?
Where are the matching teeth from the other jaw on JO’s arm? It looks to me like he rolled in glass on the outside of his arm.

Did you have a series of bites up and down one side if your arm without any bites from the opposing jaw on the other side? Highly unlikely

Thoughts?

IMO

 

[AngTxGal]

What are the many reasons? Do share please.

Corruption of many different kinds could leave evidence on phones- Higgins went out of his way to destroy his phone. I find the timing of that very suspicious.
Do I think they planned to harm JO and cover it up? No
Do I think the same guys that likely planted taillight evidence here could have done so in other cases? Yes

IMO

 

[cocomod]

What are the many reasons? Do share please.

I agree that there may have been evidence of shady behavior in other cases, selling drugs from the police lock up, knowledge of other cases where LE covered for one another. They were destroyed one day before they were told to turn them in. Family works for the DA office. Could they have been given a heads up the order was coming? Strange that 2 people destroyed them on the same day - while they knew the defense was requesting them

 

[waldojabba]

I don’t have any dog in this fight, but I think we ALL have an interest in seeing a fair and balanced trial.

The way our justice system works, is “innocent until proven guilty in a court of law”. My fight is that I truly believe the CW has not proven their case. Watching T1 and T2, I feel it is apparent that the CW has not proven BARD that she killed him. Did she? It is possible, but not proven.

The reason the ME wasn’t asked in this trial about whether a dog bit his arm is because the answer came in T1. She didn’t examine the arm injury. She didn’t measure the arm injury. She didn’t swab the arm injury. She can’t answer what she doesn’t know. But, I have a dear nurse friend with no knowledge of the case that immediately said that looks like dog bite injury. It doesn’t mean it was a total attack by the dog. Dogs attack quickly, grab, and if called off, just a few injuries. The dog is an issue because she was rehomed and they refused access before T1 to the defense.

I stated in a very long post in the last thread why I feel their case hasn’t been proven. The CW has rested and once again failed to deliver several key facts; the main fact the CW has proven is that OJO was hit by a car. This to me is a very important fact to not be able to prove. They proved he was found dead on the lawn. They have tried to prove she performed a 3-point turn and that she backed up. That is not proof she hit him.

So true @cocomod - a fair and balanced trial - that’s the goal.
We have been here many many threads and lots of us watched the first trial and are doing the same with t2.
The thing is - and for those new to thread if it has not been said recently - the investigation was so piss poor that we may never know what actually happened here. John O’Keefe deserved better. Karen deserved better. Those of us in Norfolk County deserved better. So could Karen have hit John in theory - sure. Could his injuries have been caused by something else - sure.

We are at trial now though so it’s all about BARD.

You want to talk about bias ? You only have to focus in on day one with the lead investigator deciding Karen was guilty not thru his due diligence/ investigation - we were not even 24 hrs out. You need to start at the beginning. How the media told us all locally that it was caught on a neighbors camera that Karen backed into John.
Except oh surprise the trial comes and there was nothing on tape - there never was.

I came here to trial 1 thinking sure lots of booze - KR backs up /unintentionally hits John. Car is so big she has no idea and takes off. It seems reasonable right? Sure.

And then you see the injuries that don’t seem to fit. And the CW cannot make them fit even for 400k.
I also don’t believe a tail light made from polycarbonate breaks into 47 pieces and flies thru the air. Look it up. And oh, we have extra pieces of taillight. Someone was out there scattering taillight pieces like a flower girl at a wedding with flower petals.

Trial 1 ARCCA made the difference for me. NO BIAS with them bc it was a report ordered and paid for by the justice dept/ fbi. They did not know the case or the players at that point. Just the details they needed for reconstruction.
That report was sent to the Prosecution. It said basically John’s injuries were not consistent with being hit by a vehicle. It did not fit the P’s narrative so they ignored it. Did not even bother to have their guy call and discuss. Sent it to the D in a discovery dump.

The Prosecution has Confirmation BIAS - if it doesn’t fit they discard it. Same thing here at times - there is a lack of intellectual honesty in acknowledging actual facts.

I sense the clash between opinions is emotional thinkers vs logical thinkers. People looking at things with different filters.

I don’t think many people find Karen a sympathetic defendant at all, but the hate directed at the defendent in these threads borders on pathological. I find it disturbing.

If you think Karen is guilty - or not guilty - or the other category of “who knows” bc of the lack of good evidence - this is a discussion board. People will ask you for your rationale and that’s part of discussion.

ARCCA should be up this week. I’ll have a second look and see what I think.

I believe most are open to new information.

But yes at this point I am clearly in the NG bc the CW did not meet BARD. And they had every opportunity to do that.

I lean towards that he went into the house and got sucker punched maybe from behind with a blunt object. Chloe the dog jumped in.

Whatever happened nobody was trying to kill John it was an accident.

You can call that Bias or call me biased if you want - I call it following the information where takes you.

JMO.

 

[lohrtabitha]

Question for you

Did the dog bite only on one side of your arm? Or did the top teeth catch one side while the bottom teeth catch the other side of the arm?
Where are the matching teeth from the other jaw on JO’s arm? It looks to me like he rolled in glass on the outside of his arm.

Did you have a series of bites up and down one side if your arm without any bites from the opposing jaw on the other side? Highly unlikely

Thoughts?

IMO

The dog took hold of my right arm above the elbow. My arm was in its mouth for only 30 seconds until my friend opened the door and called him off. He didn't break my skin or claw me. I was lucky there. I was smart enough to stay still/limp and not fight him off. The whole thing was traumatizing and whenever I see a German Shepherd, I get scared all over again. I know the power first hand of their jaws.

 

[cocomod]

Re: "The data is what the data is” — Karen Read

It’s my understanding that defense accepts the three-point turn event and eight minutes later (in front of 34F) a backing up event happened at 24 miles an hour, agreeing that both triggering events occurred. Defense used the CW’s science.

Keep in mind that the techstream trigger event recorded 10 seconds, five seconds before and five seconds after, this is a snapshot not suggestive of when the impact actually occurred. Of course there is no opinion of when the impact exactly occurred.

DiSogra attempt to cause doubt:

He is trying to state there are different numbers that should have been applied to offset other possibilities, he is questioning whether or not three (3) seconds difference between key on is accurate or not. He further states many more vehicles should have been tested. DiSogra’s gap is around 30 seconds from the end of trigger event to lock event… within 30 seconds of defendant moving forward, stopping and then the backing up maneuver, John’s phone locked for the last time; and seconds later never moved again. He’s arguing mere seconds.

In addition, there was no impact recorded.

Moreover, he claimed that the triggering events are not caused by a collision, though, when asked by ADA Brennan on cross if this was his offering of an opinion he stated "he is not.”

Karen Read's defense begins with engineer who analyzes crash data

Defense attorneys called their first witness on Friday after a motion to dismiss the case was promptly denied.

www.wcvb.com

Timestamp 0:32

Reporter: so did you go in reverse 24 miles an hour 53 ft

KR:the data is what the data is and it's
going to come out cleanly more cleanly
in in our case and chief

What I fail to see here is proof he was hit by a car. No matter if there was a 3 point turn or a backing up event. We know she already made a 3 point turn that night because she was going the wrong direction. This still doesn’t prove he was hit by a car. Jen Mc was watching out the window - her words. She saw the car. She should have seen a hit. But, beyond that inference, the CW did NOT prove he was hit by a vehicle. Their own ME said his body doesn’t exhibit the signs of a pedestrian strike

 

[Mony Mony]

There may be many reasons those phones were destroyed that has nothing to do with this case.
It is possible their attempt to pin it all on KR is going to lead to a huge internal investigation that is out of their control.
There is no telling what all will come out if these guys have been operating as if they could do whatever they wanted to without consequences.

IMO

Agree. I think it is more probable they were hiding something much bigger than Karen’s hit and run on their phones. Perhaps it was a multitude of things they were hiding.

And there was an FBI investigation done on all the shenanigans that occurred with this case. That is how ARCCA became involved. The fbi hired them as part of their investigation. AFAIK, that investigation has concluded and the only consequence of the investigation was Proctor was fired.

MOO

 

[AngTxGal]

I have tried to think of every scenario.. I always come up with something that "doesn't make sense".

I have considered he went to the trees to pee or throw up ... and fell....
I have considered he just slipped on the snow and fell...
I have considered she backed into him ...
I have considered that something happened in the house.. it doesn't have to involve a "beating", it could have been something as simple as one punch (wouldn't even have to be hard) and he went down and hit his head on something... JOK had a HIGH blood alcohol level, the Neurosurgeon testified that it is a typical injury he would see with drunks falling on the cement/ice (this is one thing that stood out to me from his testimony)

The one thing that is hard to explain in all scenarios that don't include some other person/force that caused it is... he had blood all over his clothes, including the bottom of his jeans, his clothes had vomit on them.

We have heard testimony that the laceration to the back of his head was blunt force trauma and he would have become immediately incapacitated.

How does that blood and vomit get on his clothes like that then? Why didn't he have frostbite after being there for 5+ hours? The CW can't have it both ways.. the ground was hard enough to cause the laceration because it was so cold, but not cold enough to cause frostbite in that snow?

The marks on the arm.. well.. I think I will wait for the ARCCA guys to testify LOL and I believe the defense has 2 witnesses to address the dog bites.

I can think of biological reasons that explain the blood on clothes.

Blunt force trauma leading to seizures.
If his body was convulsing due to brain bleed- it would be like a bleeding stroke. Seizures could result. If he had seizures he was moving around while bleeding. If he had seizures he was building up body heat that could prevent what we imagine as a completely still body with thin clothing being covered with snow.

My dad had a stroke and began to have seizures- huge grand mal seizures where he vomited. It was scary to watch. Dad was 6’7” and weighed 225 or so. One time he seized repeatedly and they could not stop them- he was put in a medically induced coma until they could get them under control. Long story- but seizures would be consistent with the injuries and would move blood all over the place.

IMO

 

[cocomod]

So true @cocomod - a fair and balanced trial - that’s the goal.
We have been here many many threads and lots of us watched the first trial and are doing the same with t2.
The thing is - and for those new to thread if it has not been said recently - the investigation was so piss poor that we may never know what actually happened here. John O’Keefe deserved better. Karen deserved better. Those of us in Norfolk County deserved better. So could Karen have hit John in theory - sure. Could his injuries have been caused by something else - sure.

We are at trial now though so it’s all about BARD.

You want to talk about bias ? You only have to focus in on day one with the lead investigator deciding Karen was guilty not thru his due diligence/ investigation - we were not even 24 hrs out. You need to start at the beginning. How the media told us all locally that it was caught on a neighbors camera that Karen backed into John.
Except oh surprise the trial comes and there was nothing on tape - there never was.

I came here to trial 1 thinking sure lots of booze - KR backs up /unintentionally hits John. Car is so big she has no idea and takes off. It seems reasonable right? Sure.

And then you see the injuries that don’t seem to fit. And the CW cannot make them fit even for 400k.
I also don’t believe a tail light made from polycarbonate breaks into 47 pieces and flies thru the air. Look it up. And oh, we have extra pieces of taillight. Someone was out there scattering taillight pieces like a flower girl at a wedding with flower petals.

Trial 1 ARCCA made the difference for me. NO BIAS with them bc it was a report ordered and paid for by the justice dept/ fbi. They did not know the case or the players at that point. Just the details they needed for reconstruction.
That report was sent to the Prosecution. It said basically John’s injuries were not consistent with being hit by a vehicle. It did not fit the P’s narrative so they ignored it. Did not even bother to have their guy call and discuss. Sent it to the D in a discovery dump.

The Prosecution has Confirmation BIAS - if it doesn’t fit they discard it. Same thing here at times - there is a lack of intellectual honesty in acknowledging actual facts.

I sense the clash between opinions is emotional thinkers vs logical thinkers. People looking at things with different filters.

I don’t think many people find Karen a sympathetic defendant at all, but the hate directed at the defendent in these threads borders on pathological. I find it disturbing.

If you think Karen is guilty - or not guilty - or the other category of “who knows” bc of the lack of good evidence - this is a discussion board. People will ask you for your rationale and that’s part of discussion.

ARCCA should be up this week. I’ll have a second look and see what I think.

I believe most are open to new information.

But yes at this point I am clearly in the NG bc the CW did not meet BARD. And they had every opportunity to do that.

I lean towards that he went into the house and got sucker punched maybe from behind with a blunt object. Chloe the dog jumped in.

Whatever happened nobody was trying to kill John it was an accident.

You can call that Bias or call me biased if you want - I call it following the information where takes you.

JMO.

I enjoy reading your posts because they come from a place of rational not emotional thinking. You and I have come from a very similar place, but I cannot imagine being local and watching this as well as the other huge no-no trial with LE bias. I would be terrified for the justice system in that area! Thank you for the discussion. I have no one here to talk to about he case and the many “oh my” moments!

 

[jepop]

Question for you

Did the dog bite only on one side of your arm? Or did the top teeth catch one side while the bottom teeth catch the other side of the arm?
Where are the matching teeth from the other jaw on JO’s arm? It looks to me like he rolled in glass on the outside of his arm.

Did you have a series of bites up and down one side if your arm without any bites from the opposing jaw on the other side? Highly unlikely

Thoughts?

IMO

Jmo and if you are inclined, I think you might benefit from listening to the expert testimony from trial 1. This is an area of specialist expertise.