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

[waldojabba]

The biggest thing that was clear to me with Wolfe's testimony... the inside of the tail light was never broken to the extent that it was on Karen's SUV. Why? How does that damage occur if it was not from the impact?

They didn't even go into the damage that JOK's body must have sustained if this happened, but we can all see the test dummy.

If you have not been able to watch, please go back and watch. The still photo's are no substitute for the videos that they showed IMO

Also the diffusers in the tail light were damaged on Karens car
A sledgehammer might do the damage - I was waiting for that question -
Say a sledgehammer swung by a big guy weighing in at 350lbs like BH ?
Just Imo

 

[waldojabba]

The biggest thing that was clear to me with Wolfe's testimony... the inside of the tail light was never broken to the extent that it was on Karen's SUV. Why? How does that damage occur if it was not from the impact?

They didn't even go into the damage that JOK's body must have sustained if this happened, but we can all see the test dummy.

If you have not been able to watch, please go back and watch. The still photo's are no substitute for the videos that they showed IMO

thanks for your service
I think I will also do a rewatch it was so well done
JMO

 

[Anniesflowers]

Defense should rest now! IMO!

KR said she believed that the defense’s case will be done by Tuesday of next week. I wonder how long Brennan will cross Dr. Wolfe?

 

[keek]

BBM
And that's exactly the point. There is no way of knowing how fast she was allegedly going.

Welcher said: "We don’t know exactly how he was struck."

Welcher continued his testimony that he did not know “exactly” the angle of O’Keefe’s arm.

He wasn't hit by any car at all. That is the CW plan and cause to .. well their cause for the 'big guys' for some very bad reasons. In time, in time. The plan from the ALBERTS and McCABES but then it got bigger and bigger, the things to find . IMO

 

[Forest_Wood]

I'm not watching. Did he dress the dummy in JOK's clothing?

No! They purchased clothing that replicated the exact material that JOK was wearing to see if the impacts would cause those tears.

 

[Bethlamb16]

KR said she believed that the defense’s case will be done by Tuesday of next week. I wonder how long Brennan will cross Dr. Wolfe?

I think Brennan will waste the rest of the day being snarky! I think it will be hard to make Dr. Wolfe look bad. IMO the tests speak for themselves but I am sure Brennan will give it a valiant effort. I think the defense would be wise to rest after showing that it is unlikely that JOK was hit by a vehicle.

 

[missy1974]

Wolfe showed exactly why Dr. Welcher did not use dummy in his tests. No one knows exactly where John O’Keefe was actually standing at the time of the hit/side swipe.

However, imo, the parts showing the sudden shatter of taillight pieces helped the CW’s case. The dummy arm thingy, not so much. Is the jury to believe that because of ARCCA's testing the microscopic taillight pieces found in John’s clothes were planted... Not possible to plant evidence seen only by a microscope. Interesting that Wolfe left out the back door dent, scratches and marks on the SUV. Additionally, the taillight shatters, but clothing doesnt get any tears, by (shifting to reverse, and accelerating up to 24 mph) 6,000 lb vehicle impact, in the cold ... common sense.

My own opinion.

those pieces of light were NOT microscopic. 1/16th or 2/16th's of an inch (or as I would say to my hubby.. 1 little thingy or 2 little thingies on the measuring tape) and were visible to the eye. This has been shown more than once in this trial.

He did not leave out the dent/scratches, he noted it. It's in testimony.

from your post: Additionally, the taillight shatters, but clothing doesnt get any tears, by (shifting to reverse, and accelerating up to 24 mph) 6,000 lb vehicle impact, in the cold ... common sense.

So you are saying it's common sense that the hoodie doesn't get holes/tears or anything? After watching what I just did, I totally agree.. But how does that go with the CW theory?

 

[Seattle1]

Very important..

https://twitter.com/x/status/1930980033977286864

 

[Anniesflowers]

I think Brennan will waste the rest of the day being snarky! I think it will be hard to make Dr. Wolfe look bad. IMO the tests speak for themselves but I am sure Brennan will give it a valiant effort. I think the defense would be wise to rest after showing that it is unlikely that JOK was hit by a vehicle.

IMO, Brennan was so nasty to Dr. Wolfe during voir dire, I had second hand embarrassment. Dr. Wolfe knows his business inside and out, so he stayed cool and collected, which made him seem even more believable.

 

[Forest_Wood]

ARCCA charges
orig report $0 ( FBI paid)
D paid about $25k last year for travel and time to testify
D is paying about $40 k this year

Aperture the P paid $400k

JMO

I can't possibly see Aperture getting another state contract after this trial. What a way for government to misappropriate taxpayers money!

 

[Forest_Wood]

So he just picked a random speed and that's supposed to prove what?

It proved that it didn't damage the car they bought!!!!

 

[missy1974]

We have tons of variables that "could be" what happened that no one knows. And Brennan will try to hit that home during cross. Wolfe just did what Welcher failed to do in his testing.

The CW was relying on Welcher's explaination of what could have happened and what caused the damage/injuries, Wolfe's testimony just showed that is reasonable to NOT conclude that he was hit by the car, whether it is because of the damage or lack of damage to the car and tail light or the damage to JOK's sweater (he did not address the body damage that would have also come with the impacts). But we can 'see' it in the videos.

I wonder how Wolfe will hold up to Brennan in the cross? They have history from the voir dire and Brennan was a , wonder what he will do in front of the jury?

 

[justwannahelp]

MODS: if it is wrong of me to post a zoomed in image of OJO’s elbow please snip it out of my post. I personally don’t find the image “graphic” or disturbing, but i have 5 kids and have seen a lot of nasty skinned knees and bruises etc over the years.

Also, I posted the link of Dr. Russel’s testimony and noted the timestamp when this zoomed in image is shown. The reason i felt the need to post the image in my post is because I wanted to circle the tiny dots and draw the shape of the bruise mark overlayed onto the dots.

Dr. Russel said she believed the marks on the posterior/underside of OJO’s elbow may have been made by the dog’s bottom teeth at 1:26:09 in this recording of her testimony:

In the above linked testimony they then zoomed in at 1:26:40, and I was wowed by what I saw when they zoomed in. There is CLEARLY a row of little dots/indentures in the shape of a dog’s bottom jaw. The row looked like a smile sort of. And the bruising definitely looked like a smile. Her testimony this week was the first time I saw that zoomed in image under his elbow, and i found that VERY compelling and convincing.

To reference the shape the front of a dog’s bottom jaw and the tiny bottom front teeth, I’ve posted an image below that was shown to jurors during the linked testimony of Dr. Marie Russel. Please note the bottom jaw/ bottom teeth are on the right and the top jaw is in the left. Note the wide U shape kind of smiley face smile shape the bottom jaw and teeth make. Those little bottom front teeth seem to have made little dots on OJO’s arm rather than large pulling abrasions like the canine teeth did on other parts of the arm. In the image I posted of OJO’s elbow, i circled where the tiny dots are, and beneath the image i drew the shape of the bruising that appears with the dots. (Smiley face smile)






I believe according to the images of the top jaw that the 2 parallel lines above the bottom teeth dots and smile shaped bruising are from the top canine teeth and were made at the same time/ same bite as the bottom teeth smile dots and bruise were. Think of biting into an apple. Your top teeth go into the top and bottom into an area below the top teeth. Biting a bent elbow would be similar to biting an apple for lack of a better way of explaining it

I was also impressed by the zoomed in image of hole 1 in his sweatshirt that they showed to illustrate the perfect circle and size of a canine tooth and how the fabric was pulled out. Really convincing. Reminds me of the hair highlighting kit when you put that plastic cap on your head with all the little drawn and perforated circles and what happens when you poke the metal stick in to puncture each hole. When you pull the metal stick out, the plastic cap material comes out and over just like the sweatshirt fabric did when the dog’s tooth exited the sweatshirt fabric. See image from testimony below

 

[MerlinFalcon]

Welp, I guess we know why Brennan tried so desperately to keep Dr. Wilde’s testimony from this case! This is how you test! Right down to the temperature and even the mix of cotton and polyester in John’s hoodie.

Brennan would be smart just to give it up after lunch.

 

[Bodhi]

We have no idea realistically if she stayed after her shift - just hanging out or not. If there were records/tape someone would have brought them ( Kelly).

Still now a few days later we have not seen anything fron Kelly, Canton PD or BPD. Meanwhile she is getting ravaged in the media and across all online platforms, as is BPD Commissioner Cox.

Pretty easy to end all that negative energy being directed at Kelly and the commish if you have the actual receipts.

There was no false memory
Just a big cleanup/coverup - and a womans freedom hangs in the balance as well as actual justice for John.

JMO

If realistically is the criteria, would you hang around after a 16-hour shift? But realistically only goes to the weight someone gives to the evidence presented.

The defense has not disputed Dever's testimony that she left when her double shift ended. They could easily obtain footage from the parking lot at Canton Police Department to discredit her testimony as they did with Higgins.

The defense has known what Dever's testimony would be since at least April 2024. Plenty of time to obtain and review the security camera videos from Canton PD. The long lead time and the lack of evidence presented to discredit her account leads me to believe the defense has seen the footage and it documents she left long before the Lexis arrived.

As for official statements from various police departments after her testimony, that's what I'd expect. The case is not being tried in the press. It's the evidence presented in front of the jury that matters. Jurors assess the veracity of witnesses. They don't have to like a witness when there is no evidence before them that she lied in court.

 

[sunshineray]

Officer Devers Testimony-
We here have tons of questions related to Devers testimony and the sallyport.
What is the actual significance here? I think we can infer based on the defenses actions.

We know the jury would understand better if they had more information.
Why don’t they?
Why did the Defense Team not choose to do more homework here? Bring more info to the jury?

• Description of how the sallyport doors work
• Procedures of use of sallyport, why and how and rules
• Floor plan of police station with sallyport
• Photo of the desks where people are buzzed into the sally port, what can be seen
• Schedules/ timesheets of who worked that day and how long
• Devers responsibilities when working the desk, is she also doing dispatch? Phone?

So is this a nothingburger, tossing things against the wall?
Or is this a bombshell that wasn’t pursued?

IMO

And actually the big question in my mind, why didn't the defense pursue it? Very telling non action , IMO.

 

[tara83]

And actually the big question in my mind, why didn't the defense pursue it? Very telling non action , IMO.

Do they need it when so much of the evidence shows John was never hit by an automobile.

 

[Forest_Wood]

Yes, they do. Dever was working a double shift already. She was on the overnight shift and stayed on to work the day shift.

No! It was never described as a "double shift". She worked overtime only. It might have been 1 or 2 hours of OT, we don't know. But we do know she began her regular shift when it was still dark before 06:00. If her shift was 06:00-14:00, and she finished her overtime at 15:45, then she worked 1h45m OT, as an example.

 

[Anniesflowers]

Do they need it when so much of the evidence shows John was never hit by an automobile.

YES!!

 

[Anniesflowers]

And actually the big question in my mind, why didn't the defense pursue it? Very telling non action , IMO.

The commonwealth, IMO, have no evidence that JOK was hit by a vehicle. Why did the CW pursue the case? That’s very suspicious to me.
ETA: fix grammar.