MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #34 Retrial

[missy1974]

Oooh…a little information about the X-rays. Look like the CW had them the entire time, as they were part of the autopsy

“Outside court, WBZ-TV's Kristina Rex asked Read why jurors were seeing the X-rays for the first time. "The Commonwealth didn't present them," Read said. "They were in the autopsy."

link: Karen Read defense calls final witness, jury could get case as soon as Friday
ETA: correct spelling.

that just goes with my last comment... the fact that Welcher was allowed to make the comment that the ME didn't do any, and was not allowed to be challenged on it, lending credibility to his opinion, is kinda disgusting in light of some of the other things the CW has done recently. JMO

 

[Amber29]

She finally agreed it CAN happen, she does not agree that it happened in this case... he asks the question with "someone", not John. Here is the exchange.. which I will note is right after the exchange in my last post. She makes it pretty clear that she does not believe that happened in this case.


HB: Do you disagree that somebody could be alive, lose body temperature out in the cold freezing temperature below 32 they could lose body temperature a certain rate then pass out pass die and then continue to lose body temperature, Is that possible?

Doc: anything's possible. It's just what's important, is what happened in this case

HB: I'm asking for your medical opinion though rather than to be an advocate as far as your medical opinion

Objection...sustained and I'll strike that.

HB: As far as ...

Judge: Dr Would you listen to the question please

Doc: of course Thank you your honor

HB: As far as your medical experience could somebody be alive outside in the cold below 32 degrees not moving covered by snow still alive and lose body temperature?

Doc: sure

HB: And then could they after an hour or two hours could they then die and continue to lose more body temperature

Doc: sure

This was an interesting exchange because it was again the judge helping the CW, she had answered the question. HB didn’t like the answer then sarcastically and inappropriately called her an advocate. The judge strikes it and asks her to listen to the question.

 

[Wishbone]

It wasn't a complicated question yet Brennan had to ask her three times and the judge had to instruct her to listen to the question before she would answer him.

Turns out she finally agreed it was possible for a person to be alive for two hours and have a body temperature of 80 degrees after a total of six hours in sub zero temperatures.

5.35.14

That question did not apply to JO because the doctor concluded that JO died very quickly and would not have been alive in sub zero temps for more than 15 or 20 minutes before his head injury killed him. It appears brennan was trying to infer JO continued to live for hours.

Much of Brennan’s cross-examination focused on Laposata’s conclusion that O’Keefe died within 15 to 20 minutes of sustaining his brain injury.

Karen Read trial recap: ‘It didn’t hit him’: Medical examiner refutes collision theory

A medical examiner hired by Karen Read's defense pushed back on the prosecution's theory of the case, giving key testimony as Read's retrial winds down.

www.masslive.com

 

[HarmonyE.]

Oooh…a little information about the X-rays. Look like the CW had them the entire time, as they were part of the autopsy

“Outside court, WBZ-TV's Kristina Rex asked Read why jurors were seeing the X-rays for the first time. "The Commonwealth didn't present them," Read said. "They were in the autopsy."

link: Karen Read defense calls final witness, jury could get case as soon as Friday
ETA: correct spelling.

Yep. Just add it to their ommisions, distortions, and blatant lies pile.

 

[missy1974]

This was an interesting exchange because it was again the judge helping the CW, she had answered the question. HB didn’t like the answer then sarcastically and inappropriately called her an advocate. The judge strikes it and asks her to listen to the question.

Right, and he had to change the question to a somebody because she was never going to agree that it happened in this case.

and duhhhh.. of course that could happen lol

She made it clear that was not her opinion of what she thinks happened in this case though.

I'm still a bit shocked that he was the one that presented the question to her about the 4 hours.. and her answer was..

Correct, yes so he was exposed to that cold environment for four to five hours

The timing doesn't work for the CW IMO

rewatching some of this... she was a great witness.

 

[Wishbone]

I don't think proving or disproving hypothermia is going to make the slightest bit of difference to the jury's deliberations.

MOO

According to the doctor JO was not alive long enough after his head injury to develop hypothermia.

 

[Traymar]

Apologies if this is a stupid question, as I have not been watching the trial but have followed all your comments (thank you all for keeping those of us who are just reading updated).

My question is: How is it that we are suddenly talking/hearing about the judge and jury's potential (or certain) frustration with the delays and the trial "dragging out," when I can distinctly recall reading more than once very recently that the trial was ahead of schedule, and hence a shortened or off day was declared?

MOO

 

[Leilei]

Dr Welcher gave his expert opinion that the arm injuries and the ensuing head injury were consistent with being struck by the Lexus.

36.29

In evidence is a photo of Read's Lexus with almost all of her rear taillight missing about eight hours before it was towed from Dighton.

The "Not for expert designation" Dr. Welcher?
The guy who is Executive VP of Biomechanics and Accident Reconstruction of the very company who added the "not for expert designation" to his CV on their website the day after SB's testimony?
Are we seriously putting any faith and trust in this guy?
Woof.
IMO.

 

[keek]

That question did not apply to JO because the doctor concluded that JO died very quickly and would not have been alive in sub zero temps for more than 15 or 20 minutes before his head injury killed him. It appears brennan was trying to infer JO continued to live for hours.

Much of Brennan’s cross-examination focused on Laposata’s conclusion that O’Keefe died within 15 to 20 minutes of sustaining his brain injury.

Karen Read trial recap: ‘It didn’t hit him’: Medical examiner refutes collision theory

A medical examiner hired by Karen Read's defense pushed back on the prosecution's theory of the case, giving key testimony as Read's retrial winds down.

www.masslive.com

It was bizarre to me when it hit me, he IS asking if JOK could of lived for long time with medical help, NOOOO, listen Brennan when Med examiners and THIS DR. who is CORONER as well as incredibly educated in training, experience as well. NO, the head wound was one he would NOT come back from. Wasting time judge, letting that foolishness go on. IMO>

 

[keek]

According to the doctor JO was not alive long enough after his head injury to develop hypothermia.

NO, he was not. Correct, you listened and watched with your intelligent mind to know this. IMO

 

[keek]

The "Not for expert designation" Dr. Welcher?
The guy who is Executive VP of Biomechanics and Accident Reconstruction of the very company who added the "not for expert designation" to his CV on their website the day after SB's testimony?
Are we seriously putting any faith and trust in this guy?
Woof.
IMO.

Right, he is NOT an expert as shown by his own company designation of that right after he testified. Brennan did not delve into that company or the two chosen from it. He picked who would happpily agree to testify for $$$$$$$. IMO

 

[arielilane]

It's my understanding KR cannot testify anyway because she made an admission to her attorney David Yannetti. Is this correct? Any attorney on board to weigh in. Though, I didn't think she would testify anyway. jmo

He cited media interviews and a five-part docuseries called “A body in the Snow: The Trial of Karen Read" in which Read says, “And then when I hired David Yannetti, I asked him those questions the night of Jan, 29th. ‘Like David what if, I don't know, what if I ran his foot over, or, or, what if I clipped him in the knee and he passed out and or went to care for himself and he threw up or passed out and David said, ‘Yeah then you have some element of culpability.’ So that's how I thought about things for about three days.”

Prosecutors hope to use Turtleboy's phones to show Karen Read's 'consciousness of guilt'

 

[Leilei]

Right, he is NOT an expert as shown by his own company designation of that right after he testified. Brennan did not delve into that company or the two chosen from it. He picked who would happpily agree to testify for $$$$$$$. IMO

Testimony for lots-o-money.
Hopefully isn't fooling the jury.
Certainly isn't fooling the majority of trial watchers.
IMO.

 

[ShadyLady]

I don't think proving or disproving hypothermia is going to make the slightest bit of difference to the jury's deliberations.

MOO

You are right!! IMO

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Right! Didn't even think of that. But of course, if we all recall, the defense was NOT allowed to ask questions to Welcher about the ME's autopsy report.

This is a good example of why that ruling was terrible. Welcher was allowed to state something as fact when it was 100% false, and he couldn't be challenged on it.

JMO

Can I please have an ‘instruction for the jury’ for $500 Alex? (In honor of the late Alex Trebek and Jeopardy.) And yet another apparent ‘miscue’ IMO by the CW and / or Brennan. SMH. MOO

 

[ShadyLady]

Oooh…a little information about the X-rays. Look like the CW had them the entire time, as they were part of the autopsy

“Outside court, WBZ-TV's Kristina Rex asked Read why jurors were seeing the X-rays for the first time. "The Commonwealth didn't present them," Read said. "They were in the autopsy."

link: Karen Read defense calls final witness, jury could get case as soon as Friday
ETA: correct spelling.

Brennan lied by omission??? Nooooooo

 

[Amber29]

Right, and he had to change the question to a somebody because she was never going to agree that it happened in this case.

and duhhhh.. of course that could happen lol

She made it clear that was not her opinion of what she thinks happened in this case though.

I'm still a bit shocked that he was the one that presented the question to her about the 4 hours.. and her answer was..

Correct, yes so he was exposed to that cold environment for four to five hours

The timing doesn't work for the CW IMO

rewatching some of this... she was a great witness.

She was an excellent witness.

IMO after today the jurors really have to question why the Cw didn’t call the neuropathologist that studied JOKs brain with ME DrSB. Instead they chose to use an outside neurosurgeon with no connection to the case. Today DrL reiterated that she would never use a neurosurgeon to assist in an autopsy that she would call in a neuropathologist to consult with.

 

[ShadyLady]

Apologies if this is a stupid question, as I have not been watching the trial but have followed all your comments (thank you all for keeping those of us who are just reading updated).

My question is: How is it that we are suddenly talking/hearing about the judge and jury's potential (or certain) frustration with the delays and the trial "dragging out," when I can distinctly recall reading more than once very recently that the trial was ahead of schedule, and hence a shortened or off day was declared?

MOO

That was only for prosecution!

Now that it is time for the defense....no time left.....jurors are frustrated! Too hot for court! Defense has no time even to read important testimony into the record. Judge is so transparent.

 

[Leilei]

It's my understanding KR cannot testify anyway because she made an admission to her attorney David Yannetti. Is this correct? Any attorney on board to weigh in. Though, I didn't think she would testify anyway. jmo

He cited media interviews and a five-part docuseries called “A body in the Snow: The Trial of Karen Read" in which Read says, “And then when I hired David Yannetti, I asked him those questions the night of Jan, 29th. ‘Like David what if, I don't know, what if I ran his foot over, or, or, what if I clipped him in the knee and he passed out and or went to care for himself and he threw up or passed out and David said, ‘Yeah then you have some element of culpability.’ So that's how I thought about things for about three days.”

Prosecutors hope to use Turtleboy's phones to show Karen Read's 'consciousness of guilt'

BBM - I don't understand what you are saying. She would be able to testify if she chose to. She didn't admit to anything.
IMO.

 

[arielilane]

I mentioned earlier that defense showed a photo of two men at the autopsy and named one of the men as MP, when MP did not attend the autopsy. He is not in the photo.

For the record:


Timestamp: 3:13:05

Alessi: if you could please um zoom in on the two individuals in that picture

-- Top left corner of picture (small print) it notes "Proctor and Keefe"


And....


Timestamp: 6:18:28

Alessi: you noted uh these injuries to these wounds to Mr O'Keefe in your autopsy report


Top left corner of picture (small print) it notes "Arm with dog bites"



1) attempting to mislead the jury
2) Done by design
3) Creating the narrative
4) Trying to fool the jurors
5) honest mistake

The defense's record hasn't been up to par, thus far. jmo