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

[lohrtabitha]

Wanna bet that if Welcher is questioned about the Xrays, he will throw Hank under the bus. Welcher was paid, he's done with this. He has his own reputation and futrue to worry about.

Do we know that Hank will call him back for certain? Maybe he won't because of this.

 

[LittleSeaTree]

Don’t like her saying animal bite but at least pushes against the claim that it was a vehicle strike

Wanna bet that if Welcher is questioned about the Xrays, he will throw Hank under the bus. Welcher was paid, he's done with this. He has his own reputation and futrue to worry about.

That would be beautiful!

 

[missy1974]

Rentschler.. throwing shade at Welcher already haha THIS is what you have to do if you are going to do a report ... it's well established ...

 

[turaj]

Like alot of jurors and it has been proved in some cases, they have their mind made up long before deliberations

If I were a juror in this case I have to admit that I might get all the W doctors confused....I think there is one that starts. with an R that also sounds the same. I don't know if they are taking notes?

 

[missy1974]

omg.. this judge...

 

[mrjitty]

I disagree. All the defense has to have is ONE beyond a reasonable doubt event. They have established many. The law is the law is the law. Imo

Reasonable doubt is the overall standard in the case - it is not applied to facts one by one.

The jury has to consider where the defendant broke her tail light and only two options have been advanced at trial. The defendant claims it was at 1M. The CW states it was in an accident while high speed reversing at 34F.

If the Jury agrees she could not have broken it at 1M, then it's inevitable they will find she broke it hitting John.

IMO

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Rentschler: ‘you need details. You have to explain how it happened.’

Judge Cannone is surprising to me saying it needs to be more question and answer. Welcher was allowed to basically come in and opine at length with little to no actual questioning from Brennan. It was basically a lecture.

 

[LittleSeaTree]

Let Rentscler tell his anecdote, no doubt it will speak to the jurors! But, noooOOOoooo…

 

[Younger Sister]

Let Rentscler tell his anecdote, no doubt it will speak to the jurors! But, noooOOOoooo…

Big effort being made to break the tempo of the defense and their witness

 

[Wishbone]

Reasonable doubt is the overall standard in the case - it is not applied to facts one by one.

The jury has to consider where the defendant broke her tail light and only two options have been advanced at trial. The defendant claims it was at 1M. The CW states it was in an accident while high speed reversing at 34F.

If the Jury agrees she could not have broken it at 1M, then it's inevitable they will find she broke it hitting John.

IMO

The car and the taillight never collided with JO since he wasn't hit by that Lexus and there is no evidence it did proved by damage to the car and physical injuries to JO not being consistent with that happening. JMOO

 

[themonk]

Reasonable doubt is the overall standard in the case - it is not applied to facts one by one.

The jury has to consider where the defendant broke her tail light and only two options have been advanced at trial. The defendant claims it was at 1M. The CW states it was in an accident while high speed reversing at 34F.

If the Jury agrees she could not have broken it at 1M, then it's inevitable they will find she broke it hitting John.

IMO

Most jurors are going to agree the tail light was broken in the sally port

 

[lohrtabitha]

Reasonable doubt is the overall standard in the case - it is not applied to facts one by one.

The jury has to consider where the defendant broke her tail light and only two options have been advanced at trial. The defendant claims it was at 1M. The CW states it was in an accident while high speed reversing at 34F.

If the Jury agrees she could not have broken it at 1M, then it's inevitable they will find she broke it hitting John.

IMO

Wrong . The " A" in BARD is singular and not plural as it's intended usage.

 

[missy1974]

In Welcher's report, the arm wounds were labelled "lacerations"... Rentschler explaining how that is wrong, they were abrasions, not lacerations.

 

[missy1974]

There were no references to fractures in the reports.

ETA: they are showing the xray of the right hand on the screen for the jury.

 

[lohrtabitha]

omg.. this judge...

She is so very rude to all the defense witnesses and so polite to all the CW witnesses. Her subjectivity in this case is beyond apparent. Imo

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Reasonable doubt is the overall standard in the case - it is not applied to facts one by one.

The jury has to consider where the defendant broke her tail light and only two options have been advanced at trial. The defendant claims it was at 1M. The CW states it was in an accident while high speed reversing at 34F.

If the Jury agrees she could not have broken it at 1M, then it's inevitable they will find she broke it hitting John.

IMO

I see what you’re saying about reasonable doubt and you’re right that it applies to the case as a whole. But I do think it’s an oversimplification to say that if the jury rejects the defense’s version, they must accept the CW’s. The jury isn’t picking between two stories. They’re deciding whether the prosecution has proven their version beyond a reasonable doubt. Even if they think the defenses version is unlikely or flawed, that does not automatically mean the CW has met that high burden. Also, individual facts CAN raise reasonable doubt. If the evidence about where the tail light isn’t clear or reliable to the jury, that uncertainty can contribute to reasonable doubt about the CW’s broader narrative.

So no, rejecting the defenses account doesn’t make the CW’s version ‘inevitable’, unless it’s been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which is still the CW’s burden throughout.

All MOO

 

[mrjitty]

Most jurors are going to agree the tail light was broken in the sally port

There is video of it broken while Karen was still in possession of it.

 

[Amber29]

She is so very rude to all the defense witnesses and so polite to all the CW witnesses. Her subjectivity in this case is beyond apparent. Imo

I truly hope we hear from some of these jurors after this trial and if they noted her bias behavior.

 

[LittleSeaTree]

There is video of it broken while Karen was still in possession of it.

But, define ‘broken’

 

[missy1974]

Rentschler: Very important to know what the injuries are and what injuries are not there.

Tons of shade being thrown at Welcher. This is basic when it comes to what a biomechanist would do when investigating, according to Rentschler.

Now showing the forearm Xray. Showing the upper arm Xray. No defects, trauma or injuries. No joint injuries.