MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #32 Retrial

[Wishbone]

Just talking and being coached, actually picking what a witness will answer are two very different things, MO. So is sharing information between witnesses, MO. That's what I believe occured and hopefully it will be looked into by the court, at a later date.

I wasn't there with them so I can't comment nor would I presume to know what went on. JMOO

 

[Tortoise]

I’m pretty confident that if the ME was asked again- she would agree some are punctures.
It is semantics- not black and white

IMO

It's really not semantics. It's precise medical scientific terminology which can be exactly interpreted to mean the same thing to all professionals trained in the same field. IMO


Dr Scordi-Bello:

"Superficial means that the abrasion is on the superficial layers of the skin, usually the epidermis and sometimes the dermis, but there's no penetration of the skin.

When you're assessing to determine whether there's any penetration do you measure the length of the wound?

Well penetration would be measuring the depth if there was actual penetration I would have to measure how deep into the skin, for example when we assess stab wounds, we have to measure the depth of the wound. In this particular case you can see that these are scrapes or scratches and there's no exposed underlying fat or muscle. And therefore to answer your question I measured their length, and gave a range, but I did not measure their depth."

As a routine practice during an autopsy doctor if there was penetration or depth would you as a routine measure that?

I would make a note of it."

1.55.57

 

[303gmf]

I’m not sure they would know that the dog was involved until after the autopsy and someone said- Hey that looks like a dog bite.
Then they had to circle the wagons regarding evidence of Chloe’s past- and that she could get out of the back fence.
If Chloe had already harmed people and BA was cited- he is responsible if she hurt someone else afterward. If that death could be linked to an accident caused by a dog bite- Huge!

IMO

Imagining the headlines, lol

“Cop died on cops lawn by cop dog!”

 

[lohrtabitha]

I didn't finish watching her testimony, I wasn't home at the time and jumped to Barros' testimony that day. I never did go back, but partially because everything I read said it was just more of the same... here was a tweet about the jurors towards the end of Brennan's recross:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1929967545534361883

Thank you for this. I just knew it. :0)

 

[jepop]

Wow. Thanks for posting this. I thought Court TV was against KR. This sure seems like they believe JOK was bitten.

VP seems to be quite biased against the defense. His stereo typical comments regarding spaghetti against the wall are ill considered and betray a lack of understanding about this case. Jmo

 

[AngTxGal]

I don't agree. I think most people who are watching the trial including the jury, absolutely are bored to tears and tune Hank Brennan out each time that he speaks. I also don't think they liked the way he spoke to her and to Lucky. When he told Lucky, " sorry for your loss", there was no empathy there so it really dehumanized Brennan in my opinion.

He may cause the jury to muster empathy, and if they do because they are sick of his tactics then it could hurt him.
It is clear he sees it as a game, and has to win at all cost. I would hate to have a job that demanded such tactics to be good at it. But- some people thrive there.
Some people are not critical thinkers- they will listen for the witness to agree with him and then give him the point. They won’t even know what has happened in their thinking.
You and I on the other hand have more than half a brain- so we wouldn’t fall for it.

As Russell and Lucky answered I kept thinking, what are their options to answer that question. He made them have to answer in a way that appeared to be flawed. IMO That takes skill

But he didn’t do it to KK, and I don’t know why. Maybe she simply didn’t have anything to offer.

IMO

 

[mrjitty]

Karen’s drive from 34F to 1 Meadows was covered on direct by Dr Welcher.

I think only the defendant can seriously challenge the feasibility as only she knows the route and how fast she drove.

IMO.

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

It's really not semantics. It's precise medical scientific terminology which can be exactly interpreted to mean the same thing to all professionals trained in the same field. IMO


Dr Scordi-Bello:

"Superficial means that the abrasion is on the superficial layers of the skin, usually the epidermis and sometimes the dermis, but there's no penetration of the skin.

When you're assessing to determine whether there's any penetration do you measure the length of the wound?

Well penetration would be measuring the depth if there was actual penetration I would have to measure how deep into the skin, for example when we assess stab wounds, we have to measure the depth of the wound. In this particular case you can see that these are scrapes or scratches and there's no exposed underlying fat or muscle. And therefore to answer your question I measured their length, and gave a range, but I did not measure their depth."

As a routine practice during an autopsy doctor if there was penetration or depth would you as a routine measure that?

I would make a note of it."

1.55.57

How come we pick and choose what part of the ME's quotes that are used? Funny, I didn't see the quote where she said it wasn't a homicide and she couldn't say it was a vehicular strike. JMO

 

[jepop]

Karen’s drive from 34F to 1 Meadows was covered on direct by Dr Welcher.

IMO.

I didn't realise he was an expert on road conditions and KR's driving ability and knowledge of routes etc etc.

 

[Wishbone]

Karen’s drive from 34F to 1 Meadows was covered on direct by Dr Welcher.

I think only the defendant can seriously challenge the feasibility as only she knows the route and how fast she drove.

IMO.

Not impressed with what welcher had to say

The Commonwealth's crash reconstructionist, Judson Welcher, said that Karen Read's Lexus could have 'shot off into space,' though it was highly unlikely. (5/28/25)

'Let's Get Back To Reality': Expert Suggests Karen Read's Lexus Could Launch to Space

The Commonwealth's crash reconstructionist, Judson Welcher, said that Karen Read's Lexus could have 'shot off into space.'

www.courttv.com

 

[cocomod]

Just talking and being coached, actually picking what a witness will answer are two very different things, MO. So is sharing information between witnesses, MO. That's what I believe occured and hopefully it will be looked into by the court, at a later date.

The CW witnesses literally admitted to this, so... I DO hope that the court looks into this and people are held accountable

 

[AngTxGal]

It's really not semantics. It's precise medical scientific terminology which can be exactly interpreted to mean the same thing to all professionals trained in the same field. IMO


Dr Scordi-Bello:

"Superficial means that the abrasion is on the superficial layers of the skin, usually the epidermis and sometimes the dermis, but there's no penetration of the skin.

When you're assessing to determine whether there's any penetration do you measure the length of the wound?

Well penetration would be measuring the depth if there was actual penetration I would have to measure how deep into the skin, for example when we assess stab wounds, we have to measure the depth of the wound. In this particular case you can see that these are scrapes or scratches and there's no exposed underlying fat or muscle. And therefore to answer your question I measured their length, and gave a range, but I did not measure their depth."

As a routine practice during an autopsy doctor if there was penetration or depth would you as a routine measure that?

I would make a note of it."

1.55.57

Yes, I see she characterized the arm wounds as abrasions, and did not measure their depth.
Does she know that half the length of a canine is what another expert uses to note a pattern of a dog bite? No- she isn’t a dog bite expert.

Did anyone say there must be puncture into the fat or muscle in order to say you have a dog bite? No, that doesn't even make sense to assume or expect. Nor does it make sense to assume a depth must be present for it to be a dog bite.

It isn’t an exact science- life science is never an exact science. I know- my degrees are in biology.

I’m not trying to change your mind- just discuss. I’ve searched for dog bite experts to see what they think- I’ve heard three who say they are dog bites.

None of the forensic experts have said those wounds are characteristic of a car accident, or cuts from a taillight into the skin. None of them
Welcher is the only one that supports the idea- and he isn’t a medical anything, he comes from the physics angle.

IMO

 

[Tortoise]

How come we pick and choose what part of the ME's quotes that are used? Funny, I didn't see the quote where she said it wasn't a homicide and she couldn't say it was a vehicular strike. JMO

The ME's determination isn't relevant to the discussion about wounds on John's arm.

She said undetermined.

She did not say it wasn't a homicide, there is no quote for that.


Dr. Irini Scordi-Bello, the medical examiner who performed O’Keefe’s autopsy, testified to wounds she saw on the victim’s arm and head, as well as bruises and abrasions on his hand and legs. She ruled O’Keefe’s cause of death as blunt force trauma to the head and hypothermia, but was unable to conclusively determine his manner of death.

Court canceled, new video and a breakup: Week 4 of Karen Read's retrial

As Karen Read's retrial continues, jurors were given a surprise day off from court and saw videos of Brian Higgins at the Canton PD.

www.courttv.com

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

The ME's determination isn't relevant to the discussion about wounds on John's arm.

She said undetermined.

She did not say it wasn't a homicide, there is no quote for that.


Dr. Irini Scordi-Bello, the medical examiner who performed O’Keefe’s autopsy, testified to wounds she saw on the victim’s arm and head, as well as bruises and abrasions on his hand and legs. She ruled O’Keefe’s cause of death as blunt force trauma to the head and hypothermia, but was unable to conclusively determine his manner of death.

Court canceled, new video and a breakup: Week 4 of Karen Read's retrial

As Karen Read's retrial continues, jurors were given a surprise day off from court and saw videos of Brian Higgins at the Canton PD.

www.courttv.com

Did she say it was a homicide? Then why is someone on trial for murder?

 

[tara83]

The ME's determination isn't relevant to the discussion about wounds on John's arm.

She said undetermined.

She did not say it wasn't a homicide, there is no quote for that.


Dr. Irini Scordi-Bello, the medical examiner who performed O’Keefe’s autopsy, testified to wounds she saw on the victim’s arm and head, as well as bruises and abrasions on his hand and legs. She ruled O’Keefe’s cause of death as blunt force trauma to the head and hypothermia, but was unable to conclusively determine his manner of death.

Court canceled, new video and a breakup: Week 4 of Karen Read's retrial

As Karen Read's retrial continues, jurors were given a surprise day off from court and saw videos of Brian Higgins at the Canton PD.

www.courttv.com

So the ME basically proves reasonable doubt by being unsure what caused his death? Interesting.

 

[Tortoise]

Did she say it was a homicide? Then why is someone on trial for murder?

Because the jury will decide.

 

[AngTxGal]

Imagining the headlines, lol

“Cop died on cops lawn by cop dog!”

Exactly, but I think there is a couple of dog bite victims out there that could be found.
What would Brennan do if he realized one of those names was a new witness!

That would be entertaining to see how he would handle them. Especially if they have photos of their wounds and they look similar to the ones on JO’s arm!

IMO

 

[Tortoise]

So the ME basically proves reasonable doubt by being unsure what caused his death? Interesting.

She knows what caused it. The manner is undetermined.

 

[AngTxGal]

VP seems to be quite biased against the defense. His stereo typical comments regarding spaghetti against the wall are ill considered and betray a lack of understanding about this case. Jmo

I don’t think so- I think VP is trying to create a show. So he swings it one way, then swings it the other way. Watching him is like a soap opera… da dum dummmm with the drama. IMO

 

[cocomod]

I chose to not take everything that a very, very well paid expert (Welcher) with blue paint said as complete fact without question. He refused to do an actual reconstruction because he didn't know the outcome. I think he convoluted the times and numbers to fit the narrative the CW wanted to reach. It is known that Welcher's science didn't science in another case where they precluded his opinion for not meeting the Daubert/Lanigan standards. The "expert" Alvino's reconstruction methods were not reliable.

Memorandum of Law To Exclude Testimony by Defendants' Expert, Judson Welcher | PDF | Daubert Standard | Daubert V. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals

The Plaintiff, Carole J. Kavey, seeks to exclude the testimony of the Defendants' biomechanical expert, Judson Welcher, arguing that his opinions are unreliable and not scientifically valid. The case involves a rear-end collision in which Kavey sustained serious injuries, and the Plaintiff...

www.scribd.com