MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #33 Retrial

[sunshineray]

So tiny little brake light fragments could be seen in snow but not the 6 foot tall 250ish pound human being? He couldn’t be seen or wouldn’t be able to be seen, right??

Sgt Barris was nowhere near 34 Fairview to my knowledge.

 

[MerlinFalcon]

I finally caught up. With the testimony at the end of the day regarding the wounds to the front and back of John’s head, I have to wonder if the O’Keefes ever doubt the way John died. More and more we’re hearing from experts who have said he wasn’t hit by a car. More and more the evidence points to an injury caused inside the house. Will they finally get around to thinking that the people inside the house not only did the damage but let him die?

I know they want justice but I really hope they also want the truth. I feel so very bad for John and Karen. One life ended and the other destroyed, all because of the behaviour of the people in that house.

MOO

 

[sunshineray]

The evidence is the failure of initial two searches to find any shards, despite the snow blowers.

The people in the Nagle's car was parked behind KR's car, I'm incredulous that they would not see someone with the side door open.

It was an ongoing search, not first, second etc... I would think first the weather needed to clear up before a complete search was possible. AJMO

 

[sunshineray]

Welcher did a kindergarten level test at 2mph. Convenient you forget "what's my degree and why have I not finished any degree in 17 years" Burgess.

I haven't forgotten what Burgess testified to, he was a very good witness, IMO, explaining the data he found and analyzed. AJMO

 

[sunshineray]

But I SAW the video from Dighton that showed the taillight mostly intact. I believe my own eyes. Barros’ testimony just corroborated what I saw. Brennan never mentions when/where the photo he showed Barros was taken. Barros seemed confused when he was looking at the picture,he even asked where it was taken. He said it wasn’t from the Read’s home. When her vehicle was loaded onto the tow truck, its right rear taillight was mostly intact.

IMO, it was partially covered by snow but when it was being pulled out of the driveway you could see it was broken consistantly with the photos shown by the CW. AJMO

 

[Malleeboy]

One thing that the CW has not tried to explain or has not had a witness explain to the jury...

How did JOK end up where he did?

The CW wants the jury to fill in the gaps, it should never be that way. IMO

Problem is they don't accurately know where he was, or how fast the car was going, or where he was hit.
How do you explain how he got somewhere, if you don't know where he started from or where he ended up.

 

[missy1974]

I finally caught up. With the testimony at the end of the day regarding the wounds to the front and back of John’s head, I have to wonder if the O’Keefes ever doubt the way John died. More and more we’re hearing from experts who have said he wasn’t hit by a car. More and more the evidence points to an injury caused inside the house. Will they finally get around to thinking that the people inside the house not only did the damage but let him die?

I know they want justice but I really hope they also want the truth. I feel so very bad for John and Karen. One life ended and the other destroyed, all because of the behaviour of the people in that house.

MOO

I think that any victims family want to believe LE and believe they have investigated properly and are telling the family the truth. Is that the case here?

I don't see how they could not have some doubts, even if it is a little bit.

I would want to know the truth, no matter what it is.

JMO

 

[sunshineray]

The low accuracy information was used by Burgess and Welcher, no one other than Whiffen testified about the cell location data.

You are right, it doesn't sound great. IMO also

Dr Welcher did utilize that same data while testifying. Around the time he was showing the syncing between JO's iPhone clock and the Lexus clock, MO. Burgess found a SD card in the Lexus electronics that was overlooked and testified about the data, so did Dr Welcher. MO

 

[missy1974]

Problem is they don't accurately know where he was, or how fast the car was going, or where he was hit.
How do you explain how he got somewhere, if you don't know where he started from or where he ended up.

Right

 

[arielilane]

Dr. Scordi-Bello
Dr. Sheridan
Dr. Russell
Dr. Laposata

All testified John’s wounds are not consistent with being hit by a car.

It's interesting, that Dr. Scordi-Bello changed her testimony.

From trial one:

"Scordi- Bello determined that O'Keefe's skull was broken perhaps from a fall or being hit by a car."

Karen Read murder trial: Profanity-laced voicemails played for jury

Read is accused of killing her boyfriend, a Boston police officer, by striking him with an SUV and leaving him to die in a snowbank.

www.wcvb.com

6.20.2024

 

[Malleeboy]

I haven't forgotten what Burgess testified to, he was a very good witness, IMO, explaining the data he found and analyzed. AJMO

You mean the man who repeatedly claimed a degree he hadn't completed, claimed a degree that didn't exist. Said he hadn't mispresented his qualification to a court, only to be shown that had been done. Has taken 17 years to not complete any degree.
He said he was an IT expert but mixed up bits and bytes, in a report. He then used that mix up on bits v bytes to claim other experts had made a mistake when he was the one that the made the mistake.

That is your idea of a good witness??

 

[missy1974]

It should be noted that the defense did NOT agree with what the Judge told the jury about the 'holes' and they plan on writing a motion (?) and send it to the judge by morning. Alessi said something at the very end of the day. No one was on mics so it was a bit hard to hear.

 

[sunshineray]

Cause a crooked cop is suddenly going to admit a crime on the stand?

Well it's either unsubstantiated innuendos or ask the person they're insinuating these things about , MO. Treat him as a hostile witness if need be. If he takes the 5th, that certainly wouldn't be a good thing in front of the jury, right? I just don't understand why the defense wouldn't subpoena the main so-called planter of evidence?

 

[keek]

You mean the man who repeatedly claimed a degree he hadn't completed, claimed a degree that didn't exist. Said he hadn't mispresented his qualification to a court, only to be shown that had been done. Has taken 17 years to not complete any degree.
He said he was an IT expert but mixed up bits and bytes, in a report. He then used that mix up on bits v bytes to claim other experts had made a mistake when he was the one that the made the mistake.

That is your idea of a good witness??

His own company, that day I believe, made a big mark across his picture and said not an expert in so many words, but it 'said' not an expert. What does that show ANYONE about him> IMO

 

[sunshineray]

You mean the man who repeatedly claimed a degree he hadn't completed, claimed a degree that didn't exist. Said he hadn't mispresented his qualification to a court, only to be shown that had been done. Has taken 17 years to not complete any degree.
He said he was an IT expert but mixed up bits and bytes, in a report. He then used that mix up on bits v bytes to claim other experts had made a mistake when he was the one that the made the mistake.

That is your idea of a good witness??

Yes the paperwork submitted to the court said he was "pursuing" his degree, not a lie, IMO. He never said on the stand that he repeatedly claimed to have his degree yet, IMO. He said he never looked at his online presence on those sites that list those kind of things, he's never updated anything since he was, IIRC, expecting to graduate but it was put on hold (for reasons that are his own)? He was very knowledgeable, IMO, about the data he testified about. AJMO

 

[Amber29]

It should be noted that the defense did NOT agree with what the Judge told the jury about the 'holes' and they plan on writing a motion (?) and send it to the judge by morning. Alessi said something at the very end of the day. No one was on mics so it was a bit hard to hear.

I’m glad because it was not even close to her planned statement.

 

[bobbymkii]

It's interesting, that Dr. Scordi-Bello changed her testimony.

From trial one:

"Scordi- Bello determined that O'Keefe's skull was broken perhaps from a fall or being hit by a car."

Karen Read murder trial: Profanity-laced voicemails played for jury

Read is accused of killing her boyfriend, a Boston police officer, by striking him with an SUV and leaving him to die in a snowbank.

www.wcvb.com

6.20.2024

"perhaps"

What the hell does that mean?

 

[Leilei]

It should be noted that the defense did NOT agree with what the Judge told the jury about the 'holes' and they plan on writing a motion (?) and send it to the judge by morning. Alessi said something at the very end of the day. No one was on mics so it was a bit hard to hear.

Good!
The nation is watching, Judge Canonne, and the residents of Norfolk County are invested in this.
I would be worried as heck about having a fair trial there.
IMO.

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

it’s strange Alessi would ask for a mistrial. if the D was confident in their case he would not want to have to run the trial yet again.

My guess is they realise ARCCA landed badly.

MOO

Respectfully, and granted IANAL….. but after several legal matters and at least one divorce through a civil attorney (a retired former judge) - IIUC an attorney will and should do all and everything practical and legally available to preserve for their client all options for future action.

And IIUC that might be done regardless of their confidence, belief, or strength of their case. Their reasons might include strategies of the defense known only to themselves and their client.

And for reasons including these, it seems entirely practical and prudent that Alessi made the request on the record today seeking a mistrial. On the basis and grounds cited. And IIUC relating to matters of this prosecutor in the second trial today. MOO

 

[Leilei]

His own company, that day I believe, made a big mark across his picture and said not an expert in so many words, but it 'said' not an expert. What does that show ANYONE about him> IMO

Him AND Welcher, along with others at the company.
Speaks volumes to me.
IMO.